Ni in INTPs

[Ex-User (8886)]

So... some history of mine in the spoiler

Spoiler

from the very beginning of my presence here I wanted be INTJ, because they seemed so amazing. Now I see that I'm a INTJ from some perspective, or at least I'm as much INTJ as INTP; and my type is amazing

here's the thing, first video:
https://youtu.be/18KAyj1GP9k
this guy have some understanding of socionics, at it gives us nice idea, that INTPs 2 strongest functions are Ti (conscious) and Ni (unconscious).

here's my theory:
my best thoughts come from nothing (Ni) (unconsciously), then
I start thinking about it, analyzing (Ti) (consciously),
if I find something's not true, I change it (consciously) (Ne)
in the end I can start doing something, but I don't have any plan, I just know what to do next (unconsciously) (Te)

my idea how INTJ can think:
their Ti analyze something and gives them feeling of some conclusion, that something is right or wrong (that's why theese people are so confident), they start thinking how to connect it to other pieces in their mind developing a pattern, here comes Te which finds application, a plan to use this new pattern, if reality changes they have no problem to adjust their plan because of Ne (INTJs are know as hightly adaptable strategists)

It's just a draft, I'm able to explain it further and debate if you don't agree

 

[Minute Squirrel]

Is this jungs Ni, MBTIs Ni, or socionics Ni?

Because they are not the same thing.

At least as I see it.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

Is this jungs Ni, MBTIs Ni, or socionics Ni?

Because they are not the same thing.

At least as I see it.

There is only one Ni. There can be different description of it because some people don't understand it and write shit in Internet.

But simple and good definition of Ni is:
Creating and recognition patterns of reality. (Therefore intjs are good long range and patient planners, they learn very quickly, also math is something natural to them).

 

[baccheion]

My theory (based on looking at the order of functions when INTPs take a function strength quiz) is that unconscious functions are in the middle. That is, Ti Ne (Ni Te Fi) Si (Se) Fe.

 

[Black Rose]

But simple and good definition of Ni is:
Creating and recognition patterns of reality.

If you mean subjective reality you will be right. Ni forms internal connections in that Ni is trying to flesh out ideas from new angles and perspectives it creates in its head. The word used to describe Ni is contemplative which means ideas are internally generated not much referencing the outside world for feedback. Ne is not internally self-generating in the sense that an external reference is needed for ideas to have a base or anchorage to branch from. Ne will see the potential of ideas or objects and this is more active than Ni because Ne looks outside and Ni looks inside.

One thing I have desperately tried to do is look inside and it just does not work, at least with perception.

Te and Ti also function by going in opposite directions. To say you use both is like saying you can walk forwards and backward at the same time. This is only an analogy but the dominant orientation will be walking forwards, so Ti is walking forward or Te is walking forwards and walking backward will seem unnatural whether it is Ti or Te. Looking inside is unnatural to me (Ni), it's walking backward.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

Te and Ti also function by going in opposite directions. To say you use both is like saying you can walk forwards and backward at the same time.

obviously you can't use both in the same moment...
Consciously you use only Ti, but you wouldn't be able to live in the world without using any Te... that's why it exists in us, but it's unconscious, because like you said, we wouldn't be able to use both at the same time.

 

[Black Rose]

It is not that walking backward is not doable. But I never try it because it feels so unsettling. Like walking eyes closed, I open them after 5 seconds in a clear open mall.

 

[QuickTwist]

It seems like you are using Ni in the Socionics dichotomy to describe a Jungian idea about how CF interact with each other. It doesn't work like that. You are essentially using a progression of a theory to describe what is happening in the original theory. Doesn't seem to be a logical sequence of ideas.

 

[Black Rose]

New idea.

Ni is about what is possible from the inside. This means the answer came from inside you. The subject. Who stole the cookies from the cookie jar? It was betty. But how do you know? Because reality is inside me so when I see the clouds, when I see the trees, when I see Betty and Jimmy and Timmy every day for 6 years. And the river out the house. I read the forces of nature. I am at one with the universe inside me. That is how I know Betty stole the cookies from the cookie jar.

Ne is about all the ways the world could be, therefore everything is outside me but real as what the world must become when we view each possibility against the standard of its place with all other possibilities. by seeing all angles we see all directions the world could go but also the definitive direction it will go by recognizing the possibilities that actually happen in reality. A map is formed of a probability cloud we can use to select our actions and best ideas.


Intuition as the Subject is in complete opposition to Intuition oriented to the Object. When the subject cannot be separated from the possibilities of intuitions. Therefore all reality becomes possible as future events in the subject that the subject must know will happen. When the object of intuition is perceived its possibility is fuzzy to what will happen and when used to combine most likely events it does so without intaking all events in reality as one thing but reducing events to localized event modeling. Ni will know it will rain tomorrow. Ne will see shapes in the clouds. Bunny or Kitty without knowing what animal it will become latter.

On the fly, Ne will recognize the solution to a problem because all possibilities happened at once to reveal the one possibility of what could happen with the objects or events or idea that fit into the solution space.

Ni will internally conclude that X or Y or Z is true. Ni will conclude the solution to a problem out from nowhere. Ni will tell you an even with happen and it does. Ni will know things about people they did not know themselves. Ni will know where the lost child is without any previous information about the child.

Ne - is probabilistic, uncertain, combines best matches
Ni - is definitive, knows by default, holistic picture of all things together.

I post all this to show how Extraversion and Introversion are different in the example of Intuition. Think of Ni as a circle absorbing all reality into itself. think of Ne as a seed the grows from the circle into the outside world. To better say it. Ni is layers of circles upon circles humming with the universe. The seed Ne grows to find out what is there. probes the world, not absorb it. The answers come to Ni but the answers are discovered by Ne.

The whole point is that socionic is wrong because you cannot both have answers come to you and also be discovering them at the same time. Intuition cannot be doing both at once. N cannot push and pull at the same time. Discover and come to you at the same time.

Socionic would say Ne in me is conscious and Ni is unconscious. makes no sense because they say Ni is still active in me. If I am pushing outside myself I am not unconsciously pulling into myself with intuition. I cannot walk forward and backward at the same time. I am ENFP and if I had a psychotic break my functions would flip orientations and I would access NiFeTiSe. I do think they are unconscious but only active in dreams when the 4 main conscious functions lose consciousness. They are not active in consciousness background operations. that is what I think. adieu.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

^
how do you explain if one is INTx? I mean when one has strong preferences in I, N, T, but have only slight preference in P or J?
because types are mostly about preferences, I found also opinion that the last preference is the least important, sometimes it's even small letter instead of capital, my friend who introduced me to personality types told me that when he couldn't figure out whether I'm INTP or INTJ. The funny thing is that he didn't know if he is INFP or INFJ and I even don't know this till now.

(I know that you can leave preferences and focus only on functions, but the problem is that none really know what this functions are and from they come from, there is no real theory behind this, but everyone knows what preferences are and understand the concept)

next thing, how to explain, that I can do job very efficient, even more than ISTJ and INTJ (but not ExTJ though)? Ti has nothing to do with efficiency, because it works in opposite way, but still, I can focus about getting job done [and I really hate misconception that INTPs can't finish anything, it's the most frustrating lie in the internet wrrrrr.....]

 

[Black Rose]

I'm INTP or INTJ.

I get what you mean by no one know what functions are because that took me 10 years to figure out. But I am capable of distinguishing between the J and P of INT by functions. I am not a natural TiFe type so I use a chart in my head for each type when I come to the type, I do not think of every combination nor observer that many people in real life. It is just my lookup table.

Ti is first in INTP they usually over think everything by which I mean they take any subject and think it to death, For example, they would take socionic and do type combos 16x16 type interactions and see how they all worked. This would mostly combine with Ne because they would see many options afterward and expand beyond 16x16. They expand continuously because they see so many options.

Ni is a perception in INTJ's so they see meaning in everything. They notice things like logos on shirts or just avatars on web forums. Some that code has the wizard type style where spells are written to be interdependent. You only know what the code does if you know what it means. INTP code would be more structured top down to enter any subroutine, a hierarchy. INTJ code is more like a complex object in a physics engine with so many parts but it does work. The INTJ feels the need to eliminates waste (Te) so they will no include everything the INTP will in their stack but the cond the INTJ creates though smaller and does whats needed is hard to decrypt. ISTJ coders are more like BASIC coders. They build code from Lego blocks and not from stacks. OOP is basically a graph. INTP's keep the graph like a Microsoft folder system trying to include everything Ne (Data in and out of files with a top folder going down to subfolders) and INTJ's like a directed graph. Again ISTJs would operate the way BASIC is written.

The computer example was the best I could think of. The esoteric stuff like Issac Neuton I do not know much about.

 

[Black Rose]

I may have changed my understandings a bit. (like always)
I chalk this up to Ne (always seeing more option they way thing could be)
And since I have been talking to my doctor I have been narrowing in on the problem.
I just feel horrible all the time and I believe it is that my brain is stuck preventing mental clarity.
I am also still developing my theory of intelligence to understand how to create artificial intelligence. It is difficult with a stuck brain that makes the rest of the brain need to work harder.
Typology being something I am still working on I may still have more ideas to come.
My old ideas may no longer be valid. There are many.

 

[QuickTwist]

MBTI is completely separate from Jungian functions. The two just do not equate.

For example, according to MBTI, I am INTP. Functionally speaking though, I am Ti>Ni.

 

[elliptoid]

^
how do you explain if one is INTx? I mean when one has strong preferences in I, N, T, but have only slight preference in P or J?
because types are mostly about preferences, I found also opinion that the last preference is the least important, sometimes it's even small letter instead of capital, my friend who introduced me to personality types told me that when he couldn't figure out whether I'm INTP or INTJ. The funny thing is that he didn't know if he is INFP or INFJ and I even don't know this till now.

(I know that you can leave preferences and focus only on functions, but the problem is that none really know what this functions are and from they come from, there is no real theory behind this, but everyone knows what preferences are and understand the concept)

If one is INTx then they don't really have a type at all because no preference for either perception or judgement is demonstrated.

Being unable to differentiate means heterogeneity and therefore balance. Also, the inability to differentiate is pretty much related to a normal psychology I think is what Jung was trying to say whereas a differentiated personality type is a pathology.

next thing, how to explain, that I can do job very efficient, even more than ISTJ and INTJ (but not ExTJ though)? Ti has nothing to do with efficiency, because it works in opposite way, but still, I can focus about getting job done [and I really hate misconception that INTPs can't finish anything, it's the most frustrating lie in the internet wrrrrr.....]

Again, synthesis.
Introversion means that it is always trying to take away, to grow larger than, to pull energy from the environment and make itself biggest and most important.

When something engages thinking, and supplies the energy, the thinking feeds on it and grows larger and more powerful, and able to take more and more. In this way, maybe the INTP is the best of all at getting some jobs done. Jobs of thinking.

Most of the time though the opposite is the reality. The environment decides what is important and it takes away the energy. Introverted attitudes resist this sapping but it is an unconscious force that always happens. So mostly INTPs wouldn't want to put too much energy into something that is always a net drain.

 

[Jennywocky]

^
how do you explain if one is INTx? I mean when one has strong preferences in I, N, T, but have only slight preference in P or J?
because types are mostly about preferences, I found also opinion that the last preference is the least important, sometimes it's even small letter instead of capital, my friend who introduced me to personality types told me that when he couldn't figure out whether I'm INTP or INTJ. The funny thing is that he didn't know if he is INFP or INFJ and I even don't know this till now.

One thing to remember (that I think people forget) is that J/P is not a function pair.

Sensing and Intuition are functions. [Perceiving functions]
Thinking and Feeling are functions. [Judging functions]

See what J/P is now? It's the value that describes what type of function you prioritize. Typically you can come at it from the side, by asking whether someone prefers closure or open-endedness. Do you prioritize an extroverted perceiving function, or an extroverted judging function?

This is why INTPs are still labeled as P's in the system, despite having a primary that is a Judging function -- the J/P is describing the level of comfort with external closure. So it distinguishes INTP from INTJ in the system, the INTJ supposedly prefers extroverted closure more as a motivator, which is why extroverted Thinking (the Je function) is thus attributed more to them.

But again, J/P is not a function pair like S/N (information gathering) or T/F (information processing). It just denotes which of those functions are prioritized in your makeup. So the INTx dilemma seems like a roundabout silly thing to me. You can reach a conclusion about it by simply determining how you approach information gathering and information processing, rather than trying to evaluate it as if it existed on its own.

 

[QuickTwist]

@Jennywocky,

IIRC, What MBTI is, is what Jung describes in his book 'Psychological Types' and is done in an effort to take out the core concepts that Jung laid out. It was the two woman who thought that they had simplified Jung's work into a polarized system between different dichotomies which do "represent" the CF, but it is essentially condensed to the point where there is no need to even use the CF to describe things anymore - they believed they had eliminated the need to rely on CF in that CFs were not individual criteria, but could be simplified into something more basic.

MBTI is supposed to be the encapsulated work of Jung in 'Psychological Types' and as such, the need to describe MBTI in terms of CF has been done away with.

 

[Yellow]

One thing to remember (that I think people forget) is that J/P is not a function pair.

Sensing and Intuition are functions. [Perceiving functions]
Thinking and Feeling are functions. [Judging functions]

See what J/P is now? It's the value that describes what type of function you prioritize. Typically you can come at it from the side, by asking whether someone prefers closure or open-endedness. Do you prioritize an extroverted perceiving function, or an extroverted judging function?

This is why INTPs are still labeled as P's in the system, despite having a primary that is a Judging function -- the J/P is describing the level of comfort with external closure. So it distinguishes INTP from INTJ in the system, the INTJ supposedly prefers extroverted closure more as a motivator, which is why extroverted Thinking (the Je function) is thus attributed more to them.

But again, J/P is not a function pair like S/N (information gathering) or T/F (information processing). It just denotes which of those functions are prioritized in your makeup. So the INTx dilemma seems like a roundabout silly thing to me. You can reach a conclusion about it by simply determining how you approach information gathering and information processing, rather than trying to evaluate it as if it existed on its own.

I really like the way you explained this. I kinda wish we had a little wiki on the site to stick straightforward explanations like this into for people to reference when they get confused.

 

[Jennywocky]

I really like the way you explained this. I kinda wish we had a little wiki on the site to stick straightforward explanations like this into for people to reference when they get confused.

That would be good if we agree on what it is. This is my understanding of it, though.

I should mention the E/I pair is similar in that it is also not a function pair per se, rather it describes orientation of energy (flow).