Let's discuss this: NeFi, FiNe, etc

[Slacker]

This is a Maritsa thing:

NeFi-expands possibilities then draws conclusions
FiNe-limits/processes possibilities to draw conclusion

Really, I don't even think that first thing is accurate for me. It's mroe like I feel it's important to look at every single possibility from the beginning, and then evaluate all equally and try to eliminate those that don't go anywhere, though I'm always willing to go back to a possibility I've eliminated earlier.

[Beautiful sky]

Mirrors.

NeFi-You look at all the possibilities. You look at the big picture all the time. You just look at high volume of information but don't draw general conclusion...
FiNe-I look at the most likely to succeed of all the possibilities. I look at the big picture and see what stands out in Red. I process a high volume of info and draw general conclusions....

This is why in close relations this match causes problems because while one can't settle (you/ENFp) the other has already settled (me/INFj).

[krieger]

Maritsa's explanation surprisingly well matches my views on this issue.

Accepting functions (aka dominant) are expanding; they start with a very small observation and create a huge number of interpretations as to what goes on to give rise to the perceived occasion.

(Dynamic/Accepting (Limiting) == just acknowledging a singular perception; Static/Accepting (Empowering) == chosing one interpretation out of the many possible ones)

Creating functions (aka secundary/auxiliary) are contracting; they combine a lot of observations, a large body of impressions, and identify their common properties so as to isolate a single possible state of affairs in the real world.

(Dynamic/Creating (Empowering) == having many pieces of information available to you and/or focussing on one out of these many pieces; Static/Creating (Limiting) == combining all pieces of information and isolating one possibility of interpretation)

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa's explanation surprisingly well matches my views on this issue.

Accepting functions (aka dominant) are expanding; they start with a very small observation and create a huge number of interpretations as to what goes on to give rise to the perceived occasion.

(Dynamic/Accepting (Limiting) == just acknowledging a singular perception; Static/Accepting (Empowering) == chosing one interpretation out of the many possible ones)

Creating functions (aka secundary/auxiliary) are contracting; they combine a lot of observations, a large body of impressions, and identify their common properties so as to isolate a single possible state of affairs in the real world.

(Dynamic/Creating (Empowering) == having many pieces of information available to you and/or focussing on one out of these many pieces; Static/Creating (Limiting) == combining all pieces of information and isolating one possibility of interpretation)

Labcoat, I find when reading the interpretations offered by ENTp's on any given topic, that my mind did the math without being able to explain how; why is that? We basically reach the same conclusion on two seperate paths. Or, maybe not two seperate paths but ENTp more math or analytic, based on hard core, representative logic...like they can write out the formula for the conclusion; while I make the conclusion and I KNOW I am right about it but can't relate to the math until I look at a formula and say "yes, that's how I got to my conclusion."

[krieger]

Labcoat, I find when reading the interpretations offered by ENTp's on any given topic, that my mind did the math without being able to explain how; why is that?

ENTp thought works a lot like that. They don't use models and stable descriptions, they just skip right to adressing the answer to the problem (which they understand in a sort of shallow, subjective way rather than in one conforming to some precise description). The ENTps basically help you draw on the part of your mind that thinks the way they do, so you borrow the ability to this same thing through their guidance.

Other than that, no idea.

[Beautiful sky]

ENTp thought works a lot like that. They don't use models and stable descriptions, they just skip right to adressing the answer to the problem. The ENTps basically help you draw on the part of your mind that thinks the way they do, so you borrow the ability to this same thing through their guidance.

Other than that, no idea.

Maybe it's this the Ne, Ti

[consentingadult]

This is a Maritsa thing:




Really, I don't even think that first thing is accurate for me. It's mroe like I feel it's important to look at every single possibility from the beginning, and then evaluate all equally and try to eliminate those that don't go anywhere, though I'm always willing to go back to a possibility I've eliminated earlier.

Maritsa's definitions are vague to begin with, but I think your description is typical for how IEEs deal with information.

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa's definitions are vague to begin with, but I think your description is typical for how IEEs deal with information.

You blow at Socionics OR SUCK, TAKE A PICK EITHER WAY IT ARRIVES AT THE SAME CONCLUSION.

Yes. In ENTps the possibilities don't start contracting until they address the answer to the problem (J). Their understanding of the problem is variable and multiplicitous.

Contrarily, in INxjs, the act of understanding is already a contraction. So the person identifies one situation out of many possible ones in the act of recognizing the problem.

Thank you, that was wonderfully said.

[consentingadult]

You blow at Socionics OR SUCK, TAKE A PICK EITHER WAY IT ARRIVES AT THE SAME CONCLUSION.

Well, I'm willing to admit that I suck at your version of Socionics, which is a deluded form of Socionics.

[Beautiful sky]

Well, I'm willing to admit that I suck at your version of Socionics, which is a deluded form of Socionics.

I feel guilty for having said that to you. I'm sorry.

[consentingadult]

I feel guilty for having said that to you. I'm sorry.

I could accept your apologies, if only I'd know the reasons why you are sorry.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[consentingadult]

Now it's my turn to say that there are some people that are worthless to talk to - I very-very rarely say this, but Maritsa is such an exception. I'd not waste any more time if I was you.
---

Btw, I'm interested in your opinion, do you think that she can be an IEE?

Don't worry about my interactions with Maritsa. There is a purpose to everything :wink:

As to her being IEE, thatś always a possibility, but in that case we must consider her having some strong sort of pathology, because her style of reasoning is totally different to what I consider IEE style reasoning, such as we see in Mariella or Rick DeLong.

Going by her pictures, she could be a leading Fi type, but I think her behavior looks like Ti-mobilizing. This, of course, is a contradiction in terms, and I think there is something else wrong with her. Could be anything: mood disorder, schyzotypy or schizofrenia, personality disorder, whatever.

[Marie84]

I don't relate to it either and would think an Ne dominant would relate to it even less.
The only time I'd feel comfortable making a conclusion on anything is if there was indisputable facts to back it up, and even than sometimes...

This is how I see it...
Ne through Ni works by developing possibilities but will than narrow them down until they have one to work towards, or work on. Whereas Ni through Ne works by seeing possible consequences and scenarios and will than either expand or narrow them down to a few that seem most plausible

So this is how Si and Ni work against each other, with Si focused on the current state of things while Ni is already past that and onto the next step.
Se compliments Ni by motivating/encouraging Ni in this process, while Ni provides Se with reassurance of the process (a conclusion)


From the Wiki...

Types that value always like to have in mind a specific plan for how their life will develop in the future. Thus they have little time for the concept of "living for the moment" or "making the best of the present". They generally engage in pure leisure activities only for short periods of time, and even then their leisure activities generally involve a psychologically demanding or competitive aspect.

vs

Types that value prefer to try out an opportunity rather than consider all possible ways in which it could not work out. They pick a few options and stick with them, in contrast to introverted intuition (Ni) types who pick one option and continue to doubt that option.