Jung on Ni

[Alomoes]

The introverted intuitive type, like the extraverted intuitive, has an uncanny capacity for smelling out the future, the notyet-manifest possibilities of a situation. But the intuition is directed within, hence they are primarily found among seers and prophets, poets, artists; among primitive peoples they are the shamans who convey the messages of the gods to the tribe. On a more mundane level, persons of this type tend to be mystical day-dreamers. They do not communicate well, are frequently misunderstood, lack good judgment about both themselves and others, and never accomplish anything. They move from image to image, writes Jung, "chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious," without establishing any personal connection.108 This type is especially liable to neglect ordinary physical needs. They often have little awareness of their own bodily existence or its effect on others. It often appears (especially to the extravert) that reality does not exist for them—they are simply lost in fruitless fantasies. Jung counters this by describing the value of this type to the collective community: The perception of the images of the unconscious, produced in such inexhaustible abundance by the creative energy of life, is of course fruitless from the standpoint of immediate utility. But since these images represent possible views of the world which may give life a new potential, this function, which to the outside world is the strangest of all, is as indispensable to the total psychic economy as is the corresponding human type to the psychic life of a people. Had this type not existed, there would have been no prophets in Israel.109 Introverted intuitives are characteristically vague about details in the "real" world. They easily get lost in strange cities; they misplace possessions, forget appointments, seldom turn up on time, arrive at airports at the very last minute. Their working environment is usually chaotic; they can't find the right papers, the tools they need, clean clothes. There is seldom anything orderly or tidy about them. They tend to muddle through life, dependent on the tolerance and good will of sensation-oriented friends.

Oh look, it's Einstein.

[Kill4Me]

Jung is dead on.

"On a more mundane level, persons of this type tend to be mystical day-dreamers. They do not communicate well, are frequently misunderstood, lack good judgment about both themselves and others, and never accomplish anything. They move from image to image, writes Jung, "chasing after every possibility in the teeming womb of the unconscious," without establishing any personal connection.108 This type is especially liable to neglect ordinary physical needs. They often have little awareness of their own bodily existence or its effect on others. It often appears (especially to the extravert) that reality does not exist for them—they are simply lost in fruitless fantasies."

I hear these “fruitless fantasies” all day long from my IEI-Ni 4w5 sx/sp. It makes for lots of play. A typical example:

Her: Baby, I’m a Hollywood star inside. Inside me there’s marlene dietrich, Audrey Hepburn, a little bit Marilyn Monroe but the bigs of all them you know who, Joan Crawford mixed with Bettie Davis, I have both inside me burning burning consuming my soul. I am a diva, I am a diva!

Me: Heh.

Her: And you don’t understand that that I need to pursue my dream to stardom. I want to go to broadway one day. To see shows not to perform. with a rich old bald man with a pocketful of money and then I want to travel with him to monte carlo because I’ crazy to visit monte carlo. it s a place where all big stars start and you don’t’ understand this because you’re 2 eggs 2 bacon 2 sausage and you’re a guy who likes to go to starbucks because you feel more rich. NOOO you’re rich if you take coffee in Portugal, if you take coffee in Lisbon. Then you are rich. “I like starbucks” Noooo. You’re suspposed to say you like the coffee they serve in Chiado, Portugal. I love chiado coffee. It’s the best coffee in the world.

Me: Disneyland?

Her: NOOOO, no Disneyland man. I don’t talk about plastic. I talk about things 200 years old. don’t come with plastic words like you americans like.

Me: You can seduce your rich man in Disneyland.

Her: No no theres no Disneyland. I want to go to monte carlo. Monte carlo. That’s what I want. How come you don’t take me to monte carlo. Its not that expensive. We should go. Its beautiful there. Its quiet, beautiful a lot of people visit. You should take me there.

Me: Just don’t forget I’m the star.

Her: You’re the star for what, starbucks, mcdonalds star Donald. Dunkin Donalds!

Me: Cut the crap.

Her: Cut the crap. I’m going to name our kids Cut the Crap. Cut the crap. Cut the crap!

***

there's never a dull moment, though....the other night around eleven o'clock she just comes up with this plan to ride her bicycle around the city looking for a dresser somebody left on the street for trash day. "I have to go now because if soembody put something out tomorrow it will be gone." it took me a half hour to convince her to let me drive her instead. she didn't lose hope that there would be a dresser just waiting for her on one of the streets. of course there was nothing there.

she excels at driving people crazy. i am already crazy so I get a kick out of it.

[mfckrz]

Oh look, it's Einstein.

No it isn't.

[waddup]

Yes to all your posts.

[Dalek Caan]

I kind of wonder if Einstein was INTp as well. From the few things I've read about him, he enjoyed learning math and physics, but was apparently a bad tutor and had a hard time getting an academic job and was kind of screwed up until he got a job in a patent office that his father helped recommend him for. His Fe seemed lacking; in my experience, Ti/Fe types usually do okay career-wise because they put on that Fe to get people's favor. And he was only well-known by people after his theory of relativity became prominent. Apparently he was also a bad lecturer when his theory of relativity got him into academia. People that had classes with him said he'd often just talk to himself and write things on a board. He was hard to follow and mostly inside his head apparently.

But he used what he called "thought experiments" to come up with his ideas and tried to come up with a unified field theory, though I don't think he ever did. His theory of relativity was lacking the necessary mathematics to back it up and was almost taken by a colleague as a result. I don't think Ti was his priority, but rather his intuition. He seems to have spent a large amount of time in his head trying to work out his intuition and frequently isolated himself from other people to do it. I know the Russians think he was ILE and maybe he was, but he seemed a lot more introverted like an ILI.

[Tallmo]

His Fe seemed lacking

Einstein cracks joke

[Dalek Caan]

Einstein cracks joke

Okay, he probably was ILE.

[Tallmo]

Okay, he probably was ILE.

yes, I think he looks more ILE in that short video. But that's my only typing material so far.

[mfckrz]

But he used what he called "thought experiments" to come up with his ideas

As has everyone in physics and philosophy since time immemorial.

His theory of relativity was lacking the necessary mathematics to back it up and was almost taken by a colleague as a result.

Actually it was based on a number of priors that had been well-known for decades.

Minkowski & Born worked out the mathematics for it a few years after Einstein's 1905 publication—nobody 'stole' anything. This is typically how science works.

I know the Russians think he was ILE and maybe he was, but he seemed a lot more introverted like an ILI.

The Russians are correct.

If you want examples of ILI contemporaries, check Niels Bohr. Solid exposition of Te vs. Ti between him and Einstein.

Max Born is another ILI.

[Singu]

If you want examples of ILI contemporaries, check Niels Bohr. Solid exposition of Te vs. Ti between him and Einstein.

It only has to do with their philosophical differences of Realism vs. Antirealism. Basically, Einstein the Realist was interested in the role of explanations in science. He wanted to explain how things worked. That's why he had "thought experiments" to attempt to come up with explanations for certain phenomenas and resolve apparent contradictions in known theories and science at the time. While Niels Bohr attempted to "bypass" having to explain things by coming up with the probabilistic "interpretation" of quantum mechanics. You don't need to deal with the "Many-Worlds theory" explanatory nonsense, because you can't see or feel any multiverses, anyway.

You might say that's the difference between Ti and Te, but Einstein wasn't always a Realist, and he wasn't always interested in the role of explanations.

[mfckrz]

It only has to do with their philosophical differences of Realism vs. Antirealism.

Philosophical differences tend to imply functional differences.

That's why he had "thought experiments" to attempt to come up with explanations for certain phenomenas and resolve apparent contradictions in known theories and science at the time.

Everyone in science has been doing this for centuries. Stop pointing it out like it's something special.

While Niels Bohr attempted to "bypass" having to explain things by coming up with the probabilistic "interpretation" of quantum mechanics. You don't need to deal with the "Many-Worlds theory" explanatory nonsense, because you can't see or feel any multiverses, anyway.

Bohr never championed multiverse theories. He's notable for the 'Copenhagen Interpretation'—effectively an instrumentalist take on quantum phenomena that tries to avoid getting mired in metaphysical assumptions beyond what can be measurably observed.

Probabilistic interpretations aren't a way of 'bypassing' explanations. For all anyone knows, probability may well represent how reality actually works. As Max Born says:

"The question of whether the waves are something 'real' or a function to describe and predict phenomena in a convenient way is a matter of taste. I personally like to regard a probability wave, even in 3N-dimensional space, as a real thing, certainly as more than a tool for mathematical calculations… quite generally, how could we rely on probability predictions if by this notion we do not refer to something real and objective?"

[waddup]

It only has to do with their philosophical differences of Realism vs. Antirealism. Basically, Einstein the Realist was interested in the role of explanations in science. He wanted to explain how things worked. That's why he had "thought experiments" to attempt to come up with explanations for certain phenomenas and resolve apparent contradictions in known theories and science at the time. While Niels Bohr attempted to "bypass" having to explain things by coming up with the probabilistic "interpretation" of quantum mechanics. You don't need to deal with the "Many-Worlds theory" explanatory nonsense, because you can't see or feel any multiverses, anyway.

You might say that's the difference between Ti and Te, but Einstein wasn't always a Realist, and he wasn't always interested in the role of explanations.

I actually tend to agree with the realist interpretation of anything. I’ve often wondered if the many worlds conceptualizations said something about how differing human cognitions build their own mapped frameworks for reality. Not to say this is anything about socionics and Ne. Not saying that at all. Its something more about the way in which its common understanding everybody has their own unique perspective on each and every event. These perspectives create an infinite of imaginative variations of the interpretation of reality. Something similar is illuminated with wave particle function physics, where the probabilistic outcomes are observation dependent.

I’m saying that in the end, maybe a unified theory is not possible as both many worlds and time dependent outcomes are both true depending on the varying frame of references.

This is all somewhat mish mashed in my head. I cant really describe it well enough. I dont think the true implications of quantum mechanics have been fully realized in all sorts of applications in todays world yet.

[The Reality Denialist]

His Fe seemed lacking; in my experience, Ti/Fe types usually do okay career-wise because they put on that Fe to get people's favor.

Fi is the most effective networking function. Fe is just all the show. You do not get behind the scenes with Fe aka making people to conduct favors of exchange.



For example people might want me out not because I'm bad for atmosphere but because I do not respect their security seeking (like occupational unions). I give absolutely zero moral support so to say and I'm proud of it.

That being said networking as in belonging to something is more of beta/delta thing.

[The Reality Denialist]

OK, take a look at all the 8 types first before giving labels. It seems like Jung has put lots of eggs into one basket for each type instead of two which is socionics approach.

In my experience Ni type's physical needs: lack of proper body mass, non appropriate clothes or make up for events.

That is their lack of body consciousness. IEI's have problem with time (which they might might have common with their super ego type SLI) where as this not clearly problem with ILI. Like I said he put eggs into one basket when the other one was also available. IEI's tend to also share in common with SLI's certain appreciation of colors and stuff regarding aesthetics

Whereas Ne type would be more oblivious to what is in front of their nose. Lack of tuning into a present moment.

[karas]

Hermann Gottlieb ILI (character from Pacific Rim)
Quote:
"Numbers do not lie. Politics and poetry and promises, these are lies. Numbers are as close as we get to the handwriting of God."

Ni Vs Ne = Battle Of The Bullshit

[Beautiful sky]

Einstein is SiTe he rolls Ni so if you don’t look carefully you will miss his Si

[Metamorph]

Einstein is SiTe he rolls Ni so if you don’t look carefully you will miss his Si

It should be *roles Ni, because God doesn't place dice with the Universe.

[sbbds]

Do not come @Kill4Me

[Rebelondeck]

The original post seems to be late 19th century thinking expressed with early 20th century wording. The overreaching statements try to associate outcomes solely with input processes. It's somewhat like saying people of a race are all alike.....

a.k.a I/O