hey look guys, i'm psychic.

i knew obama would be president before november 4th.
 
saru said:
*sigh*


i have given up on this.

btw, he was making a joke. thus the ;)
Click to expand...

I assumed not. I see it as an example of Ne at work. There is no way to prove this. Nevertheless, Ne is about tangential patterns. Ne starts from a central event and expands on this. It seeks to find later links from this and see where the possibillites could lead. Generally getting further from the initial starting point to see where things lead. It generally does not seek to re-refrence the inital starting point. The initial idea you explained highlights this nature of Ne to extrapolate on things in a tangential pattern.
 
Lol, I'm not cold to the unknown at all, but at the same time, I don't buy into every conspiricy theory that comes my way, I don't pretend at all that I can predict the future, and I don't see dead people.

I'm interested in the unknown, but only as someone who's interested in all things human. ESP genuinely interests me as a possible stage of human evolution, so I read books on it, I have visited so-called psychic readers and done some research, but I've never taken it further than that.
 
saru said:
btw, he was making a joke. thus the ;)
Click to expand...
It looks like your so-called Ni failed to see through the appearance of the ";)" which was mocking the obvious example of Ne. :(

Woops, I almost made an accident. What if it really happend? What if I killed the people? Maybe they would have become ghosts. Or maybe they would've become zombies and an invasion would have started. Oh oops, I'm driving. xD

Ni doesn't think about random shit like that. That's Ne's job. :)
 
IndigoSensor said:
Ne starts from a central event and expands on this.
Click to expand...

Isn't Ni capable of taking a conclusion and expanding on it in a linear fashion of probable future events based off of the conclusion.

Ne: Central event --> possible extensions of an event or all the possibilities of what could have happened if an event took place. "X,Y or Z could have happened but it also could have been A or B".

Ni: Central event --> linear calculation of one possibility that is seen as most likely to happen by Ni. "After event happens, go to A, then A goes to B..."

These are what I understand to be a difference between Ni and Ne with imagining the future.
 
bickelz said:
Isn't Ni capable of taking a conclusion and expanding on it in a linear fashion of probable future events based off of the conclusion.

Ne: Central event --> possible extensions of an event or all the possibilities of what could have happened if an event took place. "X,Y or Z could have happened but it also could have been A or B".

Ni: Central event --> linear calculation of one possibility that is seen as most likely to happen by Ni. "After event happens, go to A, then A goes to B..."

These are what I understand to be a difference between Ni and Ne with imagining the future.
Click to expand...

It is, and this is accurate in the broad sense. It doesn't really differ Ne and Ni well though. It's the sight of the end-game that differs between the N functions. Ne must consider all options and all angles and expand on what happens. Ni seeks to centralize and uses the extrapolations to back up what has happened. In the example provided it's a bit hard to make the distinction between the two, but I see the process as being clear enough to say with some conviction that it would be an example of Ne.

I will explain this in more detail later. Typing long responses on the computer I am currently on is hard due to the spacebar being broken.
 
IndigoSensor said:
I assumed not. I see it as an example of Ne at work. There is no way to prove this. Nevertheless, Ne is about tangential patterns. Ne starts from a central event and expands on this. It seeks to find later links from this and see where the possibillites could lead. Generally getting further from the initial starting point to see where things lead. It generally does not seek to re-refrence the inital starting point. The initial idea you explained highlights this nature of Ne to extrapolate on things in a tangential pattern.
Click to expand...


no.

Royal said:
It looks like your so-called Ni failed to see through the appearance of the ";)" which was mocking the obvious example of Ne. :(

Woops, I almost made an accident. What if it really happend? What if I killed the people? Maybe they would have become ghosts. Or maybe they would've become zombies and an invasion would have started. Oh oops, I'm driving. xD

Ni doesn't think about random shit like that. That's Ne's job. :)
Click to expand...

Or you're ne assumed my ni fail was on accident, and not a purposeful thing to disguise the fact I'm really a black rapper.


bickelz said:
Isn't Ni capable of taking a conclusion and expanding on it in a linear fashion of probable future events based off of the conclusion.

Ne: Central event --> possible extensions of an event or all the possibilities of what could have happened if an event took place. "X,Y or Z could have happened but it also could have been A or B".

Ni: Central event --> linear calculation of one possibility that is seen as most likely to happen by Ni. "After event happens, go to A, then A goes to B..."

These are what I understand to be a difference between Ni and Ne with imagining the future.
Click to expand...


I agree with this post.


Btw people, infjs have ne. VUT. yup.

anyways, I don't have Ne and anyone who thinks I do honestly eitehr doesn't know me, or doesn't know crap. which ever is a closer blood relative.


Both N functions ask a what-if type thing, but the way they go about it is way different.

Ne seeks fulfillment of its reach.

Ni seeks understanding of its reach.

Ne says "i have gone as far as I can now, that is fine if I don't see one truth, because that was not my goal."

Ni says "i have gone as far as I can now, I pick apart all of these until I find the one truth. BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTH."


off topic, but i fucking hate ambiguity.

edit: btw guys, lets not get too off topic on proving I'm really a P and not a J, thanks.

also: i really hate ambiguity and intp "omg theres too many truths out there to pick one" crap.



also also: Ni jokes mock things of this world, Ne doesn't. use that as a litmus test if you need a real world example.
 
saru said:
off topic, but i fucking hate ambiguity.
Click to expand...

This might be because I'm more of a Pish J but I'm ok with a lot of ambiguity just because I've come to realize that some things you just have to accept.

The thing that I hate is when there are no conclusions though. There were a few times in philosophy of religion where the prof went over these long arguments that took a couple of hours to draw out and yet came to the no conclusion conclusion. What a waste. Why even publish something so long. Just say you can't friggin' decide because, at the very least, that would be honest.
 
bickelz said:
This might be because I'm more of a Pish J but I'm ok with a lot of ambiguity just because I've come to realize that some things you just have to accept.

The thing that I hate is when there are no conclusions though. There were a few times in philosophy of religion where the prof went over these long arguments that took a couple of hours to draw out and yet came to the no conclusion conclusion. What a waste. Why even publish something so long. Just say you can't friggin' decide because, at the very least, that would be honest.
Click to expand...

yea. I think thats what I was trying to say? idk im so tired right now, i think pretty soon I'ma pass out on my keyboard. damn ketamine.
 
saru said:
no.
Click to expand...

Ok, what exactly do you disagree with this?

saru said:
Btw people, infjs have ne. VUT. yup.
Click to expand...

No, INFJ's do not use Ne in the theory of jungian cognitive functions. All SP and NJ types work on the Se/Ni axis and do not use Si/Ne at all. This goes counter to cognitive theory due to the fact that Si and Ni do similar things indifferent manners. Further, Ne and Se do similar things in different manners. Saying someone crosses into both axis is like taking two gears, putting them together, and expecting them to both turn clockwise while hooked together.

If you do think that INFJ's do have Ne, then please explain how it is actively used, and how it can subistute in place of Ni and or Se, and how using this does not break down the theory of cognitive functions.

saru said:
Ne seeks fulfillment of its reach.

Ni seeks understanding of its reach.

Ne says "i have gone as far as I can now, that is fine if I don't see one truth, because that was not my goal."

Ni says "i have gone as far as I can now, I pick apart all of these until I find the one truth. BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTH."
Click to expand...

This is ok for explaining Ne and Ni in a brief sentance.
 
IndigoSensor said:
Ok, what exactly do you disagree with this?



No, INFJ's do not use Ne in the theory of jungian cognitive functions. All SP and NJ types work on the Se/Ni axis and do not use Si/Ne at all. This goes counter to cognitive theory due to the fact that Si and Ni do similar things indifferent manners. Further, Ne and Se do similar things in different manners. Saying someone crosses into both axis is like taking two gears, putting them together, and expecting them to both turn clockwise while hooked together.

If you do think that INFJ's do have Ne, then please explain how it is actively used, and how it can subistute in place of Ni and or Se, and how using this does not break down the theory of cognitive functions.



This is ok for explaining Ne and Ni in a brief sentance.
Click to expand...


I just didn't really want to pick a part that post, but I agreed with your definition of Ne in a sense, but it was a bit too much textbook for me. ;0

And I'm referencing this:

http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16types.html

I agree with this chart at the bottom, that every type uses every function.

@Last pot shot - thanks. and yeah I was using a brief sentence. Kinda the point, i like things to be concise. Which some people might doubt due to my posts being endless edits, but regardless, we can't really know anything in this world.


Btw ima reiterate people: lets try and keep this remotely on topic. Ni and Ne both make connections, but Ni says "THE END IS NEAR ! HURRAY!" Ne says "THE JOURNEY IS NEVER ENDING! HURRAY!"
also i really dislike ambiguity. though I don't mind philosophy, pro sleep time and easy test time is so pro fo sho like a mo fo yu kno'?
 
All the functional order means is the way you prefer to use them. Anyone can be skilled in using any type.


In fact, I know for a fact m Ne and Si is more developed than most, but its not preferred. Goddamn household consisting of enfp, entp, istj, isfj, esfj and intj. good lord my intj brother is a breath of fresh air.
 
Actually as you get older, it;s supposed to be way harder to determine your type because the CF's sort of balance out in a way. Not completely evenly but enough to make it hard to identify your type.
 
That is true, I see the cognitive functions to be displayed in stages of life. Which makes sense why our S population becomes so rebellious in their teenage/midlife years, their N really comes into play and F's with them.


But thats just a theory.


or is it?
 
I mean that depends on the person... I believe that it may increase Si and Ne. (Neuro that why i'm like that.... you know what.) although I'd say Si>Ne. Not in a way of details, but things reminding you of things reminding you of things etc. Which, is what I've garnered from Si.



i have a sociology test in 5 hours. ima go ni-ni, so bye bye
 
bickelz said:
Itbm my dstp?
Click to expand...
idk my bff jill

On topic, I would attribute at least some of what Saru touched on in the OP to NF idealism (especially after all the flattering type descriptions that dance around the word psychic with this type). How much, I have no idea. It most likely varies from person to person.
 
I'm just here to say, saru, you're an ENTP, stop claiming to be INFJ. You are not an INFJ.

Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top