k9b4
Banned
Would it be accurate to say that intuition is paying attention to your thoughts, and sensing is paying attention to reality?
-
OK, it's on.
Trying to understand intuition vs sensing
- Thread starter k9b4
- Start date
BigApplePi
Banned
- Local time
- Today 6:04 AM
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 8,984
The way I see it is intuition is taking in the whole picture all at once. It doesn't have to be about thoughts. Sensing is taking in particulars via the senses or memory. Sometimes our senses deceive us so that would not be real.
Sensing focuses; intuition is the opposite. Both inform.
Red myst
Abstract Utilitiarian
I used to think so, but I am not so sure now. You are probably trying to figure out weather you are intp or istp? I am almost always paying more attention to my thoughts than reality which lead me to think this was intuition, but I think it is more of a result of Se working in tandem with Ti. I will be interested in how others answer you question.
nanook
a scream in a vortex
>Would it be accurate to say that intuition is paying attention to your thoughts, and sensing is paying attention to reality?
Sounds like introversion and extroversion. (Though i would not use the exact formulation to explain introversion and extroversion)
>I see intuition as spiritual
Sounds like an idealization of tertiatry Ni. Actually, Ni is also the demonstrative function of types with axillary Ne. Anyhow, Ni seems spiritual due to it's subjectivity. But it's not spiritual. It's just human. And crazy. Because humans are.
Sounds like introversion and extroversion. (Though i would not use the exact formulation to explain introversion and extroversion)
>I see intuition as spiritual
Sounds like an idealization of tertiatry Ni. Actually, Ni is also the demonstrative function of types with axillary Ne. Anyhow, Ni seems spiritual due to it's subjectivity. But it's not spiritual. It's just human. And crazy. Because humans are.
nanook
a scream in a vortex
>The way I see it is intuition is taking in the whole picture all at once.
It can be a concern with the whole picture at once, but the whole picture is your whole knowledge about and understanding of the situation you are confronted with or you are wondering about. You are not taking that in, at this very moment.
Sensation is the new and obvious knowledge and understanding that can be formed from the concrete sensual information. (Or the exact detailed revisiting of whatever understanding was formed in the past)
Hence, if you are Intuitive about what happens around you (you seemingly take in the whole picture), Sensation and Intuition must work together very well. Intuition must digest the very latest understanding. Which happens occasionally.
But intuitives, especially introverted ones, are often momentarily sensotared (retarded about sensing), because their intuition is busy mostly processing an inner stream of cognition. That's why intuitives tend to suck at bureaucracy or sports where you have to take in the environment and respond shallowly, like a ball game, but can be relatively good at creativity or sports where you direct your familiar self through deep intention, like problem solving or skateboarding, figure dancing.
But grasping what intuition and sensation do as a process or experience is very difficult and can only be an example, because perception is simply 50% or your consciousness, at all times. So it's appears in a lot of different ways.
More simply speaking, all perception is the creation of understanding of objects, from stimuli.
And the more difficult part to grasp is the navigation within this understanding. Association and such.
When i was using the word understanding in the first paragraph I was referring to a comprehension of what is at an exact moment or what is happening in general. It's entirely different form thinking, which is understanding of steps of manipulation of what is. Thinking does not understand anything, except itself. Other understanding comes from visualisation, comprehension of what is. That is perception.
Sensation creates concrete, no I shall say static objects, like table, chair or the number six, or like pressure or cold. You see, six is already abstract. Sensation can form abstractions, contrary to what some people claim. A green man as seen on traffic lamps is a sensation abstraction. It's solid, static. And pressure is invisible. Sensation can be invisible, although people sometimes claim that "intuition is a concern with the invisible (they mean non-obvious)" but sensation is simply static.
Intuition forms dynamic objects or comprehensions. Like acceleration. Growth. Transcendence. Symbiosis. Intuitions are not tangible, although what they are concerned with can be tangible. You can seemingly feel acceleration, but actually you just believe that you do. In reality you feel pressure and a change of pressure. The change is comprehended as object through Intuition. You know what's happening.
Intuitives and Sensors who act in the world can seem similar, since during action both must uses Sensation and Intuition at once, but their inner comprehension of and language about what they are doing will be somewhat different, since to the intuitive the dynamic aspects are most obvious and relevant and to the sensor the static aspects leave the most impression.
Also their interests can differ or the motivations that drive their interests. A sensor may be interested in biology out of a desire to know and understand the world he lives in, an intuitive may be interested in biology out of fascination with growth, birth, live, evolution. The result might be exactly the same, a plain scholarship of biology, or maybe the sensor will spend more time indexing plants and the intuitive may spend more time understanding the life of maybe just a single plant.
My understanding of typology is very intuitive, so i have no idea, what i am talking about
But i love it. I don't fear the lack of solid facts at all.
It can be a concern with the whole picture at once, but the whole picture is your whole knowledge about and understanding of the situation you are confronted with or you are wondering about. You are not taking that in, at this very moment.
Sensation is the new and obvious knowledge and understanding that can be formed from the concrete sensual information. (Or the exact detailed revisiting of whatever understanding was formed in the past)
Hence, if you are Intuitive about what happens around you (you seemingly take in the whole picture), Sensation and Intuition must work together very well. Intuition must digest the very latest understanding. Which happens occasionally.
But intuitives, especially introverted ones, are often momentarily sensotared (retarded about sensing), because their intuition is busy mostly processing an inner stream of cognition. That's why intuitives tend to suck at bureaucracy or sports where you have to take in the environment and respond shallowly, like a ball game, but can be relatively good at creativity or sports where you direct your familiar self through deep intention, like problem solving or skateboarding, figure dancing.
But grasping what intuition and sensation do as a process or experience is very difficult and can only be an example, because perception is simply 50% or your consciousness, at all times. So it's appears in a lot of different ways.
More simply speaking, all perception is the creation of understanding of objects, from stimuli.
And the more difficult part to grasp is the navigation within this understanding. Association and such.
When i was using the word understanding in the first paragraph I was referring to a comprehension of what is at an exact moment or what is happening in general. It's entirely different form thinking, which is understanding of steps of manipulation of what is. Thinking does not understand anything, except itself. Other understanding comes from visualisation, comprehension of what is. That is perception.
Sensation creates concrete, no I shall say static objects, like table, chair or the number six, or like pressure or cold. You see, six is already abstract. Sensation can form abstractions, contrary to what some people claim. A green man as seen on traffic lamps is a sensation abstraction. It's solid, static. And pressure is invisible. Sensation can be invisible, although people sometimes claim that "intuition is a concern with the invisible (they mean non-obvious)" but sensation is simply static.
Intuition forms dynamic objects or comprehensions. Like acceleration. Growth. Transcendence. Symbiosis. Intuitions are not tangible, although what they are concerned with can be tangible. You can seemingly feel acceleration, but actually you just believe that you do. In reality you feel pressure and a change of pressure. The change is comprehended as object through Intuition. You know what's happening.
Intuitives and Sensors who act in the world can seem similar, since during action both must uses Sensation and Intuition at once, but their inner comprehension of and language about what they are doing will be somewhat different, since to the intuitive the dynamic aspects are most obvious and relevant and to the sensor the static aspects leave the most impression.
Also their interests can differ or the motivations that drive their interests. A sensor may be interested in biology out of a desire to know and understand the world he lives in, an intuitive may be interested in biology out of fascination with growth, birth, live, evolution. The result might be exactly the same, a plain scholarship of biology, or maybe the sensor will spend more time indexing plants and the intuitive may spend more time understanding the life of maybe just a single plant.
My understanding of typology is very intuitive, so i have no idea, what i am talking about
But i love it. I don't fear the lack of solid facts at all.nanook
a scream in a vortex
Actually, i'm just reconsidering one aspect of my view. I was stating that sensation is forming a static comprehension of objects first and intuition is analysing the dynamic aspect later, from comparing several snapshots of static comprehension. If this is happening like this, intuition must happen after sensation. And it's probably happening. But something else may be happening as well. It may be possible, to form a comprehension of change or of the dynamic qualities of pure and raw neurological impulses, which have not yet been translated into static comprehensions via the sensation function. For instance, if you feel it coming. Not the orgasm, the insight! Perhaps introverted (subjective) intuition is more like this, more independent from pre-gathered sensation. It creates a lot of comprehension that seems to be metaphorical of how consciousness works. Perhaps introverted (subjective) sensation is the ductus of pre-gathered sensation. Hence why introverted intuition would work side by side with extroverted intuition and extroverted intuition side by side with introverted intuition. But i don't know man, i have tons of comprehension of how consciousness works and i'm currently assuming that i use extroverted intuition, so something does not fit together, in my understanding.
WALKYRIA
Well-Known Member
- Local time
- Today 11:04 AM
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2013
- Messages
- 505
I don't know either... but I would guess that sensing is about the here and the now; and not the tomorrow or the yesterday. About the conventional understanding and the material object rather than the ideas/ feelings/ memories associated to the object.
I still can't accurately say when someone is intuitive or not; especially with girls... Girls intuition is not as loud as ours, especially Ni users( which is quieter than Ne I guess) . I mean, if you see me, you instantly get that something is odd or off with me; especially if it's first encounter... That is intuition. You get that the interaction will somehow differ from normal and that you will somehow have to extra-work if you want to get to know me or have good communication. I don't even mean to be like that; I'm just weird; and especially so with brand new situations and people.
For me intuition is also about what something might hypothetically be... but maybe that's Ne. Seeing possibilities where there is none. Creating opportunities.
Intuition is also about guessing; about fuzzy logic; about pattern spotting; about a probabilistic approach to life. That's again Ne... That's why for us to grow you need to put yourself in a multitude and variable situations and shoes; so that newt time you'r like: "I've been there, done that.. uzzy baby !"
Again, Ni is weird, I dn't get it very much(maybe because it' introverted and thus quieter) ... I don't know many INTJ or INFJ.. but my guess is that they look smart but without the whimsy associated with Ne users ( because ya know Te and Fe are more acceptable than crazy Ne) . I find them to be more linear, which renders it more difficult to differentiate with smart sensors( STJ) ; but I don't know. That's just another Ne guess. Curiously, I think Ne attracts Ni and vice versa.
I still can't accurately say when someone is intuitive or not; especially with girls... Girls intuition is not as loud as ours, especially Ni users( which is quieter than Ne I guess) . I mean, if you see me, you instantly get that something is odd or off with me; especially if it's first encounter... That is intuition. You get that the interaction will somehow differ from normal and that you will somehow have to extra-work if you want to get to know me or have good communication. I don't even mean to be like that; I'm just weird; and especially so with brand new situations and people.
For me intuition is also about what something might hypothetically be... but maybe that's Ne. Seeing possibilities where there is none. Creating opportunities.
Intuition is also about guessing; about fuzzy logic; about pattern spotting; about a probabilistic approach to life. That's again Ne... That's why for us to grow you need to put yourself in a multitude and variable situations and shoes; so that newt time you'r like: "I've been there, done that.. uzzy baby !"
Again, Ni is weird, I dn't get it very much(maybe because it' introverted and thus quieter) ... I don't know many INTJ or INFJ.. but my guess is that they look smart but without the whimsy associated with Ne users ( because ya know Te and Fe are more acceptable than crazy Ne) . I find them to be more linear, which renders it more difficult to differentiate with smart sensors( STJ) ; but I don't know. That's just another Ne guess. Curiously, I think Ne attracts Ni and vice versa.
Base groove
Banned
- Local time
- Today 4:04 AM
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,864
Intuition is a function that perceives patterns, connections, relationships, and possibilities between objects and ideas.
Sensation is a function that perceives forms, objects, utility, opportunities for action, and real-time interpretation.
The attitude of extraversion and introversion will apply to one and the other of course.
Ne, due to its extraverted attitude, is inclined to discover novelties or potential, particularly in an attempt to unravel more novelties or potential. Ne is the function that opens every door and every door within.
I think it's fair to look at both of the extraverted perception processes as being "sensation-seeking", with Se it is about intensity of perception, and being a part of the intensity too. It's a total focus on the environment, on the world around you, and there basically is no you, except you as a part of the world. The more intensely this sensation can be achieved, the more stimulated the psyche becomes by Se.
Ne is sensation seeking as well, but the purpose is to discover novel sensations that lead to high potential situations for increasing novelty. So Ne's only concern is what it means in a sense, not what it is. You can expect the same sort of extraversion that you see in Se but it's not going to be oriented to the same style of perceptions at all.
Sensation is a function that perceives forms, objects, utility, opportunities for action, and real-time interpretation.
The attitude of extraversion and introversion will apply to one and the other of course.
Ne, due to its extraverted attitude, is inclined to discover novelties or potential, particularly in an attempt to unravel more novelties or potential. Ne is the function that opens every door and every door within.
I think it's fair to look at both of the extraverted perception processes as being "sensation-seeking", with Se it is about intensity of perception, and being a part of the intensity too. It's a total focus on the environment, on the world around you, and there basically is no you, except you as a part of the world. The more intensely this sensation can be achieved, the more stimulated the psyche becomes by Se.
Ne is sensation seeking as well, but the purpose is to discover novel sensations that lead to high potential situations for increasing novelty. So Ne's only concern is what it means in a sense, not what it is. You can expect the same sort of extraversion that you see in Se but it's not going to be oriented to the same style of perceptions at all.
Red myst
Abstract Utilitiarian
Yes, paying attention to your thoughts does sound like introversion, but what function? I would guess Ti, but does it depend on what your thoughts are about? If a stray dog crosses my field of vision and my thoughts immediately turn to wondering how many stray dogs there are in the city, is that Ne? If I have a flashback to a moment in time when I used to have a dog, is that Si? If I immediately want to befriend it, is that Fe? If I immediately think how irresponsible it is to let your pet roam free, is that Fi? If I immediately look around to see if there is an the owner is nearby is that Te?
And if I write a post like this, does it look like something that was birthed through a perceiving or a judging function?
StevenM
beep
- Local time
- Today 6:04 AM
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,077
I've always thought of both the N and S being the perceiving functions, which then passes over to the F and T which formulates decisions and judgement.
N being 'meanings', and abstract things, and S being tangible concrete things.
For example, a girl smiles at you while playing with her hair.
S perceives her eyes, mouth, her hair, and how she is playing with it.
N perceives the abstract things, like her happiness, confidence, love, beauty.
Then you use your judging functions to conclude that she is flirting with you.
N being 'meanings', and abstract things, and S being tangible concrete things.
For example, a girl smiles at you while playing with her hair.
S perceives her eyes, mouth, her hair, and how she is playing with it.
N perceives the abstract things, like her happiness, confidence, love, beauty.
Then you use your judging functions to conclude that she is flirting with you.
Red myst
Abstract Utilitiarian
I would think N would explore the possible meanings of her actions, and the judging function would make a determination. Determine that she is flirting with you before examining the context of the situation an possible alternatives to the reason for her actions seem like it would be skipping right over N.
Sent from my Encore using Tapatalk
StevenM
beep
- Local time
- Today 6:04 AM
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,077
Yes, I see what you mean. I had N as finding meanings before I edited my post multiple times. So at first, I was also thinking the same thing.
But then I wondered if finding meanings behind what we perceive could be more of what the judging functions do.
Red myst
Abstract Utilitiarian
So basically the wheels of possibilities were still spinning when your judging function said "post it already damn it!!!". Lol! If so, I can relate. I do it all the time. I am still trying to understand it all myself.
Sent from my Encore using Tapatalk
The best way I have seen it explained is probability waves (N) vs. concrete matter (S). If you have taken some introductory courses in physics, it's easy to see the analogy. Some demonstrative pictures in the second part of this article.
StevenM
beep
- Local time
- Today 6:04 AM
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,077
I was certainly claiming something radical when I stated gathering "the meaning" of something was more part of a judgement function. After all, the whole definition of intuition is getting a general idea, meaning, or understanding of something without any process of reasoning.
I still wonder though if the world is actually a cube, rather than a sphere...
I still wonder though if the world is actually a cube, rather than a sphere...
Architect
Professional INTP
- Local time
- Today 4:04 AM
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2010
- Messages
- 6,691
Sensing is having the ability to process lots of sensory data. Put differently, having a high tolerance for sensory data. Intuition is the lack of strong ability to process sensory data, or having a low tolerance for it. The brain seeks input, so in the absence of data for the Intuitive the brain goes elsewhere, i.e. the unconscious.
This implies that all Intuitive dominants are "Highly Sensitive People" to one degree or the other. Having a high Thinking function attunes you less to sensory data, a high Feeling function attunes you more. So, an INFJ (Ni-Fe) is more attuned to the outside world (via Fe) than an INTP (Ti-Ne), who ideally sits outside and observes via Ne.
This implies that all Intuitive dominants are "Highly Sensitive People" to one degree or the other. Having a high Thinking function attunes you less to sensory data, a high Feeling function attunes you more. So, an INFJ (Ni-Fe) is more attuned to the outside world (via Fe) than an INTP (Ti-Ne), who ideally sits outside and observes via Ne.
scorpiomover
The little professor
- Local time
- Today 11:04 AM
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,383
Back in Jung's time in Old Europe, the majority followed conventional wisdom, conventional methods and conventional science of their day. When they would advance methods, science and traditions, it was by careful and slow extension of existing traditions, methods and science. Significant challenges to the status quo would usually be dismissed and ignored.
A small minority were highly creative thinkers who often came up with new ideas of their own, that went against conventional wisdom, tradition, methods and scientific consensus of their day. Some of their ideas turned out to be pure genius and established massive breakthroughs. Some of their ideas seemed to be totally nuts. They didn't seem to distinguish between their crazy ideas and their genius ideas. In addition, these geniuses tended to show high levels of emotional instability. thus leading to the old common expression of a "tortured genius".
A small minority were highly creative thinkers who often came up with new ideas of their own, that went against conventional wisdom, tradition, methods and scientific consensus of their day. Some of their ideas turned out to be pure genius and established massive breakthroughs. Some of their ideas seemed to be totally nuts. They didn't seem to distinguish between their crazy ideas and their genius ideas. In addition, these geniuses tended to show high levels of emotional instability. thus leading to the old common expression of a "tortured genius".
Red myst
Abstract Utilitiarian
http://www.quixoteconsulting.com/News_articles/Topics/sensing_intuition.html
^^^^^This Might Help^^^^^^^
^^^^^This Might Help^^^^^^^