A New Hypothesis About Ne

[jason_m]

This is what I think the 'real' difference is between 'Ne' and its opposing function:

Ne is about possibilities - seeing them, engaging in them, living them out, etc. As a function, it wants to have as many possibilities 'as possible.' It therefore struggles with: things being confined to one option:

- You *must* do ____.
- ___________ is the *only* career that you can go into.
- That idea is possible, but *not right.*
- You *must not* major in _______.

I would even guess that some Ne egos do not like socionics, because it confines them to *one* career, *one* set of college majors, *one* soulmate etc., whereas they would prefer to have many options for all of these things. They could even get stuck in a rut, because there is one soulmate, etc. that is right, because there really are not enough feasible possibilities.

I have experienced this myself with philosophy as a major because of socionics. I could see someone saying that this is the one career that's *right* in socionics terms, but in typical Ne fashion, I had gotten sick of it years ago, and so I became 'ice cold' to it, wanting to move on. Plus, it's important for me to not be confined to one career, but have a multitude of options. But I could still see someone insisting on philosophy because it's the one that's 'right' in terms of its IM, etc. (I've even looked at some MBTI statistics: there are a lot of intuitives and Ne types in philosophy, especially ENTPs and therefore Alpha NTs!)

Anyway, that is my hypothesis about the real difference between Ne and ________ as it's clashing function. Tell me what you think...

[Simon Ssmall]

"I would even guess that some Ne egos do not like socionics, because it confines them to *one* career, *one* set of college majors, *one* soulmate etc., whereas they would prefer to have many options for all of these things. They could even get stuck in a rut, because there is one soulmate, etc. that is right, because there really are not enough feasible possibilities."

False. There are endless possibilities to type and re-type yourself many times over .

[Exodus]

This is what I think the 'real' difference is between 'Ne' and its opposing function:

Ne is about possibilities - seeing them, engaging in them, living them out, etc. As a function, it wants to have as many possibilities 'as possible.' It therefore struggles with: things being confined to one option:

- You *must* do ____.
- ___________ is the *only* career that you can go into.
- That idea is possible, but *not right.*
- You *must not* major in _______.

I would even guess that some Ne egos do not like socionics, because it confines them to *one* career, *one* set of college majors, *one* soulmate etc., whereas they would prefer to have many options for all of these things. They could even get stuck in a rut, because there is one soulmate, etc. that is right, because there really are not enough feasible possibilities.

I have experienced this myself with philosophy as a major because of socionics. I could see someone saying that this is the one career that's *right* in socionics terms, but in typical Ne fashion, I had gotten sick of it years ago, and so I became 'ice cold' to it, wanting to move on. Plus, it's important for me to not be confined to one career, but have a multitude of options. But I could still see someone insisting on philosophy because it's the one that's 'right' in terms of its IM, etc. (I've even looked at some MBTI statistics: there are a lot of intuitives and Ne types in philosophy, especially ENTPs and therefore Alpha NTs!)

Anyway, that is my hypothesis about the real difference between Ne and ________ as it's clashing function. Tell me what you think...

This interpretation has been proposed already by @aestrivex, in terms of "expanding possibility" (Ne) and "limiting possibility" (Ni). I think it's essentially correct as far as the specific conflict goes, although it doesn't address other aspects such as why limiting possibility is compatible with Se, etc.

There is also another aspect to the Ni/Ne conflict which is positivity vs. negativity. This is closely tied with expansion/limiting of possibility. They may both derive from something even more fundamental.

https://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com...ts-in-Model-A2

[Rebelondeck]

Ne and Ni perspectives on data are relativistic as opposed to absolute; it's the myriad of connections among data that take precedence in processing over the rest of the data but this doesn't imply that the rest of the data is excluded. S-processing gives priority to the data (the independent entities); most relativistic considerations are secondary but not excluded. Ne is the use of raw N-priority data; it's not filtered like Ni-input. To say that Ne struggles with single options would be misleading.

a.k.a. I/O

[Kill4Me]

Possibilities in the mind of Ne are reframed as reality such that Ne does not recognize them as just possibilities, hypotheses and intuition.
Exploring and imagining possibilities presents as knowing-the-truth for the Ne-lead. Because Ne reframes possibilities as reality, they sometimes assume that people who disagree with the constructions in their mind are out of touch with reality. I discovered this last year in a debate I won against an ILE and it makes sense in light of Jung's writings about the Ne's dramatic fire and zealous style of presentation:

"The intuitive's morality is governed neither by thinking nor by feeling; he has his own characteristic morality, which consists in a loyalty to his vision and in voluntary submission to its authority."

"He brings his vision to life, he presents it convincingly and with dramatic fire, he embodies it, so to speak. But this is not play-acting, it is a kind of fate."

Those who remember Ineffable may recall Krig The Viking's seminal meltdowns over Ineffable's Ne-on-overdrive style. In the Ne's mind, they are not exploring possibilities but making declarations. Go on over to the politics subforum and read the Tax the Catholic Church thread....look at how zealously Eliza Thomason advocates for her position and has easily taken charge of the thread and discussion....she believes in her position wholeheartedly no matter how much science and simplification gets thrown at her.

[Aylen]

^Gotta agree, with K4, that with role Se and base Ne Eliza is a force of nature when it comes to defending her beliefs. She can go from open to ideas such as flat earth to very persistent and stubborn when it comes to her faith or socionics. Maybe there is some shifting from base to role going on there.

Are you just feeling generally limited in your life right now @jason_m?

I think socionics is like a playground for Ne egos and valuers. They often try on a lot of types and change them more frequently. I suppose this is said of EIE too.

Ne valuers are often the ones most strongly defending and/or expanding on Aušra's theory. She self typed ILE. Maybe I just don't get what you are hypothesizing here at all.

[The Reality Denialist]

Sometimes it is hard to put words around the view. Usually things are just so incredibly intangibly in the mind. Something is boiling there but no one is sure what is going on... but looks like a good hunch. I have been called very intuitive.. however... just as I stated things are usually very raw. Also base posses it and lives with it while creative is more like in one-upmanship with the world.

So as per not wanting to be something is not the problem of Ne. For me it means going towards something and then dumping it just before it gets finished ... not because of possibilities but due to dead possibilities... meaning essentially nothing to see here.

[consentingadult]

My personal experience is that I do not dislike so much being tied down to one option, but that each option is limited in what it can do or accomplush. E.g. relationships with women: One woman can give me A, B, C and D, but never A-Z. I can give her A-Z, but she might only want U-Z. This is where other women come into the picture: they might have other things to give me, they allow me to express other aspects of myself. If there was a one-stop solution, I would surely settle for it.

All 'n' all, we Ne-base types are as versatile in our needs for self-expression as we versatile in our needs to be fulfilled by other people.

[Exodus]

My personal experience is that I do not dislike so much being tied down to one option, but that each option is limited in what it can do or accomplush. E.g. relationships with women: One woman can give me A, B, C and D, but never A-Z. I can give her A-Z, but she might only want U-Z. This is where other women come into the picture: they might have other things to give me, they allow me to express other aspects of myself. If there was a one-stop solution, I would surely settle for it.

All 'n' all, we Ne-base types are as versatile in our needs for self-expression as we versatile in our needs to be fulfilled by other people.

Self-expression is Fe

[consentingadult]

Self-expression is Fe

So Fe-devalueing types do not express themselves?

[Exodus]

So Fe-devalueing types do not express themselves?

No. They don't prioritize self-expression.

[Aylen]

No. They don't prioritize self-expression.

Isn't Fe supposed to be a strong, yet unvalued, function in an IEE that plays an important part in their worldview? It is used to support the creative function.

Also this?

One will often use the demonstrative function to defend and further support their beliefs made in the vulnerable function.

IEE seem to be very expressive people in general when it comes to their thoughts, feelings and opinions.

Quite a few also self type E 4w3 which is all about self-expression.

[Ryan]

Self-expression is Fe

no context or any insight provided what so ever

people should have laughed at this simplistic and irrelevant comment, and moved on

[Exodus]

Isn't Fe supposed to be a strong, yet unvalued, function in an IEE that plays an important part in their worldview? It is used to support the creative function.

Also this?



IEE seem to be very expressive people in general when it comes to their thoughts, feelings and opinions.

Quite a few also self type E 4w3 which is all about self-expression.

The demonstrative function is prioritized more than other unvalued functions; what I said was just the general rule. I've elaborated my views on IM elements and values on my website (e.g. here) if you want to know more. Enneagram doesn't really have anything to do with this, but Type 4 almost exactly corresponds to IEI or Beta NF in socionics.

The creative and demonstrative functions do work together sort of, they're flexible.

"One will often use the demonstrative function to defend and further support their beliefs made in the vulnerable function."

Is this from wikisocion? I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Example?

Anyways, I just wanted to clarify that the above need for self-expression is not fundamentally about Ne.

[Aylen]

The demonstrative function is prioritized more than other unvalued functions; what I said was just the general rule. I've elaborated my views on IM elements and values on my website (e.g. here) if you want to know more. Enneagram doesn't really have anything to do with this, but Type 4 almost exactly corresponds to IEI or Beta NF in socionics.

The creative and demonstrative functions do work together sort of, they're flexible.

"One will often use the demonstrative function to defend and further support their beliefs made in the vulnerable function."

Is this from wikisocion? I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Example?

Anyways, I just wanted to clarify that the above need for self-expression is not fundamentally about Ne.

I think it means just what it says. I guess an example would be if the vulnerable function is being hit that the demon will respond? Think of duals in a heated disagreement over an issue where their fundamental beliefs (say religious, cultural or political) clash. I can see where they might use their demons against each others polrs. Duality is not a Utopian existence free of conflict, which you know, but I am just restating it.

Can't think of an example with others types but this example kinds of works with conflictors but in that case the demon would be supporting the creative against the base function of the conflictor. IDK, that just came to me. I didn't think deeply on it. I will give it more consideration, perhaps.

[Sol]

Ne is about objective traits which are not seen directly, they are supposed.
Ni is about links and associations between objects traits, which are not seen directly.

An example about Ne. The reason of device's malfunction mb felt - this assumption is made by Ne. Human's motivations, guessing of thoughts, etc.
An example about Ni. An object's traits change in time. Those changes are made by tendencies - the links between the same object in different time. The feeling of these tendencies relates to Ni.

[consentingadult]

No. They don't prioritize self-expression.

I think we have different understandings of what self-expressions means. To you it seems to be a performance to other people, in a strict Socionics sense, to me self-expression is whatever a person does 'to bring himself into the world', philosophically speaking. Thus, even an SLI tinkering on the motor of his car in total solitude, is engaging in self-expression.

[detail]

That idea is interesting but it's wrong.

Jk. What you are describing seems more like the "lack of Si" part of Ne, where the individual has a hard time appreciating the present moment so much that he resents anything that isn't stimulating, as a way to work around the lack of ability to connect various aspects of life together into a coherent whole. Ideas and possibilities become a substitute to what the senses would enable them to experience but ultimately it feels unfulfilling because obviously you can't outsmart your basic needs. It is typical of Ne doms up to their 30s IME.

Regarding ILEs, I don't think they consider possibilities as an end. Possibilities are where they pull input data from, that they use to creatively restrict possibilities, then they obtain certain results until they feel like their map of "how things work" feels accurate enough to try something else. They have demonstrative Te and it permeates their methodology. Think something like Rube Goldberg machines. They may seem to be meaningless Ne explorations of concepts but they work precisely by restricting energy so that it performs a task. Only the restricting is done creatively withing a larger structure, which is the set of implicated laws of physics in this example. ILEs make choices confidently only once they feel like they know enough. If not, then their default attitude is to want to explore possibilities under various circumstances to figure out the underlying structure of whatever system they are exploring. This is different from the inability to enjoy the present moment and subsequent tendency to fill this void by indulging in ideas and possibilities.

[Chthonic Daydream]

https://youtu.be/VOgFZfRVaww

You can't really spell "imagine" without . Or "ineffable".
I was supposed to say something constructive in this post but I'm on phone and I forgot.

[Exodus]

I think we have different understandings of what self-expressions means. To you it seems to be a performance to other people, in a strict Socionics sense, to me self-expression is whatever a person does 'to bring himself into the world', philosophically speaking. Thus, even an SLI tinkering on the motor of his car in total solitude, is engaging in self-expression.

That's a fair point. In a sense yes, that is a kind of self-expression. But, for one, SLIs don't *consciously* take self-expression as a general value, or verbalize its importance, even if they do "do" it in the course of life. Instead they are likely to respond to the needs of the situation that are largely detached from their internal state - which is what I mean more specifically by self-expression: expression of one's internal changing state (which is largely emotional but not completely).

Another point is that "real" expression means expressing things to others. I also use the word communication to emphasize this part in case it isn't clear enough with self-expression.

In any case I think you get what I mean.