S vs N

[Weliddryn]

Just a few obvious things I was thinking about at one point or another.

Sensors focus on taking as much experiences/ sensations as possible, thus acquiring more than an intuitor. An intuitor focuses on the second part of the human knowledge processing functioning- after less data is acquired they exert their energies to compartmentalizing them and building structures of connections and understandings.

The sensor may be considered ignorant due to their lack of participation in contemplating the connections [even if this is not solely derived from reasoning, ie an intuitor may do research for the sole purpose of clarifying/finding a missing piece of the connections being formed in their mind] they ought not be considered ignorant in terms of experience.

The intuitor /is/ ignorant in terms of experience, however.

Is this the difference between naivette and ignorance?

Have you any further contemplations on these two functions and their usage, etc?

 

[sisyphushappy]

Socrates said "The unexamined life is not worth living". Probably an INTP, surely at least a rational (NT).

An extoverted sensing type might conclude that "the unlived life is not worth examining".

 

[Jaico]

I remember I once took an MBTI where S/N were instead termed facts/ideas. I think it's a fairly good way of getting the ideas across - whereas sensors usually don't have a lack of concrete, physical facts or experience, they usually can't grasp abstract ideas as well as intuitives. On the other hand, I think intuitives may not be grounded too much in reality, and, like you said, be lacking in 'hands-on' experience (we're too busy thinking and daydreaming!) That's my take on it, anyhow (and I'm not sure how correct/relevant it is, but...)

 

[Weliddryn]

I remember I once took an MBTI where S/N were instead termed facts/ideas. I think it's a fairly good way of getting the ideas across - whereas sensors usually don't have a lack of cC anyhow (and I'm not sure how correct/relevant it is, but...)

I suspect it would be mostly agreed that intuitors have more imagination/creativity than sensors, good point [reference to day dreaming].

Why exactly do humans day dream, however? It seems to be an exploration of possibilities, but has anyone further thoughts?

Thanks for your participation, both of you.

edit- it seems that I am describing S/NP`s as opposed to J`s as J`s wouldC anyhow (and I'm not sure how correct/relevant it is, but...)[/quote]

I suspect it would be mostly agreed that intuitors have more imagination/creativity than sensors, good point [reference to day dreaming].

Why exactly do humans day dream, however? It seems to be an exploration of possibilities, but has anyone further thoughts?

Thanks for your participation, both of you.

edit- it seems that I am describing S/NP`s as opposed to J`s as J`s would be more concerned about /doing/ something with their thoughts/experiences.

 

[Agent Intellect]

the way i have always kind of thought of it is:

Si - experience driven. they're the ones that know how to do things from having experienced it. people with Si will become very proficient at what they do. SJ's are the ones who'll become good at a skill very easily from practice. generally they have the motto of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.

Se - reductionists. these are the kind of people who, when they see a car, will think of all the constituent parts. they see the tree's instead of the forest. they enjoy things that are stimulating to the senses, which is why they are often called the experiencer's, because they're not satisfied with sitting around and talking about something, they want to get out and do it.

Ne - daydreamers. these are the people who when they see a car, think of all the possibilities, whether realistic or not. they might see how someone could turn it into a flying car, or a car with missile launchers, or any other outlandish thing. when they hear an idea, they immediately think of a better/different idea. they want to build onto whats already there, instead of settling for what is. while Si looks to the solid, fact based past for its inspiration, Ne looks to the future possibilities, the "could be's" for inspiration. their motto might be "what if..."

Ni - constructors. people with Ni are the ones that can make an efficient, cohesive theory or plan out of many seemingly unrelated things. while Ne is very divergent, going off on a bunch of tangents just to see how far it can go, Ni is more convergent, taking those tangents and eliminating whats unnecessary, and making whats necessary into something that works. i always think of House from the show "House" as an INTJ (dominant Ni), the way he sits and stares at the white board full of possibilities and ideas and has an epiphany, the theory falling into place and finally making sense. i've always pictured that as Ni at work. i know from reading the INTJ board, a lot of them seem to explain it as sort of 'knowing' something without actually knowing it; i see this function as what we often refer to as intuition. Ni is when one intuitively knows, or feels, something.

 

[Weliddryn]

Excellent, AI. Thanks for that.

 

[Wisp]

Brilliant, AI. That's the best description of Ne/Ni I've ever read. I'm totally ninja-ing that from you from now on; you have been warned!

 

[LucasM]

That helps explain why I don't enjoy chess that much. My Ni is way lower than my Ne and I just see possibilities and am frozen.

 

[fullerene]

An INTJ actually described Ni to me by using examples from chess. I never understood it at all until then... it just seemed like a name that psychologists gave to something that boxed mysticism up into sudden revelations and problem-solving dreams.

There are some basic strategies in chess--don't let your king trapped in a corner, try to control the center of the board, etc--as well as all the general rules of how the pieces can and can't move. If someone with strong Ni is a skilled chess player, and is presented with a game such as 3D chess, they will be able to gather the relevant details from their old chess strategy, adapt and apply them in the context of the new game's rules, and formulate a competent strategy almost effortlessly. It's an information gathering system on the deeper, underlying principles of some system.


I've been writing a lot of descriptions for cognitive functions, for another site that's putting together a wiki, so I recently went to INFJforum to ask them about Ni, and ENFPforum to ask them about Ne, and both very strongly agreed with (basically) what AI said up there, about Ni-convergence and Ne-divergence.

 

[Beat Mango]

I remember I once took an MBTI where S/N were instead termed facts/ideas. I think it's a fairly good way of getting the ideas across - whereas sensors usually don't have a lack of concrete, physical facts or experience, they usually can't grasp abstract ideas as well as intuitives. On the other hand, I think intuitives may not be grounded too much in reality, and, like you said, be lacking in 'hands-on' experience (we're too busy thinking and daydreaming!) That's my take on it, anyhow (and I'm not sure how correct/relevant it is, but...)

Yeah I like that distinction. Actually I can hardly stand it when people talk about facts, in fact it gives me actual anxiety, like my jaw clenches and I curse them in my head for how boring they are. I'm forced to have regular contact with a few fact-based people and the conversation is very difficult - I try to change the topic by saying something intuitive and you just get this blank look, followed by them changing the topic back to facts, things, and occurrences again. No interpretation or imagination involved. Ugh.

 

[Enne]

Hmm... what I wouldn't give at times for some strong Ni. The closest thing I can generate is a sort of artificial Ni in which I suspend multiple strands of 'Ne' thought streams and try to simultaneously find some sort of connecting link. @_@ Would <3 to be able to generate convergence on demand. Most of the time my head feels like a torrent of 'bookmarks' that make me seem alternatively dumber / weirder than I really am when I talk (unless it's a subject area/s where I have a strong Ti construct).