More than one Dom function?

[ObliviousGenius]

Is it possible to have a shadow function in addition to my dominant function (such as my Ti) be close to dominant? I was just looking at my Functional Development Test results http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=10737 and noticed that my use of Ni (at 46.4) was pretty close to my use of Ti (at 52.6). Maybe I'm becoming more INTJ? I've never doubted that I was an INTP even once.

Ni is considered a shadow function of an INTP so how is it that my use of Ni can be greater than some INTPs use of Ti? I think I have the dominant functions of both an INTP and an INTJ (but Te isn't that high). I'm confused. Maybe this explains why some people have a hard time identifying their type because another one of their functions is high enough to be considered dominant.

For quick reference.
In order:
Ti=52.6
Ni=46.4
Ne=38.1
Si=30
Fi=28.8
Se=19.3
Te=18.3
Fe=7.1

*edited to include Si

 

[crippli]

Where is your Si result?

I think the splitting of functions is a bit dubious, Especially the N. Maybe the test messed up Ni and Ne?

 

[Systems]

Don't put too much stock into that test. It is pretty useless. Ti and Ni are very different from one another, and function in very different ways. You do not utilise both Ti and Ni at a high level.

 

[Words]

Disregarding other variables, aside from temperament, that might affect choice, It would be like having two equally powerful kings. Which do you follow? Course, in reality, situations easily change and there are plenty of circumstances where we won't choose a king at all, due to indecision.

I'd say, just rely and gather data and personal observation instead of "theoretical possibilities."

 

[ObliviousGenius]

It's not a matter of me just looking at my test results and seeing something different. I use Ni almost as much as I use Ti. I have pretty much all of the traits both positive and negative of an Ni dom, such as getting frustrated with slower people (that's a big one).

I've posted some links to show you and everything describes me perfectly.

http://www.famoustype.com/Ni.htm

http://russellrowe.com/Myers-Briggs%20Typology%20System.htm (see Ni section specifically)

 

[ElvenVeil]

It's really quiet simple, even though you may dislike it, and it goes against what you believe that you have observed: You do not use both Ni and Ti as dominant functions. My advice is that you begin to compare yourself to Ni users(or rather Ni dominant, intuitive, thinkers(INTJ)) and begin to understand what exactly Ni is. That is an understanding that goes beyond the one-word descriptions. You will begin to notice differences in how they speak and think.

I would say that people have a hard time understanding their type, because they have a hard time understanding the difference between dominant functions(which is fully understandable) - Which seems to be your case too.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

It's really quiet simple, even though you may dislike it, and it goes against what you believe that you have observed: You do not use both Ni and Ti as dominant functions. My advice is that you begin to compare yourself to Ni users(or rather Ni dominant, intuitive, thinkers(INTJ)) and begin to understand what exactly Ni is. That is an understanding that goes beyond the one-word descriptions. You will begin to notice differences in how they speak and think.

I would say that people have a hard time understanding their type, because they have a hard time understanding the difference between dominant functions(which is fully understandable) - Which seems to be your case too.

That may be true but keep in mind that the rest of an INTJ's functions are Te, Fi Se in that order. Because I don't use Te to back up Ni I am not a real INTJ. I have the effects of a dominant Ni. And when I look at these descriptions it explains that the things I have been contributing to Ti is actually Ni, such as foresight, premonitions and aha moments. (which are almost as constant as my logical thinking.)

I'm only using Ni here, not the entire personality of an INTJ or INFJ, so if I try to compare myself to them I will only relate in terms of the traits that an Ni dominant gives them. For example, I am still very much a perciever and very much an introverted thinker. I have a really good understanding of what Ni is, the links are for your reference not mine. After all, I wouldn't expect the INTPs on this forum to instantly connect these ideas because Ni is supposed to be a shadow function.

 

[ElvenVeil]

If you have a really good understanding of what Ni is, and you are certain that you use Ni, then I fail to see the purpose of you asking whether you can use Ni/Ti or not. But that aside.

You are jumping to certain assumptions in your train of thought; You assume that these things that you highlight are unique to your person and I believe that to be a mistake. I would believe that almost every (if not every) INTP can relate to these descriptions, until they begin to realise the differences between Ni and Ti. It can be difficult to be see the difference between INTPs and INTJs without a trained eye.

I have seen both INTPs and INTJs question whether they were INTPs or INTJs, because of the descriptions that appear rather similar. So let's follow these statements:

If INTPs and INTJs, both at first glance, can relate to the descriptions of the INTP and INTJ profile, does that mean that they, independant whether they are INTP or INTJ, use Ti/Ni? This follows the essense of your argument, I believe, and so it would not be a stretch for you to ponder such question. This I guess can be taken further, within the limits of MBTI: Does an ESFJ use Si/Fi, and so on.
The conclusion on this ofc is that INTJs use both Ti and Te and INTPs use Ni and Ne.

I hope you do not buy the above argument. If you don't, but see the point that I try to raise, then it should begin to make sense of why I believed it would be a good idea for you to spend some more time with INTJs. You could also spend time with the INTJs to test the simultaneous Ti/Ni -dominant theory.

If you don't buy any of the reasoning above, and still believe yourself to be Ti/Ni unique, then you can at very least, safely conclude, that you are not INTP, and in fact no MBTI type.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

If you have a really good understanding of what Ni is, and you are certain that you use Ni, then I fail to see the purpose of you asking whether you can use Ni/Ti or not. But that aside.

You are jumping to certain assumptions in your train of thought; You assume that these things that you highlight are unique to your person and I believe that to be a mistake. I would believe that almost every (if not every) INTP can relate to these descriptions, until they begin to realise the differences between Ni and Ti. It can be difficult to be see the difference between INTPs and INTJs without a trained eye.

I have seen both INTPs and INTJs question whether they were INTPs or INTJs, because of the descriptions that appear rather similar. So let's follow these statements:

If INTPs and INTJs, both at first glance, can relate to the descriptions of the INTP and INTJ profile, does that mean that they, independant whether they are INTP or INTJ, use Ti/Ni? This follows the essense of your argument, I believe, and so it would not be a stretch for you to ponder such question. This I guess can be taken further, within the limits of MBTI: Does an ESFJ use Si/Fi, and so on.
The conclusion on this ofc is that INTJs use both Ti and Te and INTPs use Ni and Ne.

I hope you do not buy the above argument. If you don't, but see the point that I try to raise, then it should begin to make sense of why I believed it would be a good idea for you to spend some more time with INTJs. You could also spend time with the INTJs to test the simultaneous Ti/Ni -dominant theory.

If you don't buy any of the reasoning above, and still believe yourself to be Ti/Ni unique, then you can at very least, safely conclude, that you are not INTP, and in fact no MBTI type.

INTP/INTJs have plenty of other reasons for why they would be confused of their type besides just the dominant function. Btw one of my best adult friends is an INTJ and I can observe him. I don't think having Ti/Ni dom is general for either an INTJ or INTP. Each person is different if you refer back to the Developmental Function tests. What it means is that some people develop other functions faster than others for whatever reason (environment, childhood, etc.) I just think my Ni has developed to the point that it could give me Ni dominant traits. If you knew me in person you would question me being an INTP or INTJ because I show both traits. My theory is I think that shadow functions could develop to such a level that they take priority over other functions. In my case it has developed to the point that it is used more than my auxiliary and tertiary functions.

Then again agree to disagree.

 

[Words]

Elvenveil presents a good point.

Could you present us with your understanding of Ni and Ti? Describe it in your own words.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

Elvenveil presents a good point.

Could you present us with your understanding of Ni and Ti? Describe it in your own words.

Ni is very future-oriented. It's taking an idea and realizing its future effect. I sometimes say things like: This will probably end up... or So and so will because... etc. It's known ideas contributing to an image of the immediate (or not so immediate) future. In my case, it's like a live 3d image or a movie. Like a dream, except only that I'm wide awake (to an extent lol). Sometimes these movies can be extremely unrealistic but in my world it feels like it could happen.

Each connection I make leads to another one, and another one, until I gain some profound insight (in my world at least) into something that I wasn't even originally thinking about.

You all seem to not believe me at all. But I believe that a lot of my forum posts display my Ni very well. Ni doms are known to sometimes have over-the-top theories on things and maybe that's what I'm doing here considering that I don't have much Te to back me up and snap me back into reality. But then again, if I am just totally deluded with my theories then it would suggest that my Ni is high enough to be considered dominant and maybe what I'm saying is true. How's that for a paradox.

Don't like that one? How about this?

I always feel like my theories are right from the start, but y'all are disputing me. Even though I have heard your arguments I still feel like I'm on to something here. Now granted, I could be completely wrong, and if I am, it once again suggests I have Ni dominant traits. This particular one being Ni doms trust their own intuitive insight (even if they may be wrong) over what other people tell them. (Another paradox)

In terms of Ti dom I don't think anyone here could doubt that. Especially since I can keep up with any INTP on this forum. I always pick choice words in my speech, whether that be writing or speaking and I'm quite fluent with it <--- (fluent is a specific word, Ti) I could have said "I'm very good at writing and speaking with a really good vocabulary in a smooth, easy way."

I'm instantly able to identify if someone is saying something stupid or illogical. I really take advantage of this ability in debates. I spend more time correcting my opponents ridiculous arguments than actually making points of my own (the rebuttal is my favorite part of a debate). Logic comes first, knowledge comes first, and I won't let anything get in the way of that. I could write a lot more but I keep getting distracted by these sudden movies I keep thinking about.

Any questions?

*Edited for grammar

 

[Words]

Ni is very future-oriented. It's taking an idea and realizing its future effect. I sometimes say things like: This will probably end up... or So and so will because... etc. It's known ideas contributing to an image of the immediate (or not so immediate) future. In my case, it's like a live 3d image or a movie. Like a dream, except only that I'm wide awake (to an extent lol). Sometimes these movies can be extremely unrealistic but in my world it feels like it could happen.

Sounds more like Ne to me. Ni is not necessarily about the future, it's about having an alternate perspective of things, including the past. Hence, the origins of "historical conspiracy theories." Ne, on the other hand, is more about the future, and more particularly, the near future.

Each connection I make leads to another one, and another one, until I gain some profound insight (in my world at least) into something that I wasn't even originally thinking about.

This one is too Ne. Ni isn't about jumping from one to another or making "connections." It's holistic and focuses on one thing and one picture. It's about the integration of details to suit one meaning.

You all seem to not believe me at all. But I believe that a lot of my forum posts display my Ni very well. Ni doms are known to sometimes have over-the-top theories on things and maybe that's what I'm doing here considering that I don't have much Te to back me up and snap me back into reality. But then again, if I am just totally deluded with my theories then it would suggest that my Ni is high enough to be considered dominant and maybe what I'm saying is true. How's that for a paradox.

Don't like that one? How about this?

I always feel like my theories are right from the start, but y'all are disputing me. Even though I have heard your arguments I still feel like I'm on to something here. Now granted, I could be completely wrong, and if I am, it once again suggests I have Ni dominant traits. This particular one being Ni doms trust their own intuitive insight (even if they may be wrong) over what other people tell them. (Another paradox)

Being confident of a perspective or having a perspective or theory does not necessarily mean "Ni-dom." I mean I also have theories and radically different perspectives. Just look at my post history. Look at Skywalker and his theories, who is supposedly an ENTP. I may not know you well enough, but I haven't noticed any clear signs of Ni-dom.

In terms of Ti dom I don't think anyone here could doubt that. Especially since I can keep up with any INTP on this forum. I always pick choice words in my speech, whether that be writing or speaking and I'm quite fluent with it <--- (fluent is a specific word, Ti) I could have said "I'm very good at writing and speaking with a really good vocabulary in a smooth, easy way."

I'm instantly able to identify if someone is saying something stupid or illogical. I really take advantage of this ability in debates. I spend more time correcting my opponents ridiculous arguments than actually making points of my own (the rebuttal is my favorite part of a debate). Logic comes first, knowledge comes first, and I won't let anything get in the way of that. I could write a lot more but I keep getting distracted by these sudden movies I keep thinking about.

Any questions?

Were those logical statements? Because I call "Bare Assertion." Saying something =/= that something is true.

 

[Puffy]

If you believe you demonstrate both Ni and Ti have you considered that you might be an INFJ? Ni-Fe-Ti-Se? (Or even an ISTP, I guess.) I know plenty of INFJs with developed use of Ti, I even confused myself as an INTP at first (hence why I originally came here).

I don't like the phrase "I can keep up with any INTP on this forum." It implies that INTPs have a monopoly on logic/ intelligent thinking when that is simply not true. Even Se dominants can be geniuses, it's just important to understand why they are within the Se(Fi), Se(Ti) models. INFJs or even ENFJs would have no trouble "keeping up" here - education is what matters.

In general I'm not personally a fan of the "I use all 8 functions" approach, just because I think for all practical purposes it makes the MBTI model redundant and unpractical. If someone can develop from an INTP to an ESFP then who really cares. Worse if you can be an INTP who uses Ni or Se or Fi or Te - in these cases what is personality theory even measuring? If someone can be an INTP with Ni then it's basically saying personality is amorphous, in which case it's not even a personality theory at all.

If you're an INTP you use Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, period. If you use Ni and Ti, you're not an INTP.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

I highly disagree with your thought about Ne being more future-oriented. Not only that, what are these Ni "alternate perspectives on things"?

"It's holistic and focuses on one thing and one picture. It's about the integration of details to suit one meaning." -Words

"It's known ideas contributing to an image of the immediate (or not so immediate) future." - OG. Isn't this statement integration of ideas to suit one meaning?

"Being confident of a perspective or having a perspective or theory does not necessarily mean "Ni-dom." I mean I also have theories and radically different perspectives." - Words

Yes, of course anyone could come up with a theory or insight but what you're forgetting is the paradox. It's much more likely that an Ni-dom will stick to what he intuitively knows about the situation over what others tell them. Non Ni-doms don't always do this even if they think they're right.

In regard to your "Bare Assertion", the stories weren't meant to explain how great I am at using Ti but to show you what Ti is, which was your question. I noted the stories to explain a situation in which Ti is used. In that respect, you completely missed the point.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

@Puffy I wish I was sensitive enough to consider myself and INFJ but... that just isn't likely lol. I am the type of person to not feel anything at a family member's funeral (its happened several times before). That being said I understand people very well, just not in an empathizing way.

When I first took an MBTI test i was floored by how well the INTP description fit me, especially since I didn't understand there were other people like me out there. Since then I have not considered any other type at all.

Another thing is I don't believe I've always had Ni. It's just developed in addition to my normal functions. I don't think I was born like this. I also haven't thought of a solid cause for this level of development, maybe it's my unusual environment (I'm African American, not the white-boy type either) or maybe something else I don't know. I just know now I have it. Ti and Ni both act seperately and come out in situations where they're needed.

I said I could keep up with other INTPs because of Ti. I did not mean to imply other types aren't smart, sorry about that.

 

[Words]

I highly disagree with your thought about Ne being more future-oriented.

My point is that Pi or Ni is not about time. It's about looking at things in an intuitive way. Ne is also not about time but it does focus on "possibilities" or "potentiality", which can't be backwards.

Not only that, what are these Ni "alternate perspectives on things"?

I'd like to emphasize on "perspective." Pi-functions, which are both Si and Ni, deals with the commonly known term: "perspective." The difference between the two falls on the word "alternate." I understand that my understanding varies from most descriptions, but I do think they make more sense.

"It's known ideas contributing to an image of the immediate (or not so immediate) future." - OG. Isn't this statement integration of ideas to suit one meaning?

Your mention of "image" sounds closer but "Ideas contributing to another idea" strikes me as "Ne'sh." Are you talking about perceived possibilities or points of references?

Yes, of course anyone could come up with a theory or insight but what you're forgetting is the paradox. It's much more likely that an Ni-dom will stick to what he intuitively knows about the situation over what others tell them. Non Ni-doms don't always do this even if they think they're right.

What do you mean by "paradox"? How is this a paradox?

In regard to your "Bare Assertion", the stories weren't meant to explain how great I am at using Ti but to show you what Ti is, which was your question. I noted the stories to explain a situation in which Ti is used. In that respect, you completely missed the point.

hm.. I thought the point was to determine whether you are a Ti-dom or not...

 

[ObliviousGenius]

The paradoxes are in my first reply to your post I gave you two, and paradoxes are very Ni, if you can't get them it's because your Ni is probably not developed enough. And I am Ti-dom. The stories are real but whether you believe them or not, it is and example of Ti. Since I couldn't truly prove it (because you don't know me) I showed you that I understood what it was.

 

[BigApplePi]

it explains that the things I have been contributing to Ti is actually Ni, such as foresight, premonitions and aha moments. (which are almost as constant as my logical thinking.)

I'm only using Ni here,... I am still very much a perciever and very much an introverted thinker. I have a really good understanding of what Ni is, the links are for your reference not mine.

Ob Genius I am very much interested in this problem ... the Ti Ni one you mention but am at sea for a conclusive solution. Let me pose something as a possibility.

If you are a Ti ... as an assumption, I would kick the butt out of foresight, premonitions and aha moments. I could interpret foresight and premonitions as Si, not Ni. What Ti would accept those? I could place aha moments as Ne because they look at the whole depending ...

 

[ObliviousGenius]

Ob Genius I am very much interested in this problem ... the Ti Ni one you mention but am at sea for a conclusive solution. Let me pose something as a possibility.

If you are a Ti ... as an assumption, I would kick the butt out of foresight, premonitions and aha moments. I could interpret foresight and premonitions as Si, not Ni. What Ti would accept those? I could place aha moments as Ne because they look at the whole depending ...

It's hard to say if Ti would "overpower" my Ni because their both dom (I think) and they operate separately. That's how it's possible for me to have fantastic visions of the future but still be realistic about the way I go about trying to achieve my goals. I see my successful future but then I think of all I have to do the get there and all of the obstacles in my way. Ti steps in to hurdle those obstacles.

I don't see how you can say that Si is foresight and premonitions. When I think of Si, I think of the type of comparisons I make between what I first thought of an idea or object to what I think of that idea or object now. I usually use Si when I notice something conspicuously different about said idea or object. (I use the word conspicuously because I am oblivious.) An example would be if someone who is usually talkative and outgoing, suddenly was quiet for whatever reason. Trying to figure out why that person is quiet is more intuitive. Just noticing it however, is Si because I'm referring to my past knowledge of that person and comparing and contrasting the way that person is acting now. For more subtle differences, I'm more likely to miss because, again, I'm oblivious, and that would take a more advanced Si user.

Not quite sure where you're going with Ne...

 

[pjoa09]

Let me try to help stereotypically.

Ni - There are '23's in license plates, earthquake tomorrow. 100% sure.

Ti - My seismic graph says there is a possibility of an earthquake tomorrow. 1% sure.

The likelihood of either of them being correct is equal, Ti is not confident, but absolutely rational.

Although, I can really say that I believe that Ti and Ni cannot exist mutually in one personality.

I have a little Se thing going on time to time too. Most of the time I am oblivious to my surrounding and move like a sloth. While driving I have noticed I am wayy more aware than I could even imagine.

 

[ElvenVeil]

So you are Ni, and if you are not Ni then that is just further proof that you are Ni.. Making nonesense shouldn't prove a point. Being stubborn doesn't equal Ni either, but I suspect, and I will allow myself to speak freely, that you are fighting for the Ni dominant theory because that you would love to see yourself as a Ni/Ti - ObliviousGenius - true trancendence wonder type. In other words, your ego is the driving force, not rational analysis.

But you are not here to consider and ponder, whether this combination is possible, given your bold conclusions that you are Ni no matter what. If you want it possible, then I would suggest that you move away from the MBTI system, as it is very flawed, in your opinion (from what I gather).

Also I am very sorry for the harsh phrasing, but I really wanted to speak my mind, and I am not sure how to combine that with soft(kitty) words.

 

[BigApplePi]

I have been contributing to Ti is actually Ni, such as foresight, premonitions and aha moments.

ObGenius. Can you say a little more about your experience with the above bold? I am trying to see your experience but haven't been there.

BTW I don't trust the results of that test you took. If you knew me, I'd want to see the questions asked and your answers, but won't do that.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

So you are Ni, and if you are not Ni then that is just further proof that you are Ni.. Making nonesense shouldn't prove a point. Being stubborn doesn't equal Ni either, but I suspect, and I will allow myself to speak freely, that you are fighting for the Ni dominant theory because that you would love to see yourself as a Ni/Ti - ObliviousGenius - true trancendence wonder type. In other words, your ego is the driving force, not rational analysis.

But you are not here to consider and ponder, whether this combination is possible, given your bold conclusions that you are Ni no matter what. If you want it possible, then I would suggest that you move away from the MBTI system, as it is very flawed, in your opinion (from what I gather).

Also I am very sorry for the harsh phrasing, but I really wanted to speak my mind, and I am not sure how to combine that with soft(kitty) words.

Lol, wouldn't have it any other way thanks, besides I wouldn't care in the least what I was saying to you, I am an arrogant, egotistical jerk after all. And no I don't think MBTI is flawed, I just have my own view on things. I'm just trying to figure this out, the longer this conversation goes the more we'll all find out. It's hard to say that I'm using rational analysis because the MBTI model is already set in place and I'm saying something slightly different. I am definitely the minority on this theory but I'm not the least bit afraid to be wrong (which does happen on occasion lol). That being said I am never afraid to take the minority opinion, in fact, I like it and prefer it. This entire little debate is boosting my motivation to learn more, especially with such skilled opponents. Not the usual ignorant blabber I'm used to hearing on a daily basis.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

ObGenius. Can you say a little more about your experience with the above bold? I am trying to see your experience but haven't been there.

BTW I don't trust the results of that test you took. If you knew me, I'd want to see the questions asked and your answers, but won't do that.

Oh boy, probably the hardest question I've been asked since I joined this forum. In terms of foresight, it's like I make a bunch of subconscious connections instantly. I get an idea and the connections go ding, ding, ding, ding, in a matter of seconds without me actively thinking about it. Whenever I try to duplicate this by consciously trying to make connections it doesn't work (at least not at that same speed.) Plus, this usually happens when I'm in a zoned out state.

Premonitions. Out of all my thoughts, premonitions are the MOST unrealistic. It's sort of like interpreting omens or bad luck. I usually instantly recognize this and discard such a stupid thought, but I do think it. I think it derives from my probabilistic viewpoints. I consider the effects of all the information I have at the present moment. Sometimes it adds up to something bad potentially, but only theoretically, not logically. I really compare it to how directors use Ni in movies. (BTW this is an Ni "aha" moment) Since they can't really tell you what the character is thinking they use camera shots to show several ideas to give the audience the idea of what's going on without the character actually saying anything. Ne could be used in this as well, but both really.

I just discovered that I could be Ni dom the day I started this thread. My Ni-derived theory is starting to "round into shape".

 

[Puffy]

^ More responding to your comment to me Oblivious.

INFJs don't need to be sympathetic to be INFJs, true they have auxillary Fe which leans itself to looking after others, but many INFJs, sometimes those of an academic trend, have a tendency to repress their Fe behind their Ti. When I was younger I used to be stone-cold at funerals to, but I've found myself getting more sensitive with age, due to personal development (good or bad.)

The problem with relying on your test for your own type is that it represents more an image of your ideal self than your actual one. When you answer the questions are you answering as you would like to appear, or as you are? Is identity how you define yourself, is identity something subscribed by others, is identity something that must be measured and observed?

I don't think these are things so simply demarcated. I don't think the tests take into account variation in types either. If you were an INFJ with repressed Fe how would the test tell you apart from an INTP?

I'm not saying you are or are not an INFJ, but usually it is the simplest answer that offers the best conclusion. Rather than throw-away the whole basis of category in MBTI isn't it simpler - if you do have Ni and Ti - to assume you are a type that is not an INTP?

 

[ObliviousGenius]

^ More responding to your comment to me Oblivious.

INFJs don't need to be sympathetic to be INFJs, true they have auxillary Fe which leans itself to looking after others, but many INFJs, sometimes those of an academic trend, have a tendency to repress their Fe behind their Ti. When I was younger I used to be stone-cold at funerals to, but I've found myself getting more sensitive with age, due to personal development (good or bad.)

The problem with relying on your test for your own type is that it represents more an image of your ideal self than your actual one. When you answer the questions are you answering as you would like to appear, or as you are? Is identity how you define yourself, is identity something subscribed by others, is identity something that must be measured and observed?

I don't think these are things so simply demarcated. I don't think the tests take into account variation in types either. If you were an INFJ with repressed Fe how would the test tell you apart from an INTP?

I'm not saying you are or are not an INFJ, but usually it is the simplest answer that offers the best conclusion. Rather than throw-away the whole basis of category in MBTI isn't it simpler - if you do have Ni and Ti - to assume you are a type that is not an INTP?

Well said. I'm impressed by your honesty. I very much agree with the bold as I've thought about this while taking these tests. After taking the initial mbti test once I've always felt like trying to take it again wouldn't do me much good because of what you stated in bold, regardless of my self-honesty. However the test result by itself is not the basis for my theory. It was not until I really studied Ni (didn't really have a need to until now) and took a good look at myself did it really fit. I'm no longer ignorant of that information. Also the score on Ni (46.4) is high enough imo for me to take notice. It's similar to the way I view an IQ test. The lower scores are kind of subjective. A really high score is "telling".

I answered my test as who I am, but I do know who I want to be. I can't say for sure that it hasn't influenced my answers but I try to be as honest with myself as possible.

I consider myself an intellectual. It is the only thing that I truly take pride in. I don't really have anything else anyway. Eventually I want to be able to take pride in other things, that's not the case now, so I'll patiently grow. Everyone demands certain things out of me but I continue to go up against the grain, so much so that I still stick out like a sore thumb. It's because who I am is who I say I am. I'm not bound by the rules of our tyrannical social society. Then again I'm just one person with endless possibilities, who I am doesn't matter, that doesn't last very long. It's what I am, and why I am, and it doesn't need to be noticed to be most efficient.

Fe is starting to develop for me somewhat. But it's had literally no where to go but up lol. I'll look into INFJ, and I'll also consider the fact that I have no type. Maybe I'll start from the ground up.

 

[ElvenVeil]

Lol, wouldn't have it any other way thanks, besides I wouldn't care in the least what I was saying to you, I am an arrogant, egotistical jerk after all. And no I don't think MBTI is flawed, I just have my own view on things. I'm just trying to figure this out, the longer this conversation goes the more we'll all find out. It's hard to say that I'm using rational analysis because the MBTI model is already set in place and I'm saying something slightly different. I am definitely the minority on this theory but I'm not the least bit afraid to be wrong (which does happen on occasion lol). That being said I am never afraid to take the minority opinion, in fact, I like it and prefer it. This entire little debate is boosting my motivation to learn more, especially with such skilled opponents. Not the usual ignorant blabber I'm used to hearing on a daily basis.

Well I am glad that you didn't take it badly. I believe the reason for why myself (and the others I guess) are much against this theory, is that you within MBTI presents an option that is not possible in this system, in they way, that it goes against the basic arguments that makes up MBTI. Using two functions as a dominant function is not possible in MBTI (an observation I agree with) as that would go againist the whole idea of one being dominant. There wouldn't be 'room' if you will, to have two dominant functions, as all funtions work very different from each other: that is the reason why it is labelled Dominant, Auxulary and so on.

People have different ideas of what MBTI is, and that is great I think, but should be done within limits, for us to still call it MBTI. Altering function theory to this degree is a big thing.

To me, the most common reason for mistyping people on this forum, is when one looks at people and their actions, to determine the type. Person enjoyes to read books => person must be INTP (I know the argument is simple and absurd, but I hope the point remains). I believe such typing to be a faux pas as what people are doing is not at all as important as to understand 'why they are doing it' and 'what is the manner of their approach'. I believe every person (ofc this shall not be taken as ironclad as it sounds.) is able to do and accomplice something, but their approach is what varies. That is what makes different types.

Now the point of saying the above is that I have no doubt that you are able to do a lot of the things that you catagorize as Ni, but I much doubt that you do these things in the same manner as a real Ni user would. That is why, as I said in the beginning, that many INTPs and INTJs can relate to both the INTJ and the INTP profile.

I think it is good that you look into the INFJ theory, though to me you really seem like an INTP.
Edit: Didn't read puffy's post in detail. It was a good post I agree

 

[BigApplePi]

Thoughts on this problem of dominant function:

1. The dominant function would be the function one is most at ease with naturally, not necessarily the one most commonly used if one's state is artificially directed elsewhere.

2. If one's dominant function is i (introverted or subjective) is to function properly, it would want to be supplemented by an e (extroverted or objective) auxiliary function so as to have the correct data. So Ti or Ni would want Xe. I recall Words talking about this necessity for consistency.

3. I'm not going to be able to judge others if I don't get the difference between Ne and Ni myself. I'm having trouble with that.

4. ObGenius. You can have as many Ni type images as you like. My question is, do you believe them or are they imposed on you and you favor the imposition? I would think strong Ti would not believe Ni. If you believe in Ni and ignore rationality, then that is weak Te. I crossed that out as I don't feel quite qualified to say that.

5. Ti can think of the future if it wants to. Doing that doesn't have to be Ni.

6. ObGenius: re your test results. You could be scoring high on Ni because your Ti isn't fully developed regardless of where your natural dominance is. Or oppositely your could be scoring high on Ti because your natural Ni isn't fully developed.

In general, if we take an INTP with Ti Ne Si Fe, any one of those can be mal-developed. An INTJ with Ni Te Fi Se can have any one of those mal-developed or over developed, I assume.

7. Anybody: Adymus (an absent guru from here) I'm guessing would still say ObGenius is either INTP or INTJ but not both.

8. Question ObGenius. If a stronger argument could be shown that you were one of INTP or INTJ and only one of those, how would you react? That is, would that be okay? Feel relieved? Feel pleased? Feel annoyed? Have your doubts? I don't have any answer at present so I'm not trying to waylay you. I'm just looking for your spontaneous reaction to this question regardless of what the answer is.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

1. All my functions even Fe and shadow functions, act as the situation needs them. It's a natural process as a whole even if I'm better at certain functions over others, which is reflected in my personality. Nothing is "artificial".

2. That's true but how would one take into account a shadow function? That's the issue here, Ni is a shadow function of an INTP. So how is it that not only am I able to use it regularly but to such an extent that I think it's dom? I don't have good enough Te to supplement my Ni but all that does it put me more "in the clouds" so to speak. Without that objective-based thinking to guide my Ni I can be even more aloof than normal. However I don't think that would stop Ni from being operational.

4. Sometimes I optimistically believe the images that are realistic enough to happen, but usually just tell myself "who am I kidding?" It's different for foresight though, because it's not something I consciously even understand until after whatever it is I foresaw has happened. So no, I can't say these images are "imposed" so to speak. For example, I look around and see with my eyes. What I see isn't imposed on me, it's just a function of my eyes; to see.

5. Yes that's true, but only logically.

6. This is hard to answer because I'm still not sure how I've developed Ni.

8. I wish you wouldn't have made it so obvious that this was a test question because now I might subconsciously answer as such. Above all I just want to understand my problem, it doesn't matter to me whether I'm an INTJ or INTP. I don't even really have any objective use for this information besides just wanting to know (which is the case for most of the information I'm curious about).

I'm about 90% sure I'm an INTP and that used to be 100 before I ran into this problem. I would be very happy whichever type I am as long as I am confident that is what I am. I don't like leaving doubt, which is why I started this thread in the first place. Everyone agreeing with my theory doesn't do me much good. I wanted to see all angles on this. Am I right? Am I wrong? Am I an INTJ with really low Te? All my Functions scores are so erratic that it doesn't put me with any one type perfectly. One thing I don't want to do is speculate too much. I will find an answer eventually it's only a matter of when not if.

 

[snafupants]

Don't put too much stock into that test. It is pretty useless. Ti and Ni are very different from one another, and function in very different ways. You do not utilise both Ti and Ni at a high level.

How are you so sure s/he does not use both of these at a high level? That statement seems overly categorical given how potentially rickety the framework tends to be.

 

[whatstheMATTER?]

I'm quite confident that the assertion, 'You can't have more than one dominate function' is correct. If we can agree that the different operations of 'cognitive functions' are due to differing origins within the brain structure, it would follow that when engaged in conscious/active thought, or when reacting to external stimuli at any given moment, the brain 'closes off' all irrelevant areas to handle the present situation. To make sense of visual stimulation, the brain does not engage the auditory system. Thus, to have two simultaneously active or 'dominant' methods of engaging the world would be inefficient, and you would likely 'shut down' or 'overload'.

*Though the above is simplistic in the sense that a tandem approach between a perceiving function and a judging function is an operational necessity, all it's trying to demonstrate is that the 'default' setting of a brain cannot be split between two functions

More likely you are just unsure of the definitions of Ti and Ni and Ne, etc. I agree with other posters in that what you've described sounds more like Ne. As an Ni dominant, for example, I explain my processing as a proclivity towards identifying the origins or causes of effects I am confronted with. For example, today at an intersection I saw an 8 wheeler flat-bed truck transporting a damaged car sans wheels. Roughly, my perceptions and subsequent conclusion were as follows:

1. Cheap car, totaled
2. (working with already gathered knowledge) Owners sometimes forego restoration in favor of junking or scrapping the car, therefore 8 wheeler was provided as a service (call us and we'll come pick up your junk -> give you cash)
3. No wheels
4. It's winter

therefore

5. Owner scrapped cheap car due to financial restraints, kept winter tires he bought for the season.


Notice an intuitive convergence of sensory data to arrive at a probable conclusion regarding the 'origin' of the situation. A solid conclusion that would be held until more information is provided.


Another example: When discovering that the James Bond films were favorites of Christopher Nolan, I took in the information and before anything else considered what influences that had on his method of story-telling, or leanings/focuses he has that may be identifiable with another viewing of his films. Simply put, now that this info is known, my perception of his movies has changed to accommodate. (though it isn't something I will pursue, just something that will be in the back of my mind, which may prove superfluous relative to his more prominent/evident influences (Donald Duck? (saw the thread in other subforum, lol)))

An Ne reaction would be:

James Bond
+
Nolan
=
Nolan should direct a Bond film!!


And I must say that thought hadn't really occurred to me.

 

[snafupants]

This question could possibly be construed as snarky but aren't modern extrapolations based on Jung's original notions of personality somewhat of a bastardization? I've combed through most of Psychological Types and I'm not sure I would come to the same conclusions and arrangements as, say, Katharine Briggs and company based on the data.

 

[BigApplePi]

The thing about temperament descriptions that bothers me a great deal is that they are not grounded for me. I would like to see clear foundations. I would think introvert versus extrovert if taken as subjective versus objective would be a good foundation. That is, we know the difference between subjective and objective. So should those temperament descriptions be rewritten in terms of subjective and objective ... or am I just a person with poor reading comprehension?

 

[Otherside]

How are you so sure s/he does not use both of these at a high level? That statement seems overly categorical given how potentially rickety the framework tends to be.

Totally off topic, but I usually look for concise replies in threads so your's sometimes catch my eye. The problem is that I have to squint to read that font.

My problem and not yours, just thought I'd let you know that the narrowness of the characters makes them appear to bleed together somewhat to an old guy that's lost a few diopters with time, and of course I can't find my reading glasses.

 

[BigApplePi]

I hope to have more on this thread when I return this afternoon. Having a little surgery this morning. Si and Se had better be awake.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_functions#Lenore_Thomson

I find this very interesting. It integrates all of the functions into one process, instead of the normal theory that "shadow functions" operate subconsciously which I disagree with. This model has the shadow functions operating in between the auxiliary function of Ne and Tertiary function Si. (For an INTP)

 

[BigApplePi]

I find this very interesting. It integrates all of the functions into one process, instead of the normal theory that "shadow functions" operate subconsciously which I disagree with. This model has the shadow functions operating in between the auxiliary function of Ne and Tertiary function Si. (For an INTP)

I have so many thoughts about this thread I don't know what to put down first. So whatever I say may not be in order of importance. (I'm eyeing all this with one eye while the other one is healing after a cataract removal, lol.)

I tried to find a definition for "cognitive function." How about this one? A point is subconscious behavior is not a cognitive function.
cognitive function =

Neurology Any mental process that involves symbolic operations–eg, perception, memory, creation of imagery, and thinking; CFs encompasses awareness and capacity for judgment
McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cognitive+Function

If we use that one, it will include thinking, intuition, sensing, judging. A good start. ObGenius I don't see why anyone, if so disposed, can't apply their mental processing awareness to any of the eight CF's you have shown in your link. Just because my mind races (Ti) with thoughts doesn't mean I can't stop and do something else. What's to stop me if I'm so motivated? Here is another definition, broken down into the set of eight:

Carl Jung described 8 cognitive functions in which people use. The following table is their definitions. Function Description

Se - extraverted sensing Experiencing the immediate context; noticing changes and opportunied for action; being drawn to act on the physical world; accumulating experiences; scanning for visible reactions and relevant data; recognizing "what is"
Si - introverted sensing Reviewing past experiences; "what is" evoking "what was"; seeking detailed information and links to what is known; recalling stored impressions; accumulating data; recognizing the way things have always been
Ne - extraverted intuiting Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change "what is " for "what could possibly be"; noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts
Ni - introverted intuiting Foreseeing implications and likely effects without external data; realizing "what will be"; conceptualizing new ways of seeing things; envisioning transformations; getting an image of profound meaning or far-reaching symbols
Te - extraverted thinking Ordering; organizing for efficiency; systematzing; aplying logic; structuring; checking for consequences; monitoring for standards or specifications being met; setting boundaries, guidelines, and parameters, deciding if something isworking or not
Ti - introverted thinking Analyzing ; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarying definitions to get more precision
Fe - extraverted feeling Connecting; considering others and the group - organizing to meet their needs and honor their values; adjusting and accommodating others; deciding if something is appropriate or acceptable to others
Fi -introverted feeling Valuing; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for.
http://jamesbkim.com/content/definition-cognitive-functions

What to stop me from having or using Te? Te is something I (assuming I'm INTP) am not supposed to have according to some, or is a shadow function according to others. I can do Te but I have to work at it. I live Ti, but can control myself and do Te.

Now you ObGenius, say you do Ti and Ni. Sure. Why not? If you got those scores on a test and they repeated on more tests, why not? Now I have to ask, where is your balance? Water naturally seeks a flat level. Where is yours? Perhaps that is yet to be discovered. May I propose that if you do Ni, you don't do Ti and the same time? That is because Ni is irrational. You have to stop and observe it as such and do Ti. So they alternate. Same for me. I can't do formal Te and at the same time have wild Ti.

There is another consideration to keep the non-shadow people happy. That is to offer that I don't ever do Te. It could be a pseudo Te. That is, we could say I'm using Ne and Fe instead. How so? We could say I'm using intuition (Ne) for ordering my environment and words to communicate with others (Fe) to motivate me. Then I use Ti to check for consistency. I don't know.

Now to you. Suppose we assume you are INTJ (INTP is another hypothesis) Ni Te Fi Se. That would put your Ni first. Here is something you said earlier:

It's hard to say if Ti would "overpower" my Ni because their both dom (I think) and they operate separately. That's how it's possible for me to have fantastic visions of the future but still be realistic about the way I go about trying to achieve my goals. I see my successful future but then I think of all I have to do the get there and all of the obstacles in my way. Ti steps in to hurdle those obstacles.

Paraphrasing you, You are realistic. You think of all you have to do to get there plus obstacles. That sounds an awful lot like Te to me because it is objective, not subjective, not Ti. That would be Te supporting your Ni as an auxiliary function and bringing you back to reality.

You have brought up your "contradictory" test results. I don't recall taking the test myself. I'll have to take a look at it sometime. Perhaps the test is self-contradictory or weak in distinguishing. Or the test could be okay and it is just you who are not settled as you have alluded to. I'd have to take it apart and so far I kinda doubt my ability to do that or if it would be too hard work.

Lastly I have to say I don't believe in contradictions ... or rather when I see them, they are due to subjective interpretations. Objective reality has no contradictions. We just cannot see it clearly.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

Well, I have always thought that I did not use Ni or Ti at the same time. I have learned to use Ni (if I'm INTP) or Ti (if I'm INTJ) at some point, but I do know for sure that I have always preferred logic over things irrational since I was a kid. I am fairly sure that I am Ti dominant but I just think that I have learned to use Ni to such an extent that it effects me like a normal Ni dom would without their other lesser processes. Here's the thing: I analyze my Ni irrational thoughts. I judge what's realistic and what's not. If something doesn't play out like I think it will, I analyze the result as well to see what went wrong. Then again I have both Ni visions of my subjective thoughts (like an image of a logical idea) and the Ne meaning of my logical thought. This is far too difficult for me to explain, which is frustrating. I will be the first person to suggest if something doesn't make sense logically when there is a model to follow and compare to. The point is Ti works after Ni and Ni works after Ti. They don't happen at the same time(I think)

Yes, you could say that me planning out my future and moving options is Te but my Te is weak. Te is something I understand and I am not an objective person in the least unless I actively set my mind to be objective.

That being said I see your point. Maybe I should revise my theory to include the the natural effect of Te supporting my Ni which would explain why my Ni is "naive" so to speak. It should develop naturally since I still believe I have Ni. The thing that's tripping me up is the fact that I am certain that I'm not a J. I have pretty much NO J characteristics. I fit every description of a perceiver in every way. I know this for sure because, I'm even more confused than when I started. I'm really not sure anymore. I need more feedback.

Another big problem is that I can't talk to you guys in person so you could see me and judge for yourselves...

 

[snafupants]

Totally off topic, but I usually look for concise replies in threads so your's sometimes catch my eye. The problem is that I have to squint to read that font.

My problem and not yours, just thought I'd let you know that the narrowness of the characters makes them appear to bleed together somewhat to an old guy that's lost a few diopters with time, and of course I can't find my reading glasses.

You can make the text larger by pressing command and the addition button, which is typically to the left of the backspace.

 

[BigApplePi]

Well, I have always thought that I did not use Ni or Ti at the same time. I have learned to use Ni (if I'm INTP) or Ti (if I'm INTJ) at some point, but I do know for sure that I have always preferred logic over things irrational since I was a kid. I am fairly sure that I am Ti dominant but I just think that I have learned to use Ni to such an extent that it effects me like a normal Ni dom would without their other lesser processes. Here's the thing: I analyze my Ni irrational thoughts. I judge what's realistic and what's not. If something doesn't play out like I think it will, I analyze the result as well to see what went wrong. Then again I have both Ni visions of my subjective thoughts (like an image of a logical idea) and the Ne meaning of my logical thought. This is far too difficult for me to explain, which is frustrating. I will be the first person to suggest if something doesn't make sense logically when there is a model to follow and compare to. The point is Ti works after Ni and Ni works after Ti. They don't happen at the same time(I think)

Yes, you could say that me planning out my future and moving options is Te but my Te is weak. Te is something I understand and I am not an objective person in the least unless I actively set my mind to be objective.

That being said I see your point. Maybe I should revise my theory to include the the natural effect of Te supporting my Ni which would explain why my Ni is "naive" so to speak. It should develop naturally since I still believe I have Ni. The thing that's tripping me up is the fact that I am certain that I'm not a J. I have pretty much NO J characteristics. I fit every description of a perceiver in every way. I know this for sure because, I'm even more confused than when I started. I'm really not sure anymore. I need more feedback.

Another big problem is that I can't talk to you guys in person so you could see me and judge for yourselves...

ObGenius. I am pleased with reading what you've said if only because you ARE approaching this in a "P" way. What we appear to have here (from what you say about you) is Myer-Briggs theory with you as an exception. I'm reminded about right and left handed people where some may be ambidextrous but those "some" are extremely rare. I'm also reminded about schizophrenics who have visions. I assume full schizophrenics have succumbed to their sensory impositions while you have not. (Can you say more about yourself in this?). I also agree we need more feedback.

I posed this issue of other temperaments to the former member, Adymus, some time ago. Let me look it up so we can see what he said. I'd be interested in seeing what you think. I'm possibly as interested in addressing this contradiction as you are. One resolution the "experts" are fond of is to do brain scans. Yet I should think that with adequate introspection we could predict what those brain scans would show.

One resolution: Perhaps (if you are an INTP), like the schizophrenic, you experience Ni sensory input and this is so prevalant it has caused you to not develop Ne by pushing it away from development. Or perhaps what you are experiencing is a lot of Si but you are interpreting it as Ni. What do you think? A visual experience I would want to call Si.
==============================

Later. This remains a hard topic for me to think about but will keep trying. (I had some good thoughts written but lost them when I shut down the computer.)

Cognitive functions, especially in the younger and less experienced need not be fully developed. I believe in addition I heard someone say the Myers-Briggs test is good only for the top two CFs. So if either is not fully developed they can throw off all four. If your Ne is not adequately developed, could this leave open high Ni in the test? Perhaps.

Let me see if I can locate a discussion I had with Adymus. I had proposed something about exhibiting other temperaments in a temporary manner, but he didn't buy it. I don't believe it was resolved.

Later yet: So far all I've found is this. They are talking about having Ti and Fi at the same time. The post may not help here, but it shows others are considering solutions.

Let me summarize and rephrase again because I don't want to rewrite. Here's a theory: Yes it would help to see/talk to you in person. You haven't described an example of this so-called Ni experience. I suspect Si and Ti working together would explain what's happening. I want to know if you experience it as images or an information gathering? Do those images hit you uncalled for or do you go after them? (One can still count a lot of daydreaming as Ti/Si.) Do you believe in those images or are you immediately critical?

Note: there were posts numbered 1-8. I've forgotten to look again at those. Maybe later.

 

[Mello]

(Skimmed the thread.)

I doubt it. I like thinking and creating systems too much.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

Which function is this example? Every time I learn a new word or look it up, I instantly imagine a visual situation where I'm using the word in context. The reason I ask is because I can see elements of Ni and Si in this example.

I consider my Ti working like a maze. I take one path and when I see that it's the wrong way I double back and take a different path. I keep going until I come all the separate paths I take reach the end in one line. The end of the maze is understanding. I read what some of the people in that Flexible INTP thread were saying about dominant functions and energy. I did not know one gains the most energy from using their dom function over the others.

I feel like I gain energy from using Ti and Ni but it's harder to tell with my lesser functions. I also agree that upbringing plays a part in development. I love the abstract and I love strategy and logic, that's always been the case. However, my parents are ultra-conservative Christians. We go to church every Sunday and the bible is the basis for everything in our lives. Maybe my constant exposure to church has molded me to think more intuitively. That's just a guess however. I also believe all the weed I smoke has made me more Ni. I become more INTJ than INTP when I'm high anyway and that's when I started to get a real understanding of intuition.

The causes can vary but in no way shape or form can I see myself as even mildly schizophrenic. My visions are like day-dreams when I completely zone out. I do sometimes lose my sensory perception during these periods of aloofness but I do not attribute that to mental problems. I do test 100% N on MBTI tests. Ne is the function I feel I have the least understanding on, despite that being my aux function. So maybe you're on to something there with my Ne being overpowered. Especially since I now understand that functions are in order of energy gained not prevalence.

I'm still hard-pressed to believe that what I have been thinking is Ni is actually Si. If anything Ti maybe. To answer your questions I experience my visions as images and not just gathering information. The information IS being gathered but only subconsciously inputted into my "movie". These movies hit me all of a sudden and I can't go into this state on my own. Most of the time they make sense so I believe them, but I sometimes have unrealistic fantasies that make me feel good but are otherwise unobtainable.

Don't know if you've ever seen the first Harry Potter movie but there was a mirror in the film that allowed one to see what they wanted most when looking in it. Those are the kinds of images that I dismiss after enjoying for a moment lol. (Also notice that this connection between a Harry Potter movie and my visions I would attribute to Si).

The ones that make sense often come to pass because the information I've perceived adds up to a foreseeable outcome. However, sometimes there can be so much information (or not enough) that my insight is flawed in some way. Ti explains why it's flawed because Ni is missing the same logic.

 

[Mello]

Ti, I suppose. I create a system around an idea and imagine the possibilities that can occur around it.

 

[katkeyron]

sure you're not an ISTP? only skimmed the thread but it's definitely Ti instead of Te and your infatuation for Ni can come from it being your tertiary function (really common). Both Pe functions just collect information, they don't do anything with it, and so they might seem "passive" to the point where you don't think you're using them.

Though I do agree with Words in that all the Ni things you listed early on being Ne

and @pjoa09, Ti and Ni can definitely exist in the same personality! Haha, Ni might think the possibility is 100% sure but the Ni user doesn't necessarily. Fe or Ti, or both, will decide whether to accept Ni's conclusion. Unless you mean you can't see both conclusions in the same personality, then that would depend on whether and how different the conclusions are.

 

[BigApplePi]

I am looking for an Ni example for which YOU strongly feel this is an Ni example of yours. More than one is fine. You may have given some already but what I'm after is more details for what YOU see is an Ni example. What I'm after is your view of the experience. Apologizes if I'm too blind to see your story.

Which function is this example? Every time I learn a new word or look it up, I instantly imagine a visual situation where I'm using the word in context. The reason I ask is because I can see elements of Ni and Si in this example.

Your statement about looking up a word is something I and many do too. What does the word mean? What does it not mean? Where do we put the word? Sounds like Ti-Ne at least. I suppose we could go through all eight CF's like we did for the fence here though.

Ne - I looked up the word cuz I felt it connected to you.
Ni - I looked up the word cuz I knew it fit you.

I consider my Ti working like a maze. I take one path and when I see that it's the wrong way I double back and take a different path. I keep going until I come all the separate paths I take reach the end in one line. The end of the maze is understanding. I read what some of the people in that Flexible INTP thread were saying about dominant functions and energy. I did not know one gains the most energy from using their dom function over the others.

I would put it one is most at ease and gains energy with their dominant function. If someone sits on your dominant function it doesn't get out. I gave an example where if someone stands on my foot I don't stop and think. I just want them off my foot. Here Si shouts very loudly. BTW Si will suppress Ne (Adymus I think backs this up).

I feel like I gain energy from using Ti and Ni but it's harder to tell with my lesser functions. I also agree that upbringing plays a part in development. I love the abstract and I love strategy and logic, that's always been the case. However, my parents are ultra-conservative Christians. We go to church every Sunday and the bible is the basis for everything in our lives. Maybe my constant exposure to church has molded me to think more intuitively. That's just a guess however. I also believe all the weed I smoke has made me more Ni. I become more INTJ than INTP when I'm high anyway and that's when I started to get a real understanding of intuition.

Holy macro! That's quite a mouthful. Don't know if I can speak to all that! My intuition says if you are not INFJ, that your experience can have you looking like using Ni. All I can do is propose what looks like Ni is really a combo of the other INTP functions. (If you were INTJ and Adymus is firm in saying you CAN'T be both, all bets are off.)

Thoughts: Your smoking weed is an Si experience. It hits your brain and sets you off ... it sets off the rest of your functions, except for Fe unless your conscience bothers you in front of your conservative parents. Hold on. Fe has got to play a role. Ultra-conservative combined with your age developement and pot has got to set off wild thoughts on how to adjust.

My visions are like day-dreams when I completely zone out. I do sometimes lose my sensory perception during these periods of aloofness but I do not attribute that to mental problems. I do test 100% N on MBTI tests. Ne is the function I feel I have the least understanding on, despite that being my aux function. So maybe you're on to something there with my Ne being overpowered. Especially since I now understand that functions are in order of energy gained not prevalence.

I'd like to hear a day dream but of course that could be quite personal so you can skip it. Yes underdeveloped Ne. Not to forget Ne requires lots of experienced data. I'm trying to use my Ne to get a feel for where you are at and lacking that, I'm low on Ne here in this respect.

I'm still hard-pressed to believe that what I have been thinking is Ni is actually Si. If anything Ti maybe. To answer your questions I experience my visions as images and not just gathering information. The information IS being gathered but only subconsciously inputted into my "movie". These movies hit me all of a sudden and I can't go into this state on my own. Most of the time they make sense so I believe them, but I sometimes have unrealistic fantasies that make me feel good but are otherwise unobtainable.

Only the visual and hedonistic aspect is Si. Your reflections on the "movies" are Ti. I could say that if you enjoy the movie that is Si. If you are aware of gathering information on the movie, that is Ne. If you push your movie onto the world, that is Ni. I don't hear you telling me your views are the right ones and I am fos. Instead you are searching. Of course I could be unconsciously rationalizing (trying to make everything fit INTP). I either need more data and more expertise to judge this. We need a more experienced person than me here. Solicitation for a more knowledgeable or person or alternate input ...

Don't know if you've ever seen the first Harry Potter movie but there was a mirror in the film that allowed one to see what they wanted most when looking in it. Those are the kinds of images that I dismiss after enjoying for a moment lol. (Also notice that this connection between a Harry Potter movie and my visions I would attribute to Si).

I did see that one but not the others. So many came out I refused to see any more until I learned what the proper order was supposed to be, lol. Talking about that mirror reminds me of the "three wishes" thread here. (There IS such an INTP thread.) Now what CF is that? I'm guessing Ne because it contemplates data. Just because the data is fantasy doesn't negate it. It's when someone says, "You can't go on living a healthy existence until you do the three wish thing" or "You shouldn't be indulging it such fantasy", that we have Ni." Ni pushes their view onto you.

The ones that make sense often come to pass because the information I've perceived adds up to a foreseeable outcome. However, sometimes there can be so much information (or not enough) that my insight is flawed in some way. Ti explains why it's flawed because Ni is missing the same logic.

Nothing wrong with being sometimes wrong or sometimes being right. Ni wants to run with it, right OR wrong.

 

[BigApplePi]

katkeyron. I completely overlooked that some temperaments have both Ti and Ni. But ISTP? Check out his scores for Se. It's extremely low.

 

[katkeyron]

oh, true, true. I didn't really skim for any Se-like details, but basically yes, like everyone is saying, you can't be a both a Ni and Ti dom.


I'd shy away from citing MBTI tests for typing yourself--I can easily test 100% on T>F and I know that my F function is higher than my T.

Also, what you're doing in these posts is Si-ing all the reasons you think you're using Ni and Ti and whatever else! What I'm getting the impression of is that you're an INTP and aware that you autopilot that iNtuition. But in trying to Ti out what type you are, you've made the mistake of relying on Si more and only erratically and inefficiently using Ne, which lead you to a theory full of holes.

lol this kind of makes me want to make a 'type me!' post, but I don't think that would garner much attention unless it was provocative, in a irritating and blatantly off sense.

 

[ObliviousGenius]

oh, true, true. I didn't really skim for any Se-like details, but basically yes, like everyone is saying, you can't be a both a Ni and Ti dom.


I'd shy away from citing MBTI tests for typing yourself--I can easily test 100% on T>F and I know that my F function is higher than my T.

Also, what you're doing in these posts is Si-ing all the reasons you think you're using Ni and Ti and whatever else! What I'm getting the impression of is that you're an INTP and aware that you autopilot that iNtuition. But in trying to Ti out what type you are, you've made the mistake of relying on Si more and only erratically and inefficiently using Ne, which lead you to a theory full of holes.

lol this kind of makes me want to make a 'type me!' post, but I don't think that would garner much attention unless it was provocative, in a irritating and blatantly off sense.

I think you could be right about my explanations, but trying to explain Ni is extremely difficult. I could just be using bad Si to explain Ni, idk... I do know that I am an N not an S. I don't think ISTP is really an option at all. Besides, I remember my first test being high 90s N just like my I is high 90s. I'm pretty certain of that and I don't use that word lightly.

I realize I could just be completely off with all this or at least I'm on to something and just haven't pin-pointed what it is that I was thinking so far.

Maybe I am dominant Ti when it comes to judging and making decisions and dominant Ni when it comes to general perception.

 

[SkyWalker]

Being confident of a perspective or having a perspective or theory does not necessarily mean "Ni-dom." I mean I also have theories and radically different perspectives. Just look at my post history. Look at Skywalker and his theories, who is supposedly an ENTP. I may not know you well enough, but I haven't noticed any clear signs of Ni-dom.

I (an ENTP) can explain you pretty well how an ENTP (an Ne dom) can look confident or unconfident:

Actually I'm always challenging my own theories (typical ENTP), I might even ask another something in a way as if i do not even believe my own theory, even if its really good, so that might look unconfident, while in fact i just try other possibilities as well. Constantly updating my own theory that way.

Actually I cycle through many many many theories, everytime undoing what I did, sometimes going nowhere, but sometimes hitting something profound that I cannot challenge anymore, while -trust me- I have tried ALL other possibilities in that case.
The thing is, then I become expert on that matter in my view and I can look VERY confident, because I am. Sometimes its hard to explain to other people how I got there, because then I have to cycle them through all other million possibilities that i tried, and people dont have the energy for that. So then i just say: I JUST KNOW, JUST TRUST ME. (If someone has the capacity and the time for my explanation i would be willing to explain every detail, but usually others dont want that anyway)

 

[SkyWalker]

and the subject of this thread is just stupidity to the max!

you could only have 2 equally dominant functions in your first 2 functions.
you could have Ti<>Ne balance, being between an ENTP and INTP.
or in general: balance in Ti/Fi<>Ne/Se or Te/Fe<>Ni/Si

that would probably be very scarce, to be in such an exact balance, but there might be quite a few less extreme stereotypical INTPs/ENTPs which are closer to the middle line.

for the newbies, learn about the way the functions are designed by jung, the creator of the model:
there are opposites in the model of the functions.
more of one function cancels out the opposite one.
if you understand this, you wont ask stupid questions like "can i have 2 dominant functions".

(and if you reject jung's model, also fine, but then dont talk about a confused version of his model, just design your own)