Ne vs Ni
- Thread starter Mogura
- Start date
I think there are more INTJs working as 'hacker types' and INTPs tend to be more 'architecture types'.
That is, INTJs are more likely to try to break the system while INTPs are the ones envisioning the system in the first place. They'd rather redesign it from scratch than patch the holes in the existing one.
That is, INTJs are more likely to try to break the system while INTPs are the ones envisioning the system in the first place. They'd rather redesign it from scratch than patch the holes in the existing one.
You're an ENTP. You could care less about what I want. That's why I have to be more assertive in obtaining a small package of oatmeal and raisin delight...
Getting back on topic...
Yeah, most systems--technical, social--were designed pretty crappily to begin with. I can totally get the INTPs wanting to rebuild from scratch. The thing is, would the new INTP-designed system work in the real world?
If you take for granted the things that they take for granted, you might think so
That's why so many of them are deadbeat stoners with an unusually large repertoire of philosophical literature. Getting an INTP to take practicality into consideration is like teaching an autistic child to pay attention to their audience's nonverbal communication. It's hard, but once you do, they blossom.
Ne and Ni along with Se and Si are the functions we use to process data that we receive from the world. Ne and Ni Primarily deal with patterns though they both do so fundamentally differently.
Ni takes information and sifts though it, picking up on similarities and patterns. It then checks the information it takes in with information already stored in your memory and starts producing pictures.
Ni this information would then be sent through to your next function, for the INFJ that would Fe. Which then figures out how to use the data that has been picked up.
Ni is why you don't trust that one particular guy at school, he has given you information about himself that Ni recognizes and Fe stay the hell away. It's also why you have fear of something irrational that you can't or won't get over, because your Ni recognizes the information as and Fe tells you it's bad.
Of course this works the other way around, the information from Ni can also be used by Fe to be more trusting of certain individuals and less fearful of certain things. Not to mention these being vary basic examples.
Ne also deal with pattern, but it's more about expanding upon them. It takes in information and then says no what if this happened. It's different from Ni in that Ne doesn't really care about the pattern it'self but what the pattern can lead to.
Ne looks at that particular guy a school that you don't trust and then figures out a 1000 things he and can't do and then sends that to Fi were it comes to the conclusion that he can't be trusted.
It also tell you all the way things could go in a situation and then Fi follows up on what you should or shouldn't do about it.
Ni takes information and sifts though it, picking up on similarities and patterns. It then checks the information it takes in with information already stored in your memory and starts producing pictures.
Ni this information would then be sent through to your next function, for the INFJ that would Fe. Which then figures out how to use the data that has been picked up.
Ni is why you don't trust that one particular guy at school, he has given you information about himself that Ni recognizes and Fe stay the hell away. It's also why you have fear of something irrational that you can't or won't get over, because your Ni recognizes the information as and Fe tells you it's bad.
Of course this works the other way around, the information from Ni can also be used by Fe to be more trusting of certain individuals and less fearful of certain things. Not to mention these being vary basic examples.
Ne also deal with pattern, but it's more about expanding upon them. It takes in information and then says no what if this happened. It's different from Ni in that Ne doesn't really care about the pattern it'self but what the pattern can lead to.
Ne looks at that particular guy a school that you don't trust and then figures out a 1000 things he and can't do and then sends that to Fi were it comes to the conclusion that he can't be trusted.
It also tell you all the way things could go in a situation and then Fi follows up on what you should or shouldn't do about it.
Last edited:
yes, I agree.
I'm also not interested in finding loopholls in an existing system. I would rather start a new system. Rather starting something better than improving something that exists, that is boring. I want something new
barnabas said:
I agree with this. Only Ne and Fe doesn't exist together, it would rather be Fi that makes the decission. But I agree that Ne is not looking at the pattern itself but rather use the pattern to imagine a 1000 different futures. If this person is like this than what is the most likely way he would react on a future event. And how will that influence me and is that a route I want to follow (Fi)?
I think Ne is very future oriented and because of that it can imagine the most amazing things but will have trouble with realizing them. Because a realization is restrictive, it will never be as good as the imagination.
Last edited:
- Mar 17, 2010
- 4,872
- 1,225
- 766
- MBTI
- ????
- Enneagram
- 9w1
Ni is consolidating external possibilities into one meaning. Or taking the present actualities and creating a pattern from it. This is how Ni users can seem more rational and yet pull answers to situations seemingly out of their arse.
Ne on the other hand is taking the past actualities and creating possibilities from them. This is why Ne users are able to formulate all sorts of different ideas even when not all of them are realistically possible.
Ne on the other hand is taking the past actualities and creating possibilities from them. This is why Ne users are able to formulate all sorts of different ideas even when not all of them are realistically possible.
Ne is like Tarzan gliding from tree to tree. Ni is like a genie appearing out of nowhere.
Ni is paradigmatic and Ne is syntagmatic:
Ni thinks metaphorically like the paradigmatic axis above. Ne thinks linearly, like the syntagmatic axis.
If you look at the syntagmatic axis: "The man cried", you can see that the words "the" and "cried" are not related. They require the context of "man" to make sense. Furthermore, "the", "man" and "cried" make sense when you move along the chain from left to right, creating a specific idea, but if you were to move along the chain from right to left, your brain would have to turn it back around to understand it in the left-right pattern.
Meanwhile, the words in the paradimatic axis were always already related. I actually don't know how sang is related to died in this picture :=/ So you might need to forget about that for now. But the point is that the paradigmatic axis is filled with reference that are related to the word or idea by, say, rhyme, or reference - the paradmigmatic axis is basically just, "this information is stored near this information".
So the paradigmatic axis for "cried" might actually be "died", "coffin", "puffin" etc - Died is stored near coffin in our brain - the two words are related. Coffin and puffin are stored near each other in our brain because of the half-rhyme.
But if we were to say "died coffin puffin" it would sound like code. It doesn't make linear, cause and effect sense, like the syntagmatic axis does. So the Syntagmatic (Ne) creates new meaning. Ni does not create new meaning with the same type of direction, it projects using profiling. So it is aware constantly and unconsciously of related matters. It puts this together, in an unfollowable, non-linear way, by running through its files of related materials. When it comes up with the answer, what it has done is used experiential data in a creative way (by creating new patterns between materials or seeing metaphorical relations that are not immediately obvious) and from this data created a new picture from the convergence of a lot of previously stored info. So it has not transformed anything into something else. It has taken existing material and shoved it together to create a new thing. It can also project into the future by taking a load of references and, using prior knowledge of those references, calculate the probability of something happening. It predicts the future because it sees, automatically and unconsciously, probable paths that will span out from the circumstance it is in - it says - from what I know of the behaviour of this person and people who have shared similar traits is that they are likely to do so and so. It predicts that they will do this exact thing and it is usually right. I'm speaking from an INFJ perspective where Ni is working with Fe - but the Ni part is the profiling part. Think of the police. They say, the way this man has been killed points to a murderer who felt his/has this kind of lifestyle/knows this/is likely to be this colour/is likely to be this age - - - they profile from previous experience. This is EXACTLY what Ni does.
this means a few things:
1) Ni is STATIC, while Ne has DIRECTION.
I.e. Ni stands still and focuses on ONE idea at a time. It sees all related material and uses this to get a holistic and 360-degree view of the situation. It thinks VERICALLY - look again at the image. It is going nowhere, it is not creating new ideas, it is simply getting a total understanding of the situation with past, present, future, contextual data all being fed in and given equal importance.
Meanwhile, Ne grabs something and runs with it. It takes a situation and sees how it could be transformed into something else to create new meaning. It sees "The" and goes - the what? The man? What's he doing? Is he crying? Yes - the man cried - and they have taken "the" and made it mean something in a way that other people can understand. They are picking something up and using a cause and effect logic to move the situation forward into another situation, another context, another meaning.
2) Ni users don't know how they know, Ne users are more likely to.
Ni is an unconscious process. All those stores of information are locked up where the conscious mind can't see them. Ni users try to write a story and sit there thinking, I know what the character's like, I can't see a vague anamorphous shape and I can feel the tone of the piece - but I don't know what happens in the story. However, you also get a feeling that the story is IN THERE somewhere, hiding under the murk. And you'd be right. Your unconscious is working on it, creating patterns, projections, fitting things togeher, organisation the information. Then, when you're in the shower one day - POP! There it is, the whole story, laid out neatly for you. Thank you Ni!
Ne however, is a bubbling cauldron of ideas! It isn't struggling to draw ideas out of a murky mess, it has too many of them! And they're all so clear! Ne is prolific. Give Ne a pen and they can sit down and write a story start to finish, because they know what happens next - and that's how they work - this happens, then this, then this, then this. Ni is going: this is related to this, is related to this, is related to this - it's going nowhere! It's just understanding the situation not transforming it (yet!).
3) Ni is what you would call traditionally intuitive. Before we read MBTI stuff, we consider intuition to be an almost psychic sense. This is true of Ni but not Ne. Ne moves stuff around externally to create new things. Ni doesn't appear to do anything at all. It feels automatic - it's gut reactions, epithanies, sudden realisations - if you're in the US think of House, in the UK, think of Luther - one related subject spins off into a pattern of related subjects and puts the last piece in place and then SUDDENLY all is clear! And they can't tell you how they came to know - they just did, intuitively, all of a sudden. They don't know the process because the conscious mind never became involved.
Ni thinks metaphorically like the paradigmatic axis above. Ne thinks linearly, like the syntagmatic axis.
If you look at the syntagmatic axis: "The man cried", you can see that the words "the" and "cried" are not related. They require the context of "man" to make sense. Furthermore, "the", "man" and "cried" make sense when you move along the chain from left to right, creating a specific idea, but if you were to move along the chain from right to left, your brain would have to turn it back around to understand it in the left-right pattern.
Meanwhile, the words in the paradimatic axis were always already related. I actually don't know how sang is related to died in this picture :=/ So you might need to forget about that for now. But the point is that the paradigmatic axis is filled with reference that are related to the word or idea by, say, rhyme, or reference - the paradmigmatic axis is basically just, "this information is stored near this information".
So the paradigmatic axis for "cried" might actually be "died", "coffin", "puffin" etc - Died is stored near coffin in our brain - the two words are related. Coffin and puffin are stored near each other in our brain because of the half-rhyme.
But if we were to say "died coffin puffin" it would sound like code. It doesn't make linear, cause and effect sense, like the syntagmatic axis does. So the Syntagmatic (Ne) creates new meaning. Ni does not create new meaning with the same type of direction, it projects using profiling. So it is aware constantly and unconsciously of related matters. It puts this together, in an unfollowable, non-linear way, by running through its files of related materials. When it comes up with the answer, what it has done is used experiential data in a creative way (by creating new patterns between materials or seeing metaphorical relations that are not immediately obvious) and from this data created a new picture from the convergence of a lot of previously stored info. So it has not transformed anything into something else. It has taken existing material and shoved it together to create a new thing. It can also project into the future by taking a load of references and, using prior knowledge of those references, calculate the probability of something happening. It predicts the future because it sees, automatically and unconsciously, probable paths that will span out from the circumstance it is in - it says - from what I know of the behaviour of this person and people who have shared similar traits is that they are likely to do so and so. It predicts that they will do this exact thing and it is usually right. I'm speaking from an INFJ perspective where Ni is working with Fe - but the Ni part is the profiling part. Think of the police. They say, the way this man has been killed points to a murderer who felt his/has this kind of lifestyle/knows this/is likely to be this colour/is likely to be this age - - - they profile from previous experience. This is EXACTLY what Ni does.
this means a few things:
1) Ni is STATIC, while Ne has DIRECTION.
I.e. Ni stands still and focuses on ONE idea at a time. It sees all related material and uses this to get a holistic and 360-degree view of the situation. It thinks VERICALLY - look again at the image. It is going nowhere, it is not creating new ideas, it is simply getting a total understanding of the situation with past, present, future, contextual data all being fed in and given equal importance.
Meanwhile, Ne grabs something and runs with it. It takes a situation and sees how it could be transformed into something else to create new meaning. It sees "The" and goes - the what? The man? What's he doing? Is he crying? Yes - the man cried - and they have taken "the" and made it mean something in a way that other people can understand. They are picking something up and using a cause and effect logic to move the situation forward into another situation, another context, another meaning.
2) Ni users don't know how they know, Ne users are more likely to.
Ni is an unconscious process. All those stores of information are locked up where the conscious mind can't see them. Ni users try to write a story and sit there thinking, I know what the character's like, I can't see a vague anamorphous shape and I can feel the tone of the piece - but I don't know what happens in the story. However, you also get a feeling that the story is IN THERE somewhere, hiding under the murk. And you'd be right. Your unconscious is working on it, creating patterns, projections, fitting things togeher, organisation the information. Then, when you're in the shower one day - POP! There it is, the whole story, laid out neatly for you. Thank you Ni!
Ne however, is a bubbling cauldron of ideas! It isn't struggling to draw ideas out of a murky mess, it has too many of them! And they're all so clear! Ne is prolific. Give Ne a pen and they can sit down and write a story start to finish, because they know what happens next - and that's how they work - this happens, then this, then this, then this. Ni is going: this is related to this, is related to this, is related to this - it's going nowhere! It's just understanding the situation not transforming it (yet!).
3) Ni is what you would call traditionally intuitive. Before we read MBTI stuff, we consider intuition to be an almost psychic sense. This is true of Ni but not Ne. Ne moves stuff around externally to create new things. Ni doesn't appear to do anything at all. It feels automatic - it's gut reactions, epithanies, sudden realisations - if you're in the US think of House, in the UK, think of Luther - one related subject spins off into a pattern of related subjects and puts the last piece in place and then SUDDENLY all is clear! And they can't tell you how they came to know - they just did, intuitively, all of a sudden. They don't know the process because the conscious mind never became involved.
In regards of 'shapes' of their thoughts and what creates it..
Is it something like this?
Ne is expanding / divergent, the overall shape looks like an amalgamation of myriad of thoughts / thought components*. generic, wide, and more free.
Ni is detailing / convergent, the overall shape looks far smaller, but definitely more detailed and as much as part as possible is filled with thought components*. specific, narrow, and more focused
That is not to claim one is more or less creative, capable of detailed and indepth thinking or not, but the process seems different...?
Comments? If it's more or less true I can create a far more detailed and neat version of this.
*Thought components : other aspects. Se, Si, Ti, Te, Fi, Fe....
Is it something like this?
Ne is expanding / divergent, the overall shape looks like an amalgamation of myriad of thoughts / thought components*. generic, wide, and more free.
Ni is detailing / convergent, the overall shape looks far smaller, but definitely more detailed and as much as part as possible is filled with thought components*. specific, narrow, and more focused
That is not to claim one is more or less creative, capable of detailed and indepth thinking or not, but the process seems different...?
Comments? If it's more or less true I can create a far more detailed and neat version of this.
*Thought components : other aspects. Se, Si, Ti, Te, Fi, Fe....
What about this scenario:
The Ni is the kid jumping on a trampoline next to a fence. As they jump up they see the whole yard next door. In this yard there is an abandoned birthday party. The Ni kid will jump and see the whole picture; he/she then deduces that it is an abandoned birthday party through the patterns presented in front of him/her, but wants to know more, so as this kid jumps he/she only has moment to take in one aspect of the party at a time before he/she is touching the trampoline again and becoming hidden behind the fence. For example, the Ni child jumps up and see a half eaten cake. It takes in this information as he/she is pulled down by gravity – aka returning back into the subconscious. While the child is unable to see the yard, it is using its other functions to chew on this observation.
The Ne kid has gotten him/herself on top of the neighbors roof, and can not only see his friend jumping on the tramp next door, but can take in the whole seen at once. Yet instead of reverting back into the house or getting down and walking around the yard, he/she suspiciously sneaks water balloons up to the top of the roof, and is now throwing them down on the abandoned birthday party. This allows the Ne child to be involved in changing the scene in front of him, which is giving the poor Ni more things to focus on.
Both children are in a position to see the whole picture at once, but one (Ni) lets the image go in order to grasp a deeper concept of the meaning (or even understanding the image in a way others have not looked at it before – the very way he/she is taking in the image is different than just walking through the gate onto the yard), whereas the other (Ne) never escapes the image, which allows him/her to make a quick assessment of the situation, as well as creating a wider time frame where he/she can manipulate and play with the image.
The Ni is the kid jumping on a trampoline next to a fence. As they jump up they see the whole yard next door. In this yard there is an abandoned birthday party. The Ni kid will jump and see the whole picture; he/she then deduces that it is an abandoned birthday party through the patterns presented in front of him/her, but wants to know more, so as this kid jumps he/she only has moment to take in one aspect of the party at a time before he/she is touching the trampoline again and becoming hidden behind the fence. For example, the Ni child jumps up and see a half eaten cake. It takes in this information as he/she is pulled down by gravity – aka returning back into the subconscious. While the child is unable to see the yard, it is using its other functions to chew on this observation.
The Ne kid has gotten him/herself on top of the neighbors roof, and can not only see his friend jumping on the tramp next door, but can take in the whole seen at once. Yet instead of reverting back into the house or getting down and walking around the yard, he/she suspiciously sneaks water balloons up to the top of the roof, and is now throwing them down on the abandoned birthday party. This allows the Ne child to be involved in changing the scene in front of him, which is giving the poor Ni more things to focus on.
Both children are in a position to see the whole picture at once, but one (Ni) lets the image go in order to grasp a deeper concept of the meaning (or even understanding the image in a way others have not looked at it before – the very way he/she is taking in the image is different than just walking through the gate onto the yard), whereas the other (Ne) never escapes the image, which allows him/her to make a quick assessment of the situation, as well as creating a wider time frame where he/she can manipulate and play with the image.