[INFJ] Ti scrutiny of Ni insights

[CogentPursuit]

The biggest annoyance of a Ti's probing is not their beliefs or their over development or underdevelopment of their functions. It is their inability to accept what is being presented to them because they get more of a rush from the "probing" than understanding an external perspective. There seems to be some kind of rush or excitement in the pursuit of probing.Their desire to continually probe regardless of topic is a matter of attitude. So in an essence it is an attitude that is being given off and not so much what is being discussed.

INTP obsessive questioning:

1. Overbearing curiosity.
2. Unable to to deal with the frustration of the seemingly existing cognitive dissonance, inconsistency, or contradicting concepts.

2. For me is hard to let go when it is a topic that is not inherently related personal faith/belief or personal views and yet they hold onto it as true when insufficient/nearly no evidence has been found.

The lack of intuition development is my personal observation.
p.s - the re-quoting of others writings as in "your wrote" with highlights is also an annoying way to probe others. To me it gives off an attitude of inquiry without understanding.

The re-quoting with the highlights was very helpful in providing more specific reference to what he was talking about. I don't understand why you think it gives off an attitude of inquiry without understanding.

 

[apemon]

INTP obsessive questioning:

1. Overbearing curiosity.
2. Unable to to deal with the frustration of the seemingly existing cognitive dissonance, inconsistency, or contradicting concepts.

2. For me is hard to let go when it is a topic that is not inherently related personal faith/belief or personal views and yet they hold onto it as true when insufficient/nearly no evidence has been found.




The re-quoting with the highlights was very helpful in providing more specific reference to what he was talking about. I don't understand why you think it gives off an attitude of inquiry without understanding.

Ok so then that would be a problem dealing with Zen?

 

[la boheme]

Yes, while I do use Ti from time to time, I don't often ask myself those questions that you list. I never consciously considered all the other criteria. I believe they do pass my mind, but more subconsciously. Only the ones that I feel are important to the situation pop up and get conscious examination. In this case: legalising euthanasia would increase the amount of self-deaths, relatively to the amount when not legalising it.

But if you haven't consciously considered other possible arguments, how can you know you've found the best one? I encounter this confidence all the time in Ni-doms, and always have trouble understanding it.

The nice part is that it's more often a hit than a miss. I believe this is due to the sheer processing power of the subconscious. I just googled around and found different numbers.
The processing speed of our consciousness is listed between 40 and 50 bits per second. The subconscious is said to operate at 11 to 40 million bits per second. (Random internet sources)
Either way it's a lot higher, it can process a lot more data and thus make a more accurate decision. Hence I believe I'm more often than not 'right'. Sometimes it's wrong and I can find out by using my own Ti (which is quite strong too according to function tests).

I once asked an INTJ what his accuracy rate was and he said "a little better than 50%". But his measure may be different than yours. You may count that euthanasia debate as "being right" because you won. But that issue is not so much a question of true or false as it is a question of good or bad--ie, a question of values. So you may have won the debate, but you can't say your argument was "right" in the sense of being true. It was simply more persuasive. And that is not necessarily the same thing.

It's not that I build an argument block by block. It's just suddenly there, completely. A huge long argument that consists of many mental steps. I do not consciously know all the steps in between. I just know the starting position and the final conclusion. Afterwards I have to figure out the steps in between so someone else can understand it.
In the case of my pro-euthanasia argument it looks a lot like the reasons for legalising weed in some US states. If something is illegal, people are going to do it uncontrolled. If it's legal, you can regulate it. At the point that I made this argument, such a link never occurred to me, but my subconscious probably made it.

Do you see images when these ideas come to you? Do you visualize Ni? Or is it just these ideas as you've described them here?

That's probably Te at work.
It really whether I bother to structure my message. Whether I really want to explain or put into use what I conceived. I could spend many more hours on the make-shift model around the subconscious to improve it and make it easier to understand, but I didn't because I felt it wasn't worth the time.
This process is necessary to let others admire my intelligence, which I would obviously like a lot. Also because Ni jumps so quickly I would have to spend hours each day writing it all into understandable systems. It's just impossible to explain everything.

Those systems are often highly organised. I spend time on how to structure it. Where to list what, to make it the easiest to understand. I spend time on explaining concepts and set definitions.
I'll do so if I think it's important, but it's tiring because it's sooo much slower than my own mind can go.

So by "system" you mean a detailed explanation or maybe even theory? What did you mean by "plan"?

I once tried give a girl from my classes extra lessons in science, because I was acing it. But whenever we'd try an assignment I'd know how to do it, but not why. I could complete the assignment within a few minutes and now exactly where to find what number in what table or what formula to use. She'd ask why I used that formula. Me: "I don't know. Because it's the right one" *shrug*. I tried finding the formula in the textbook, so I could explain how and why it works. But finding the formula already took ages and then I still had to read the text, understand it and explain it. That lesson was the first and the last with her.

This passage illustrates why INTJs and Ni-doms are not the best debaters since they often can't explain the steps in their thinking, the steps being necessary to convince others of their arguments.

Correct. Especially the bolded parts.
The Ni insights are however very valuable to developing new and innovative theories. Making them comprehensive and understandable for any other than the one who made it will be done with T functions.
The insights are not necessarily only applicable to particular situations. N users like to think abstract and find patterns that link multiple situations.

Yes, Ni can yield insights that may be the kernels of truth around which theories can be advanced or even built. It can be very powerful in this way. However, because intuition is essentially informed guessing, it depends on the information informing its guesses, and the more experience and knowledge a Ni-user has the better and more accurate his guesses will be. The corollary is that the less informed a Ni-user is, the less useful his guesses will be. The problem arises that Ni-doms are so accustomed to using and trusting their intuitions that they are prone to deceiving themselves and believing their intuitions may be trusted in all situations, including ones they have less or even little knowledge or experience of. This is where a reality check from their other functions can be especially useful.

Does this make sense? And do you deliberately check and balance your Ni by routinely second guessing yourself in this way?

 

[la boheme]

Ok so then that would be a problem dealing with Zen?

INFJs have Ti. How do they deal with the "Zen" of paradoxes, contradictions, and ideas that can't be rationally explained?

 

[apemon]

INFJs have Ti. How do they deal with the "Zen" of paradoxes, contradictions, and ideas that can't be rationally explained?

The only reason "paradoxes" exist anyway is because we think they do and believe it as well.

 

[la boheme]

Who knows what your sole purpose is. It seems like it is to "scrutinize" Ni as the thread stated. I guess I should have been forewarned as I mistook scrutiny with desire to understand. But as it stands it is for the sole purpose to scrutinize Ni and it seems like you are very good at it.

Ti scrutinizes to see if there is anything there and, if there is, to understand it. But understanding is the underlying motivation.

 

[la boheme]

Yes, Ni can yield insights that may be the kernels of truth around which theories can be advanced or even built. It can be very powerful in this way. However, because intuition is essentially informed guessing, it depends on the information informing its guesses, and the more experience and knowledge a Ni-user has the better and more accurate his guesses will be. The corollary is that the less informed a Ni-user is, the less useful his guesses will be. The problem arises that Ni-doms are so accustomed to using and trusting their intuitions that they are prone to deceiving themselves and believing their intuitions may be trusted in all situations, including ones they have less or even little knowledge or experience of. This is where a reality check from their other functions can be especially useful.

I suspect this is where the Ni-dom reputation for paranoia comes from. They have little choice but to lead with Ni, but since they usually don't have sufficient knowledge or experience with everything they perceive, they are prone to making inaccurate guesses that they nevertheless tend to believe, this tendency often being reinforced by their inexperience--ie, they don't know better.

 

[la boheme]

The only reason "paradoxes" exist anyway is because we think they do and believe it as well.

Ti would say paradoxes don't really exist, that they only appear paradoxical because our understanding is incomplete. You seem to agree. But other Ni-doms seem to disagree. Is that your experience?

 

[apemon]

I suspect this is where the Ni-dom reputation for paranoia comes from. They have no choice but to lead with Ni, but since they usually don't have sufficient knowledge or experience with everything they perceive, they are prone to making inaccurate guesses that they nevertheless tend to believe, this tendency often being reinforced by their inexperience--ie, they don't know better.

Little judgemental are we?

 

[apemon]

Ti would say paradoxes don't really exist, that they only appear paradoxical because our understanding is incomplete. You seem to agree. But other Ni-doms seem to disagree. Is that your experience?

I haven't had too much experience discussing this in that way. Live in the cornfields.

 

[la boheme]

Little judgemental are we?

Haha, no, not judgmental. Just trying to understand Ni and where the Ni-dom reputation for paranoia comes from.

 

[la boheme]

I think all types are inherently unbalanced. With J-doms the imbalance appears in their judgments being weighted too far on the side of thinking or feeling. With P-doms the imbalance appears in their perceptions being weighted too far on the side of intuition or sensory perceptions. Paranoia is a perceptual phenomenon and susceptibility to it is probably heightened by the strength and subjectivity of the perceptions producing it. That, at least, is my hypothesis.

 

[apemon]

I think all types are inherently unbalanced. With J-doms the imbalance appears in their judgments being weighted too far on the side of thinking or feeling. With P-doms the imbalance appears in their perceptions being weighted too far on the side of intuition or sensory perceptions. Paranoia is a perceptual phenomenon and susceptibility to it is probably heightened by the strength and subjectivity of the perceptions producing it. That, at least, is my hypothesis.

I like this. Perhaps that is why everyone is consciously or unconsciously drawn to self-realization.

 

[Erlian]

But if you haven't consciously considered other possible arguments, how can you know you've found the best one? I encounter this confidence all the time in Ni-doms, and always have trouble understanding it.

The concept of 'knowing' is vague. Must you know because of the right reasons? Must it be true? What is truth?
One will never know for sure. I use theories that are useful. I find MBTI useful, yet there's not much scientific backing.
I've learned that my intuition is mostly right, so I'll assume that, because that makes my life easier.
Whether I make a decision with my intuition or with concsciously considering arguments doesn't matter. With my narrow one-person perspective I won't be able to judge all relevant arguments properly anyway.
I follow what has worked in the past. And if it doesn't work in the future I'll learn from my mistake.

I once asked an INTJ what his accuracy rate was and he said "a little better than 50%". But his measure may be different than yours. You may count that euthanasia debate as "being right" because you won. But that issue is not so much a question of true or false as it is a question of good or bad--ie, a question of values. So you may have won the debate, but you can't say your argument was "right" in the sense of being true. It was simply more persuasive. And that is not necessarily the same thing.

It's never about being right in the absolute sense. As I've just motivated I don't think we can know an absolute truth. The argument was 'right' in the context of the situation. It convinced people to think differently.
Values can't be true or false as you mentioned. Thus I worded my argument such that even people with values opposing euthanasia could see the benefit of euthanasia. This probably never changed their values and I don't intend to, I just want to show them a new perspective.

Do you see images when these ideas come to you? Do you visualize Ni? Or is it just these ideas as you've described them here?

I don't visualise. It's just suddenly there and very hard to describe. I always try to rationalise afterwards what happened and why I got to it, but that's hard.

So by "system" you mean a detailed explanation or maybe even theory? What did you mean by "plan"?

I don't know. The quote was from personalitypage.com. They don't explain it.
System is a frame or way to explain a theory. The system I meant was Te at work. It was a text explaining my theory to others. A system in the sense of Ti is understanding everything and have a few simple explanations for it (Physicist trying to bring all kinds of forces back to a few: gravity, magnetism etc).
A plan would be a course of action, but I don't think that's what personalitypage.com meant.

This passage illustrates why INTJs and Ni-doms are not the best debaters since they often can't explain the steps in their thinking, the steps being necessary to convince others of their arguments.

Totally. Also I don't like debating, because if the other is right I want to be able to agree with him
Often the day after a nice mind-inspiring chat I finally know how to explain everything.

Yes, Ni can yield insights that may be the kernels of truth around which theories can be advanced or even built. It can be very powerful in this way. However, because intuition is essentially informed guessing, it depends on the information informing its guesses, and the more experience and knowledge a Ni-user has the better and more accurate his guesses will be. The corollary is that the less informed a Ni-user is, the less useful his guesses will be. The problem arises that Ni-doms are so accustomed to using and trusting their intuitions that they are prone to deceiving themselves and believing their intuitions may be trusted in all situations, including ones they have less or even little knowledge or experience of. This is where a reality check from their other functions can be especially useful.

Does this make sense? And do you deliberately check and balance your Ni by routinely second guessing yourself in this way?

It makes perfect sense. Yes, I do this all day long if I had the time.
I've always been an extreme over-thinker.
I found that the values I assign to arguments (to rationally consider them) is heavily influenced by my emotions. Right know I've got 10 arguments why this girl doesn't like me and 10 why she does. Some of those arguments are really small and some are substantial. The weight I assign to the arguments changes based on my emotional state. Considering the worth of these arguments becomes extremely subjective and no where near the truth. Using reason to find the truth is impossible.
For less emotional topics, scrutinising Ni by Ti works great and I'll do it plenty.

So constantly second guessing myself wasn't enough. I have others second guess me constantly.
Currently I'm dating a girl and obviously that brings food for thought for me. A list of people I've involved on getting advice with this particular girl. (Many on the list have been consulted multiple times)

Flatmate 1
Flatmate 2
Flatmate 3
Flatmate 4
Flatmate 5
Best friend
Mom
Flatmate of said girl 1
Flatmate of said girl 2
Flatmate of said girl 3
Flatmate of said girl and colleague of me
Colleague 2
Colleague 3
Studyfriend 1
Studyfriend 2
INTJ forum
INFJ forum

And I'd totally add anyone willing to listen.

People are actually getting annoyed by me asking to second-guess me. I'm obsessed with learning about myself. I'm obsessed with knowing as much as I can about a situation like dating. To know as much as I can I cannot only use my own knowledge. I'll have to tap into the perspectives of others. I've found that plenty people are really simple minded and don't get me, but that's ok. I value their input. Besides if 2 people tell me one thing and 10 people tell me to do the other, I'm more inclined to go for the second option.

Also I believe the girl is an ISFJ. I've thus read a lot about ISFJs. But I realise that I imagine/plan having a relationship with an ISFJ, not with her. So I often end such a reading session with the thought: Lets find out if she's really like that. And not with the thoughts: I've figured her out and I'll follow these assumptions.

This case is about me though. I do scrutinse my own Ni. And I even scrutinise my Ti. And I think that that's a good thing to do.
This reminds me of a comment I made on the INTJ forum where it claimed INTJs were the master race. I concluded that 'I' am awesome and not necessarily all INTJs.
Warning: It's heavily patting myself on the back. Even some self-scrutinising and them further patting myself on the back for self-scrutinising. http://intjforum.com/showpost.php?p=4450063&postcount=54

 

[the]

What is truth?

truth
tro͞oTH/
noun
the quality or state of being true.
"he had to accept the truth of her accusation"
synonyms: veracity, truthfulness, verity, sincerity, candor, honesty; More
antonyms: dishonesty, falseness
that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
noun: the truth
"tell me the truth"
synonyms: what actually happened, the case, so; More
a fact or belief that is accepted as true.
plural noun: truths
"the emergence of scientific truths"
synonyms: fact, verity, certainty, certitude; More
Origin


Old English trīewth, trēowth ‘faithfulness, constancy’ (see true, -th2).

i was able to find an answer to at least one of your questions.

 

[Erlian]

[MENTION=731]the[/MENTION]
I prefer this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

Besides, the entry refers to the words: true, fact and reality.
Not gettng any wiser

 

[Erlian]

Ti would say paradoxes don't really exist, that they only appear paradoxical because our understanding is incomplete. You seem to agree. But other Ni-doms seem to disagree. Is that your experience?

Paradoxes exist alright, you just need to get the definition right
A paradox is "something that looks like a contradiction, but isn't". They're apparent contradictions.

Even some people majoring in philosphy seem to get this wrong ><

 

[Radiantshadow]

As a Ti-dom, I enjoy the company of P-doms whose perceptions stimulate and feed my thoughts. I'm particularly interested in Ni insights since they can appear to come out of nowhere and sometimes be quite prescient. However, they often fall far short of their marks, too. Either way, my inclination is to examine the insights to see if they make sense. I understand you do this with your tertiary Ti function. My question is, how do (or would) you react to sharing your insights with a Ti-dom whom you know is going to question your every utterance? Do you welcome this scrutiny? Or does the very idea repel you? I ask because I can see this as one deal-breaker in any close relationship with an INFJ.

Scrutiny is a welcome reality check for me. Finding weak spots in the architecture of my worldview or thought processes is refreshing and invigorating because it keeps my mental life alive. Frequently, these spots are fuel for my Ni to engage and update the way I look at something to generate a more holistic perspective that is capable of improving the faulty cognitive engineering and explaining reality more accurately. Clearing away mental debris can be painful and I might initially resist, particularly when its pieces are deeply embedded in my psyche, but the process is ultimately strengthening. In short, Ni-Ti feedback loops can be powerfully instructive for INFJs.

From my experience, those who do not or will not tolerate inquiry are more concerned with appearances than understanding, or are otherwise engaged in some kind of self-reinforcement. Ideas and the debates that surround them are consequently degraded by this prioritization into psychological power-plays instead of honest attempts to understand phenomena. Regardless of how much the pain of growth burns, it's intellectually dishonest to place ourselves above truth and - where abstraction intersects with real-world events (where don't they, really?) - morally so as well. Honesty with one's self and with others is rarely an easy principle to follow, especially when ambiguity, risk, and uncertainty are revealed, but I ardently believe it is crucial for human wellness and improvement. But that is a separate matter from the central question, so here I will stop.