Printable View
I propose this thread as a collection of portraits written from the point of view of the leading function. I think they are good way to understand the distinct nature of information elements, especially those that are used by my weakest functions.
So, how do you dominate the world ?
Ni allows me to anticipate and explore potential trends, patterns, causes and effects of events, actions, choices and beliefs. I can sense when actions and choices will be the most beneficial or detrimental. I am also acutely aware of hidden meanings and symbolism. Because there is so much focus on the future or past I become inactive and oblivious to the present I can only live in the moment for short durations. Due to my imagination being so vivid and expansive I find the real world boring and drab in comparison; thus suffering from constant boredom. I'm inadvertently drawn to towards people, place, things and ideas that are esocentric, occult, paranormal, supernatural; as well as novelties, oddities and mysteries.
I dominate the world with my ability to sense the most opportune time to initiate action and refrain from it. Love me, fear me, respect me for I am Ni dominate; knower of causes and effects, predictor of trends and patterns.
Loving people, being righteous about my ethical conclusions, bringing everything of external world in an alignment with a formed and exact value system.
Look beyond what you see, to see how it came to be, and where it leads.
A singularity of multiplying fractals, shape and form that make out what can be considered an entire world, beneath my eyelids and a few centimeters into my skull starting in the middle of my forehead. Always looking for the catalyst that allows me to access the reservoir of my preconscious.
I try to see the funny sides to this complex, dark and sometimes intimidating world. Since no-one can control the complexity and no-one knows which point of view is right the most rich experience can be gotten by seeing the world from as many sides as possible! Seeing beyond alleviates boredom and relativises hurt. Also anything can be understood in relation to something else (this might be my creative function speaking though). Finally, wierd ideas freak people out, which is fun!
what type are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankh
I effortlessly make connections between things, ideas and people. I am brimming with an overabundance of information which i amass naturally without difficulty. I constantly take in oddly shaped jigsaw pieces and require the whole jigsaw to fully understand the puzzle and all it's possible meanings. Sometimes the connections I make can seem inane but be asured the dots have been joined and clarity reigns. Because i jump around a lot externally I can appear to be dynamic but I have a system of bulbs which, when the circuit is complete, light up in my mind. What am I...?
She's SLE obviouslyQuote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
"Explicit Field/System/Relation Statics"
I try to compute the long-term economicity of most of my "actions" whenever I undertake something. Notice that this doesn't mean I wish to pursue a career as an accountat, since personal desires are unrelated to functional "perception".
An obsession with finding questions and answering those questions by understanding them without answers, and using those questions to produce more questions - Ouroboros of thought.
Reading between the lines.
Sifting through the shades of grey for meaning.
Having a hard time ever really seeing things at face value and a frustration with having to often be around those that do.
An obsession with understanding the nature of a thing, if it exists at all. But maybe because I seek to find that nature that I end up creating a way for it to exist. But I'm okay with that actually.
Understanding paradoxes and reconciling myself with them.
I seem to have a tendency to dissociate myself from the sensations of my body and act somewhat destructively as a result. But that might be more Se; I'm not sure.
I'm confused...is this Ananke?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankh
There is such a thing as username history... (and yup)Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
Of course you are :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa
This is by no means an exhaustive account; I could've added more relevant info, but I finally reached the point where I thought "I'm done". There's also a lot of personal and perhaps individual stuff mixed in.
--------------------------------------------------
I may not always know how someone feels toward me, but I do analyze their behavior and make relevant conclusions based upon it. I am also aware of emotional distance from my end, and I get uncomfortable if I think the other person is doing something for which they are not close enough. Being hyper-sensitive about rejection, I can misinterpret signals. What I see as “that person doesn’t like me”, another person might see as “maybe that person’s just having a bad day, and their response is no reflection of their feelings toward me”. And sometimes I find how my original conclusion was incorrect. For example, I originally didn’t care for one of my managers at work; she seemed awfully critical. But over the months I have been there, she has begun treating me more like the other employees, joking with me, complaining to me, etc. So maybe she just needed time to warm up to me. Some people are like that.
My feelings toward others... it's hard to describe. Some people I feel nothing for. They're in the background, people with whom I barely interact. From there, we have acquaintance, sort-of friend, friend, close friend, best friend, etc. And on the other side, we have anything from mild dislike to outright loathing. I am slow to attach to people, often coming to like them over repeated exposure. With a few people, I feel a quick connection.
If I am very fond of someone, that tends to last for a long time. It isn't always permanent, though; if it feels like the bond is gone, that is the end of things (or it can be). Likewise, if someone finds my shit-list, they stay there. Very rarely does someone manage to get off it. Naturally, there are different levels on said list; those who repeatedly demonstrate offensive behavior are more loathed.
In general, I tend to hold onto such sentiments, positive or negative, for far longer than is healthy. These days, I tend to realize that these sentiments often don’t allow for a change of the behavior which pissed me off to begin with or a change of circumstances which would make the positive feelings (especially romantic attachments) no longer practical. There are still times that I miss high school because of the strong bonds I had with friends; feeling so apathetic now and having so few attachments, I wish to have those kinds of strong feelings again. On the other hand, I do wonder if I got so attached because at that point in my life, I had a ton of anger which caused me to basically reject my blood family and substitute my own. Perhaps the violence of the rejection is what caused me to cling to them so tightly.
Did I mention that I analyze my feelings? Constantly. It’s kind of fun being both an emotional and an analytical creature. I’m sure that it helps me quite a bit. On the other hand, the two can clash horribly. I’ve had to learn to accept that feelings are irrational by nature, that they don’t just go away because there’s a reason not be angry or sad. And in a sense, they are somewhat logical. Someone insults me, and I feel angry because of it. The anger follows from the perceived hurt. I’m still not good at getting rid of these feelings, though. My emotions don’t have a shut-off switch, though I sometimes wish they did. (I mean, they do through my coping mechanisms, but then I can’t find the on switch.) I think that as a whole, I need to stop taking things so seriously. People do stupid, irrational shit, and I can’t let myself suffer because of it. Sitting here and stewing gives them far more power and far more credit than they deserve.
I have the capacity to be very attached, fiercely loyal, and quite protective; the both times I went off on my female friend group in high school, it was over (or partly over) how they were treating one of the girls in that circle, the one to whom I was the closest. I also tend to be fairly jealous and possessive, though I try not to show it or push it onto others. One exception would be that I have learned that I will not share men; if I am romantically and physically involved with one, I had better be the only partner. It’s very rare that I consciously and deliberately cut someone out of my life. The majority of times this has happened, it was because my parents disapproved of my friends (or would have disapproved had they known), and I was trying to be obedient and have acceptable associations. But there have also been times that I’ve cut people off for my own reasons. These are generally people who have hurt me deeply and who I can no longer trust to not hurt me again. It’s not always a physical distance; sometimes it’s an emotional distance that I never expect will be overcome. (Both of my parents are in this category, for the abuse and bullshit I took from them over the years. As I have said many times, they were great at providing for us physically but really screwed us up emotionally.)
pretty much every interaction i have with another person(s) is being analyzed and sifted to some degree in terms of our sentiments toward eachother (especially mine towards them) and the proximity of our relationship. "relationship" here doesn't have to be close - since its occurring all the time. could be as shallow as maintaining awareness of which coworkers i'd feel comfortable asking to borrow a tampon or it could be as deep as pondering over the viability of a longterm romantic partnership. when somebody acts unpredictably or gives what i perceive as mixed signals about our relationship status i can either get really intrigued and intent on figuring it out (i can get fixated sometimes) or i lose respect for them and see them as untrustworthy and fake. it depends. i can easily create distance between myself and other people i'm not comfortable getting closer to. creating closeness is harder, though, except on the internet. also, i'm not sure if this is a universal trait, but everything that comes in front of me (people, objects, ideas) goes through a sieve in which my degree of resonance or aversion is sifted. (i say sifted instead of figured out after some thought because the solidness of my impression can vary quite a bit.)
I will not remember the words you said, but i did listen attentively the entire time.
This is a great post, Ryene, but I don't think you can attribute this stuff solely to your leading function, as cognition is the set of all functions. That's why I have a problem with the thread overall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryene Astraelis
It's not meant to be a presentation of pure :Fi:. The IM elements are always colored by the other IM elements they are blocked with; my :Fi: description would be different from an EII's. And, of course, other ESIs will not give the exact same feedback I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johannes Bloem
@Ryene Astraelis, I'm back to ESI > EII for you.
Noted. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Joy
My views on Extroverted Intuition:
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html
From your blog:Quote:
Originally Posted by consentingadult
Quote:
Like Introverted Intuition, Ne is a form of perception, i.e., it 'sees' things in the form of 'images' (for the lack of a better word). By itself it does not arrive at insights through means as logical or ethical evaluations. It also relies, again very much like Ni, on a framework of images and insights that has been built up in the past.
In other words, "Explicit Field Statics".
Quote:
Like Introverted Intuition, Ne is a form of perception, i.e., it 'sees' things in the form of 'images' (for the lack of a better word). By itself it does not arrive at insights through means as logical or ethical evaluations. It also relies, again very much like Ni, on a framework of images and insights that has been built up in the past.
In other words, it can compare newly-encountered "Explicit Field Statics" with remembered "Explicit Field Statics", just like an Se-ego can compare newly-encountered "Explicit Object Statics" with remembered "Explicit Object Statics".
Quote:
The focus is on underlying traits of a phenomenon, i.e. those things that are not directly visible, as opposed to physical qualities of the phenomenon.
Now you're talking about "Ti", "Fi", "Si", or "Ni", i.e. any one of the "Introverted" functions. All "Introverted" functions are concerned with "Implicit" information. Here is the definition of "Implicit":
Quote:
capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed
So if some "thing" (static or dynamic property) can be known or understood about some other "thing" (object or field), but such knowledge or understanding is unexpressed by that "thing" (object or field), then where does that knowledge or understanding come from? If no information flowed from the environment to the observer, how did the observer gain knowledge or understanding? I contend that such knowledge or understanding must come from an operation of the brain. If I am correct in my contention, then it would make sense that an "introvert" might seem quiet, aloof, self-absorbed, etc., because they would be more focused on their thought processes if their so-called "primary function" were an "implicit" one.
Yeah its kind of hard to separate functions, but basically...
My Se in simple words is, I -see- EVERYTHING. Im in the moment, every second, every sound, smell, touch, everything in my environment, everyone in my environment, I experience every single thing thats going on (in relation to me anyways). My Se is also sheer willpower and just....anger. Im talking about pure rage. Its actually far worse than rage, its like a slow smoldering current of sinister lava. You might meet me and think im nice, happy go lucky, smooth,...a slightly submissive/shy person, I am at the surface, which is really me being Se in the moment but filtering every action through Ti. But deep down, im always angry, a monster (not a bad person, im actually a very "good" person, but the word monster is the only thing that comes to mind that can describe how I feel and what im capable of. I could say devil or demon, but those definitely don't get the right message across).
What ananke said about being ahead of everyone and being unpredictable...thats partially Se, but really for me thats Ti. My Se sees thats going on, my Ti not only refers back to my Se experiences, but is the sum total of collected knowledge...so the more I experience and know, I not only experience everything in the moment, but I see whats going on at the core of reality (concrete/abstract/relationships) and am able to logically deduct whats going to happen way into the future as well as contemplate what has happened in the past, the reasons why, etc.
Both functions do much more than this, but these are just the basics for me.
Fascinating post here. Basically, you constantly perceive "explicit static" properties of "objects". I think you might be SEE rather than SLE, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leader
I'd say all this describes me pretty much as well. I also feel like I can easily see the potential a relationship has and create greater closeness and emotional intimacy, sort of help it reach it's full potential. I'd think this has something to do with the ability to "put myself in other people's shoes", which helps me to relate to them emotionally, understand their motives and intentions etc. The main difference to an ESI would probably be that they evaluate and analyze relationships mainly through their observations of concrete interactions and events, while EIIs focus more on alternative possibilities and potential qualities.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Yes, color! This is why I started this thread. We all know the theory, but for me a good portrait brings the definition to life. Definitions are always circualr in some way, Necessary, but meaningless without experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryene Astraelis
I'm good at processing... colors, textures and shapes of things and how they fit together without really thinking...? Like sifting through a thousand of these tiny elements at once (noise, blare, curve, space, etc) until my brain decides which combo is the one I like. I'm good at looking at things (a dish, a dance) and picking apart how they were physically made, what gives them that particular effect (is it the texture? the particular kind of movement? etc) knowing that if one thing were out of balance the whole piece would feel like something else, or have a different effect on people (comfort versus disturbance, warmth versus slickness, etc)
I have a mental "aesthetic bank" of paintings, designs, clothes, food, etc, that I've seen somewhere and can fluidly rehash all of these things without really thinking. Like if you ask me to design something I've never made before (movie poster, living room) I would probably just move stuff around (mentally or for real) until it "felt right," and it would likely look like ( a worse version) of successful designs you had seen. I tend to automatically absorb craft and technique elements of books. By technique I mean things like, how syntax affects one's sense of time or emotion, how micro/ macro structuring will make you feel like certain psychological motives are hidden, others are out in the open, how certain placements of elements at particular points in the narrative can break your heart. It's hard to separate out base from creative function. SLI's and SEI's are typically better at making different kinds of things.
I think the biggest issue w/ the Si bank is that, if I'm not thinking, it becomes very easy to just reference everything I've already seen as a way to figure out what I "can" make, rather than make something new.
I would NOT have worded it today the way I worded it here, and there are some things that are ambiguous or glossed over. But other Ne types seemed to really dig it at the time.
Plus, I sounded a little arrogant and kind of douchbaggy, even more so than usual: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-description-)
p.s. don't forget about the disclaimer at the bottom of the link
I love food, um, like fried rice and chicken. Watch my video to find out more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUr3Gm5gFD0
oh is that you. Not bad. I like food too, but not what you say. I'm a fool for exotic dishes with seafood. I think we lead with different functions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Park
I'm trying to think of a less poetic way of explaining how I experience Ni. I find it difficult because – I think someone already mentioned this (in this thread?) – it seems as though it prefers to remain mysterious even to itself or its users. In short: most of the time I'm rather baffled by the way my mind works.
Someone recently said I give too much credit to Ni as I was explaining a precognition I had, but I don't think I do. That's just the way it works. I had an epiphany some while ago about the way Se and Ni work together – it's as though I gain information by looking past my surroundings, and I might literally just stare at something for extended periods of time, spacing out, and then all of a sudden there's a sort of a "blip" in my head and I realize my unconscious had been processing information the whole time which lead to an understanding of something. Which is why I just often suck in new information perhaps without fully understanding it, because I can oftentimes trust that once I have it there, my mind will subconsciously keep processing it until it's time for it to surface again and sort of settle in properly.
I recall someone once saying that Ni is sort of like Ti, but without the logical steps it needs to arrive to a conclusion. I think a similar comparison has been made with Ne and Ni, but anyway. I arrive to all sorts of conclusions without fully knowing why. Combined with Te PoLR, this has sabotaged all of my math tests in my entire life. I always get minus points for not including the calculation in my answer, just the correct outcome :(
Socially speaking, being Ni base sort of really sucks. You simply cannot communicate the way your head works to anyone but other Ni bases. Being an IEI, I can mend that a bit with Fe, but I have never wondered for a minute why a lot of ILIs have prolems relating to other people. And it's so strange meeting another Ni base! I recently met a slightly schizophrenic ILI. He was telling me about some models and theories he'd been constructing lately, and as I listened, I realized I hadn't understood a word he said, yet still understood what he meant, as a whole. Some parts of the conversation were just us two cutting each other off and completing each others' thoughts – and not sentences, but thoughts. As though there was just this air of understanding what we meant.
I've come to hate it when people ask me what I usually think about. Umm? Colours? Abstract patterns? No kidding. That's pretty much all I can see besides some random mental chatter. That and hot imaginary sex. What you gon make of that?
It's weird, but meditation has helped me understand the way my mind operates a lot better. It helps when you learn to sort of "rest" your awareness, all the while becoming more and more all-encompassing. I'm also glad to have switched my perception from mind-body dualism to monism. I feel less like I'm torn in two, half of me in my body and half of me in my mind, and feel more like I'm on a bridge in between that makes them into one. I don't know if I put that very well but that's the best I can do.
As for Ni being time-based... I think a lot of people sort of misunderstand what that means. An SLE was once sorely disappointed after asking me where I was going with my life... I think he expected me to have this script containing everything that was ever going to happen to me, when in fact I just usually have these vague abstract images of some distant future and I require something more tangible to start from before I can actually concretely see where I'm heading and what leads where. When the time comes, I will know, but only as it's already approaching and near. I mean, yeah, there are patterns and cycles too but the farther they are, the more vague they usually seem. It's just like regular seeing. The farther things are, the less detail you see. Ugh.
T.S. Eliot's Four Quartets in four dimensions.
I had a great last paragraph/bottom line in my head but it escaped. I paid a visit to a retirement home last week and found the old age fascinating. Old people make no sense and it makes so much sense. I could seriously almost taste the strings that had pulled them there.
Thanks. It's a great description I can relate to. Not sure yet if I am IEI or ILI, but my mind works like this. I often say that I dont really "think", I just juggle with toughts and somehow, suddenly, I have a conclusion. I have an hypothesis that Ni is the way we think when we dream. Se being the most "awake" state of mind, Ni would be the complementary : accumulating information, then connecting the dots backwards, like when we hear a sound while sleeping and the dream constructs a story that ends with that sound. Do you think "dreaming" would be a good metaphor to describe Ni ? To me it seems more accurate than speaking of being aware of time or being "prophetic" or "seeing the unconscious". Maybe Ni egos prefer the dream-like mode of thinking. I also noticed that Ni was very similar to Ti, like a Ti in "perception mode". For a long time I thought I was Ti dominant because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aivonaima
I can't say for sure... I have several types of distinctly different dreams, and some of them seem much more real than my thoughts :lol: I'm working on a dream classification thing but my lack of Te makes it a little tricky! I do think, however, that Ni works closer to the archetypal mind. It generalizes rather than individualizes. I like to think of it as a barcode reader... A barcode has a lot of information packed tightly into a simplified pattern. Ni is the reader device for the "codes" of the archetypal mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by frog
I really like the description of Ni. It speaks to something I've been thinking about lately, which is that I've always wondered how it would be something other than Si base- b/c growing up I really thought, the physical world that I am infinitely processing is just the most immediate world everyone lives in. If you want to perceive something else you really have to force yourself to think about it- like an additional level of "reach." It wasn't until much later on that I think I processed that other people are perceiving something else *automatically* lol. I just thought that other people had this additional mental energy that I lacked. But I imagine for some of the other base functions, you'd be aware of the disconnect from a young age, and Ni is probably one of them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu-NJA4Y1RI&list=PL9948F4A541503051Quote:
Originally Posted by felafel
Ne ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Geminatronix
My leading function is all about fun ideas to think about and possibility. I'd say part of my own personal growth is realizing some.
It's prickly but tastes like chocolate.