Ne-users
- Thread starter Gaze
- Start date
I notice that when i'm trying to figure out how to explain an idea, the best insights are unplanned, on the spur of the moment. Sometimes, i'm more effective or productive when i'm figuring out something on the spot, it's as if an idea will come to me, and it will be more helpful or beneficial then something i've already planned or predetermined ahead of time.
I definitely notice relationships between things may not immediately seem to have a connection or i will see possible connections between thoughts or concepts occasionally which may not be obviously interrelated. And this is probably where the idea of insight comes from - noticing unique relationships, where others may see none.
when I make decisions it feels like Ne puts all possibilities before the judge (fi) who then decides what seems right
at work when trying to solve a problem I jump from thought to thought. playing with possibilities like building blocks. What if I skip this block and use that block instead followed by this block would it work then? Or when somebody teach me a method that is exciting and new to me I immediately start to explore how I could use it in my job to make things work better. My mind jumps so quick to such odd places that my coworkers can't follow. I often start saying "if we do it this way then it will work" but mid-sentence realize I'm wrong, stop talking and immediately see an other possibility and say "I've got it". Everybody is looking very puzzled at me and then I have to force myself to take the time to tell the others my idea. When an other Ne is thinking alongside me we only need half sentences to tell eachother what we are thinking about, we can follow eachothers jumping thoughts and use them to jump to others and finely say to eachother "this will work" and all other people present look like we are mad.
that is what I think Ne is
at work when trying to solve a problem I jump from thought to thought. playing with possibilities like building blocks. What if I skip this block and use that block instead followed by this block would it work then? Or when somebody teach me a method that is exciting and new to me I immediately start to explore how I could use it in my job to make things work better. My mind jumps so quick to such odd places that my coworkers can't follow. I often start saying "if we do it this way then it will work" but mid-sentence realize I'm wrong, stop talking and immediately see an other possibility and say "I've got it". Everybody is looking very puzzled at me and then I have to force myself to take the time to tell the others my idea. When an other Ne is thinking alongside me we only need half sentences to tell eachother what we are thinking about, we can follow eachothers jumping thoughts and use them to jump to others and finely say to eachother "this will work" and all other people present look like we are mad.
that is what I think Ne is
Ne wants you to understand their nonsense.
Ni doesn't care if you don't understand anything.
Ne thinks about a goal and thinks about 583490583459034 ways to get there (Although it probably wont even finish it =P)
Ni thinks about a goal, gets a vision on about how to get there, and works towards the goal (And it has more chance to Ne to finish it)
When Ne users talk of one subject, they tend to make a lot of analogies and sometimes even have troubles staying on the subject
Ni users are much more focused on the subject and won't randomly start talking about unrelated stuff
Ni doesn't care if you don't understand anything.
Ne thinks about a goal and thinks about 583490583459034 ways to get there (Although it probably wont even finish it =P)
Ni thinks about a goal, gets a vision on about how to get there, and works towards the goal (And it has more chance to Ne to finish it)
When Ne users talk of one subject, they tend to make a lot of analogies and sometimes even have troubles staying on the subject
Ni users are much more focused on the subject and won't randomly start talking about unrelated stuff
Yea, well, maybe that's not the reason Ne users don't finish their goals. Maybe they don't prioritise goals in the first place. Perhaps these "goals" are merely stepping stones for exponentially divergent thought. So in a sense, Ne users have foci that are expansive in nature and Ni users' goals are more "straightforward"? I mean, maaaybe? Who knows.
Wait... Maybe this was vague. Ne users just prioritise thinking up multiple possibilities and don't focus on the solution as much? Per se, not always... just, it's creative? I have no idea.
Yea, well, maybe that's not the reason Ne users don't finish their goals. Maybe they don't prioritise goals in the first place. Perhaps these "goals" are merely stepping stones for exponentially divergent thought. So in a sense, Ne users have foci that are expansive in nature and Ni users' goals are more "straightforward"? I mean, maaaybe? Who knows.
Wait... Maybe this was vague. Ne users just prioritise thinking up multiple possibilities and don't focus on the solution as much? Per se, not always... just, it's creative? I have no idea.
Never thought of Ne this way. So maybe Ne is more interested in the process or journey, the theorizing of what could, rather than the end result which is to complete a task, etc. That makes sense. For example, when i'm in class, i'm focused on the experience of learning, considering the possible links in what i'm learning to what i already know. Instinctively, i know the end result is credit towards the course and a degree program, but my focus is on the process of internalizing information and the possible application of this information in other subjects areas.
This would corroborate MBTI's use of P vs J. In MBTI, if you are a P, it means that you perceiving function (N or S) is extroverted. One of the characteristics of P is interest in the process over the end result.
I, myself, don't consciously get excited over the process, but it is the only thing capable of motivating me. If someone tells me anything about what they believe, I will rarely question the content. If anything, I am only interested in why - that is, I am only interested in knowing how they arrived at that conclusion.
My Dom is Ti, so what I'm looking for is: did they follow logical protocol in coming to their conclusion?
This is usually what I say about the religious, concerning whenever I do debate with them. They are used to having to prove what they believe. I don't particularly care. I just want to know why.
I can also confirm that Ne is all about possibilities. An ENTP would know this even more than me. I will see something and I will immediately find many ways to interpret it. Because of my strong Ti, I refuse to jump to a conclusion, once I am conscious of multiple interpretations. What I do then is either: a) seek clarity, or b) use ambiguous wording that covers all possibilities, or c) guess which possibility others will automatically interpret and work with it.
Agapooka
This would corroborate MBTI's use of P vs J. In MBTI, if you are a P, it means that you perceiving function (N or S) is extroverted. One of the characteristics of P is interest in the process over the end result.
I, myself, don't consciously get excited over the process, but it is the only thing capable of motivating me. If someone tells me anything about what they believe, I will rarely question the content. If anything, I am only interested in why - that is, I am only interested in knowing how they arrived at that conclusion.
My Dom is Ti, so what I'm looking for is: did they follow logical protocol in coming to their conclusion?
This is usually what I say about the religious, concerning whenever I do debate with them. They are used to having to prove what they believe. I don't particularly care. I just want to know why.
I can also confirm that Ne is all about possibilities. An ENTP would know this even more than me. I will see something and I will immediately find many ways to interpret it. Because of my strong Ti, I refuse to jump to a conclusion, once I am conscious of multiple interpretations. What I do then is either: a) seek clarity, or b) use ambiguous wording that covers all possibilities, or c) guess which possibility others will automatically interpret and work with it.
Agapooka
I can definitely relate to the last sentence. I do this all the time. I speak in general terms or use vague descriptions because i'm trying to include or incorporate all the possibilities rather than excluding any. I think many people find it difficult to follow Ne's thought processes because they are looking for specifics and details, when we're concerned about the overall picture.
Yea, well, maybe that's not the reason Ne users don't finish their goals. Maybe they don't prioritise goals in the first place. Perhaps these "goals" are merely stepping stones for exponentially divergent thought. So in a sense, Ne users have foci that are expansive in nature and Ni users' goals are more "straightforward"? I mean, maaaybe? Who knows.
Wait... Maybe this was vague. Ne users just prioritise thinking up multiple possibilities and don't focus on the solution as much? Per se, not always... just, it's creative? I have no idea.
yeah well said!
I noticed I have many interest. I followed a shiatsu course but don't practice it. I'm now following a graphic design course but I don't think I will make it my job in the near future. I follow a path until I think I know enough and jump to an other. But in a way all my paths are connected to eachother although most people will say otherwise. I believe all the things I'm creating and learning right now will serve me eventually to fulfill a for the moment unknown goal.
and at the same time they are possible carrier options in case I get fired and need to find an other job. Keep my options open
It could also be that I made this up to feel better about not finishing my goals.
yeah well said!
I noticed I have many interest. I followed a shiatsu course but don't practice it. I'm now following a graphic design course but I don't think I will make it my job in the near future. I follow a path until I think I know enough and jump to an other. But in a way all my paths are connected to eachother although most people will say otherwise. I believe all the things I'm creating and learning right now will serve me eventually to fulfill a for the moment unknown goal.
and at the same time they are possible carrier options in case I get fired and need to find an other job. Keep my options open
It could also be that I made this up to feel better about not finishing my goals.
+1
I can't agree with this enough. I also have a ton of interests, it's hard to choose just one. I would probably get 3 degrees at once if i could. The television movie The Librarian was one of my favorites because the main character, a librarian, had 22 degrees. I was so envious. Everything seems relevant, interesting or important. It's hard to choose just one thing to focus on. Not sure if this a good example but whenever i read something, i want to read something which engages me on a number of levels, not just one. i prefer comprehensive books vs. more specialized literature. And i always like finding connections between seemingly unrelated topics. This probably explains why i enjoyed theory and criticism in college. Applying semiotic theory to media or narrative literary theory to film was breathtaking. I would literally get euphoric studying theoretical texts and coming up with insights. It's probably also why i didn't appreciate it when a professor indicated that an idea or comment wasn't relevant because it wasn't already considered by other theorists. That was like an arrow to my soul.
Last edited:
Also, I think it's important to note where Ne is placed. For examples~ an infp has Fi dom and Ne as auxiliary~ whereas enfp's have Ne dom and Fi as their second.
To me~ the difference probably lies on the emphasis or goal? Fi is a function that focuses on "value" "truth". So... If you have Fi as a dominant I think it means that you have strong "values" and "know" the "truth" and use Ne to convey that. Whereas.... Ne doms use Fi as their tool of choice to discover the possible "truths" and "intentions"? I don't know for sure.
I mean, to me... Truth is highly relative. Everyone's interpretation of the world is good in their own little way.
One of the "reasons" I came to this conclusion was the endless possibilities of the assimilation of values. By that I mean.... I was born in Japan, my mother is Christian I was taught this and that, I have gained these and those values. BUT if my situation were to be different my values would have also been different. The scenarios to my life are the determining factor for my identity but the possible scenarios are endless, therefore all is relative.
My values are therefore also a lot more "flexible" than that of an Fi dom infp. Because values are not my main "focus", it's merely a tool.
I think... Maaaybe, I think I might be wrong but yea, mbti is ambiguous~ so yea yay for that
To me~ the difference probably lies on the emphasis or goal? Fi is a function that focuses on "value" "truth". So... If you have Fi as a dominant I think it means that you have strong "values" and "know" the "truth" and use Ne to convey that. Whereas.... Ne doms use Fi as their tool of choice to discover the possible "truths" and "intentions"? I don't know for sure.
I mean, to me... Truth is highly relative. Everyone's interpretation of the world is good in their own little way.
One of the "reasons" I came to this conclusion was the endless possibilities of the assimilation of values. By that I mean.... I was born in Japan, my mother is Christian I was taught this and that, I have gained these and those values. BUT if my situation were to be different my values would have also been different. The scenarios to my life are the determining factor for my identity but the possible scenarios are endless, therefore all is relative.
My values are therefore also a lot more "flexible" than that of an Fi dom infp. Because values are not my main "focus", it's merely a tool.
I think... Maaaybe, I think I might be wrong
but yea, mbti is ambiguous~ so yea yay for that
So, Ne-users, how do you learn? Do you find that you have a more self-directed learning style? Are you more discussion oriented or do you learn better by studying alone and reading texts? Do you enjoy close readings or analysis of a book, novel, or text?
You (pl) are doing it all wrong.
Ne has no goal, motivation, will, or priority. Those are judgements, not perceptions. perception is merely an interpretation. It is the ability to freely draw upon one's own imagination. The capacity to consider: What if this? Why not that?
one may ask, what use is a question without answer?
To them I ask, what use is a newborn baby?
Ne has no goal, motivation, will, or priority. Those are judgements, not perceptions. perception is merely an interpretation. It is the ability to freely draw upon one's own imagination. The capacity to consider: What if this? Why not that?
one may ask, what use is a question without answer?
To them I ask, what use is a newborn baby?
Hmmmm, It's very difficult to explain... Because "How I learn" or "process" is inherently subconscious. But I will try to use my idea of what "Ne" is and try to identify my behaviour in regards to learning.
Whenever I have to "learn" something I usually never have to repeatedly do the same thing over and over again. (I never make homework that's the same, I also tend to think of "how" I might tackle the problem and then subsequently not write anything down) But, if I don't "understand" the theory behind how something works then I find it extremely difficult to reproduce it even if I make 100 questions. (but usually I "create" a theory to the problems even though my theory is inaccurate, It's how I have to cope![but this is very bad to do because theories stack up on eachother... so if I don't "get" the basics then it'll be harder to "get" the further ones])
So usually I read the theory, read how to apply it~ and taadaa. For subjects like history, art theory, etc. I have to really "be one with it" to get it. I have to understand the thought patterns people made when they came up with these theories and scenarios. (but that's obvious right?) (this is such a handy skill because everyone demands you to "Say it in your own words" for tests and exams these days)
Also, the more you know the more patterns you can string together, so if you synthesise theories from different fields. (which gets really really handy once you get older and stuff)
right. I think I missed a lot, but whatever
I will try to use my idea of what "Ne" is and try to identify my behaviour in regards to learning. Whenever I have to "learn" something I usually never have to repeatedly do the same thing over and over again. (I never make homework that's the same, I also tend to think of "how" I might tackle the problem and then subsequently not write anything down) But, if I don't "understand" the theory behind how something works then I find it extremely difficult to reproduce it even if I make 100 questions. (but usually I "create" a theory to the problems even though my theory is inaccurate, It's how I have to cope![but this is very bad to do because theories stack up on eachother... so if I don't "get" the basics then it'll be harder to "get" the further ones])
So usually I read the theory, read how to apply it~ and taadaa. For subjects like history, art theory, etc. I have to really "be one with it" to get it. I have to understand the thought patterns people made when they came up with these theories and scenarios. (but that's obvious right?) (this is such a handy skill because everyone demands you to "Say it in your own words" for tests and exams these days
)Also, the more you know the more patterns you can string together, so if you synthesise theories from different fields. (which gets really really handy once you get older and stuff)
right. I think I missed a lot, but whatever
Hmmmm, It's very difficult to explain... Because "How I learn" or "process" is inherently subconscious. But
Whenever I have to "learn" something I usually never have to repeatedly do the same thing over and over again. (I never make homework that's the same, I also tend to think of "how" I might tackle the problem and then subsequently not write anything down) But, if I don't "understand" the theory behind how something works then I find it extremely difficult to reproduce it even if I make 100 questions. (but usually I "create" a theory to the problems even though my theory is inaccurate, It's how I have to cope![but this is very bad to do because theories stack up on eachother... so if I don't "get" the basics then it'll be harder to "get" the further ones])
So usually I read the theory, read how to apply it~ and taadaa. For subjects like history, art theory, etc. I have to really "be one with it" to get it. I have to understand the thought patterns people made when they came up with these theories and scenarios. (but that's obvious right?) (this is such a handy skill because everyone demands you to "Say it in your own words" for tests and exams these days
Also, the more you know the more patterns you can string together, so if you synthesise theories from different fields. (which gets really really handy once you get older and stuff)
right. I think I missed a lot, but whatever
Keep trying.
ooooh :0 I have been there~ Seeking purpose to my "mentality". In the end I had to admit to myself that I didn't find it all that important that I "knew" why and that I thought like this because I thought it was "fun".
So, Ne does have motivation. I think because I find it entertaining. Or maybe I don't... Maybe I'm just a robot that does whatever, but if I say it like that... Who isn't a robot? Exactly. Everyone's a robot.
Keep trying.
You explain it then~~~ !!! GeeZ, anyways, I'm trying to be vague here on purpose. Stop pressuring me to be definite! I could be wrong (and nothing is really definite anyways)!
+
If you're vague you can never be wrong, you're only annoying.
Hmmmm, It's very difficult to explain... Because "How I learn" or "process" is inherently subconscious. But
Whenever I have to "learn" something I usually never have to repeatedly do the same thing over and over again. (I never make homework that's the same, I also tend to think of "how" I might tackle the problem and then subsequently not write anything down) But, if I don't "understand" the theory behind how something works then I find it extremely difficult to reproduce it even if I make 100 questions. (but usually I "create" a theory to the problems even though my theory is inaccurate, It's how I have to cope![but this is very bad to do because theories stack up on eachother... so if I don't "get" the basics then it'll be harder to "get" the further ones])
So usually I read the theory, read how to apply it~ and taadaa. For subjects like history, art theory, etc. I have to really "be one with it" to get it. I have to understand the thought patterns people made when they came up with thedse theories and scenarios. (but that's obvious right?) (this is such a handy skill because everyone demands you to "Say it in your own words" for tests and exams these days
Also, the more you know the more patterns you can string together, so if you synthesise theories from different fields. (which gets really really handy once you get older and stuff)
right. I think I missed a lot, but whatever
Yeah, i do the same. I need to understand the underlying goal of the theory or i can't evaluate it's application to other areas. I tend to question whether a theory is being correctly applied if i see people criticizing it. My instinct is to always ask, "how can a theory be weak or inadequate to explain something when it wasn't created to explain that phenomena." In that case, it has to be admitted that a theory needs to be reworked or is being interpreted in a new way to explain that phenomena, rather than arguing than arguing that it's faulty.
And i agree, that synthesis is great when you have more fields of study or areas of knowledge to pull from.