Pondering on Ni Ignoring (IEE/ILE)

[anndelise]

I suppose this is to be expected due to the 7th functions rivaling the base, but I've observed that Ne dominants tend to have a poor perception of remembering the approximate time of past occurrences. In this sense, the 7th function is similar to the 4th, the differences laying in being less concerned about criticism of the 7th, it's just an annoyance, is how I see it

For instance, the Ne dominants I've observed frequently draw huge gaps in the time of occurrences with seemingly little regard for how acute their timing is, to give a couple examples;

An ILE who often questions where something has gone, thinking that they have bought said object recently when in fact they didn't

ILE: Where is the [item]?
A: it's been used up/gone/spoiled a while ago
ILE: but I just bought it!
A: you bought it [a long time ago], it's been used/spoiled by now

or

IEE: I haven't seen so-and-so in such a long time, at least a year
A: You saw them 4 months ago
IEE: I thought it was longer


Has anyone noticed similar issues with ILE/IEE's in this reguard?

Timing is an example of Ni, but Ni isn't Time.

Calendars and clocks are not natural timing systems, they are man made systems of codifying the passage of time. There is no evolutionary connection between the human mind and splitting the passage of time up into hours, minutes, seconds, weeks, months, etc.

Natural timing systems would be various cycles that occur. The rotation of the earth which gives us dawn, day, dusk, night. The cyclical relationship between the moon and the earth...of which our months don't actually follow, making 'months' ambiguous. The longer term cyclical relationship between the earth and the sun which leads to seasonal changes.

Where are the natural cycles for seconds? minutes? hours? weeks? etc

There are other timing systems that may fall under Ni. Such as one's breath, one's energy cycles, and even one's response systems. How long does it take for you to answer a question? Why would it take you that long? Are you hiding something? If you need to make sure that x happens, then you need to set y into motion. etc etc

These are but small examples of dynamic + implicit relationships/interactions.


In the OP's example, I don't see how the examples actually relate to the timing example of Ni. How does the brain process "recently"? "a while ago"? "a long time ago"? "4 months ago"?

To process any of those, they would need to be linked to something significant. If an item was purchased, say a food item which would spoil if not used within a certain time frame, what information would be required to anticipate the edible time frame?
* One could look at the date of expiration and then mark it on the calendar.
* One could mentally link it with an expected event, such as "I need to eat this before I go to my gf's house next weekend", or "this will last in the fridge for that picnic", etc.
* One could take into account what one knows about the type of food, how it spoils, and how long it will last under certain conditions.
* etc

One of the problems is that most foods in the stores aren't natural foods, they are boxed up, bottled up, canned up, etc. The sight of it is closed off from the senses, and requires an unnatural focus on man made calendars. If it was a tomato, one could see it start to shrivel up, and then know that it needs to be used quickly...or can guess at approximately how long it's been since it was purchased. But a can of beans?

Add to that is that all sorts of other things can influence how long such a product could last. Is the fridge at the right temp? Is the vegetable in the appropriate temperature zone? What influences that temperature zone? Was the person taught how to properly store the item so that it would stay fresher, longer? We can't forget cultural influences and teachings.

If an event happened in the past, how would the person remember it?
If it has a strong enough emotional tie to it, then a person has a better chance of remember the event. But how to remember how far back the event happened? The brain doesn't know the difference between what is real and what is imagined...it's all triggering the same things. So to think back on an event, it doesn't really know the calendar age of when the event happened, remembering the event is in effect having the brain go through the event again...now..at the time of remembering it.

We can put it along a time line of other remembered events or other emotions. Event X happened...which was before Event Y...which was sometime before Event Z. Event Z happened when Event P happened, which was on Date D. And then an approximation is given as to when an event happened.

For example, my daughter's birth was when I was 24, I remember this because I keep confusing her birth year and the age I was when she was born. I remember the date only because I've had to fill out so much paperwork over the years that ask over and over again what the date of her birth is. I remember my own birthday because of a) filling out the paperwork over and over, and b) because of it's unusualness (leap day)...but I certainly don't remember it because of the emotions occurring at the time of being born.


Back before the advent of the man made calendars and such, I'm willing to bet that it was the Ni people who spent most of their time working out the timings of events and such, using the various cycles occurring as their tools. Paying attention to astronomical events, such as the cycles and locations of mercury to certain constellations would allow a person to anticipate at what point a child would be 'old enough' to start his own family. Or paying attention to seasonal changes occurring in a given location, and being able to anticipate when to plant seeds or reap harvests, or when it will be time to move to a more southernly location, etc.

But for modern day? The brain still isn't evolved to break up timing into seconds, weeks, months, etc. So even modern day Ni's would have difficulties with 'being on time', and 'forgetting when an event occurred', and even for 'forgetting what day it is today'.

[Aiss]

I don't associate Ni with time as much as with consequences, a turn of events as opposed to points in time. Events are related to each other - never mind if it was a cause-effect thing or not; there's a dynamic quality to it which translates into timelines, but isn't one. This results in some timing-related skills, but Ni isn't dependent on time, it works the same in other areas. I'm mostly opposed to associating Ni with time because it seems to make most people think of it as "objective", single and linear timeline, on which events are mixed by relation but chronologically ordered, which is about as far from Ni as I can imagine. It's by their relation to each other - like interweaving threads - that the actual timing is worked out when needed. These relations aren't really fixed or stable, but I have no better word at the moment. Pretty much as anndelise described, except I'd say the focus is more on "X must have happened after/before Y, because of Z".

FWIW, I can usually pretty accurately tell when something happened, though it's a purely associative process, making what I recall about the event match with related events. Regarding the future, I find it easy to maneuvre so that timing is to my advantage.