Intuition - Origin and Definition

[hush]

To your point @hush the trauma has to acknowledged and dealt with before a person can maximize intuitive capability. If they don’t come to terms with it then they will forever be slave to the pain, fear, and irrational thoughts and choices. This in turn will be a flawed intuition about the experiences encountered in the world

Honestly, I feel like this has been my exact experience. It took me a long time to realize I was coming from a place of trauma though, perhaps a little too long. Had to do some rather lengthy self-examination. I could see how my intuition has been twisted and warped to support negative perceptions and conclusions. It doesn't provide clarity in this state - it muddles matters even more. I haven't been able to progress and move forward without moments of understanding like this. But I do still have a lot of work to do, in this regard

Particularly at 3am when I’d rather be asleep than analysing what went wrong with something I said 20 years ago .

This sounds like me every moment that I'm conscious perhaps even when I'm not. Unsafe from my own mind even in my dreams, contorted into nightmares. I'll replay every little detail of a conversation. Go over text exchanges 5 times to make sure I didn't err, then maybe return for a 6th time just to be safe

MBTI measures preference not capacity.

I think I have encountered this issue throughout my journey, especially when trying to do tests and such related to my type. There have been many times where I feel like I have a strong preference for something, but I'm lacking capacity for it in some way. I'm not sure what to say about my capacity for S, only that it's embarrassing and I would rather be more well-rounded

 

[TomasM]

I'm not sure what to say about my capacity for S, only that it's embarrassing and I would rather be more well-rounded

I don’t think we have much control over the capacity for S. At least mostly don’t. For example, I have a friend that is a super-taster and can taste subtle differences in things - I can’t do that. The same can be said for super-smeller or the brilliance one can perceive in a beautiful day. All of the senses are on a spectrum and I believe intuition is a sense that similarity has its own spectrum. However, the intuition spectrum, unlike the sensory, can often develop to a higher capacity when the sensory functions are impaired. This is very similar to a blind person developing better hearing as a means to overcome their handicap.

On this site I have noticed a larger than normal number of ND’s and that this state is aligned with the autism spectrum. I tend to correlate this with a degraded sensory capacity and a higher level of intuition. I think this is true for NF’s and NT’s. As we progress deeper into the autism spectrum I’m starting to see a greater capacity for intuitive awareness with some having what appears to be a supernatural capability (look at the telepathy tapes - previous page.) Though these people appear to have highly developed “inner awareness,” they are also burdened by their sensory malfunction.

I think our control over the sensory is limited to our ability to maintain good health within the confines of our genetics. I sometimes wonder if there is anyone that gets to have it all (high sensory, intuition, thinking, feeling) because that would be an evolution in the species that should be nurtured - not that everyone else shouldn’t. It would be a super individual with the potential for creating incredible outcomes.

 

[Wyote]

Agree it's an important differentiation between capacity and preference
Though perhaps functions work a bit like IQ, in the capacitive sense
High capacity in one area generally means an overall higher capacity in all
That's not to say there isn't a lot of variance, just a general way of looking at it perhaps
You can't "have it all" but you can maybe have overall higher capacity
Or just one super strong area
It's difficult to know one's own capacity in a true sense, as it is comparative
What might feel like an absence of an area may be just an overshadowing by a stronger area

But also it may not really be intended to be capacitative at all

 

[TomasM]

High capacity in one area generally means an overall higher capacity in all

Perhaps a higher collective capacity but not necessarily individual or single capacity (one side of a dichotomy). The people I have known that have highly developed IQ (thinking), EQ (feeling), and intuition always seem to have impaired sensory. I only know one (maybe two) that also had the sensory and it always seems to create a self destructive state in some way. It’s as if turning on the firehouse from all of those capacities creates an overload that is too much to cognitively manage effectively. Anxiety, depression and other mental disorders appear to start manifesting within the individual.

Still, I find myself rooting for that underdog.

 

[AkarItaly]

I don’t think we have much control over the capacity for S. At least mostly don’t. For example, I have a friend that is a super-taster and can taste subtle differences in things - I can’t do that. The same can be said for super-smeller or the brilliance one can perceive in a beautiful day. All of the senses are on a spectrum and I believe intuition is a sense that similarity has its own spectrum. However, the intuition spectrum, unlike the sensory, can often develop to a higher capacity when the sensory functions are impaired. This is very similar to a blind person developing better hearing as a means to overcome their handicap.

On this site I have noticed a larger than normal number of ND’s and that this state is aligned with the autism spectrum. I tend to correlate this with a degraded sensory capacity and a higher level of intuition. I think this is true for NF’s and NT’s. As we progress deeper into the autism spectrum I’m starting to see a greater capacity for intuitive awareness with some having what appears to be a supernatural capability (look at the telepathy tapes - previous page.) Though these people appear to have highly developed “inner awareness,” they are also burdened by their sensory malfunction.

Forgive me for saying so, but I think you should expand your concept of 'S'. What you are describing are the biological characteristics of a person.

A person can have impaired 'hardware' (biology) while still possessing a highly disciplined 'software' (cognitive Sensing) that seeks order and presence in the physical world. Confusing sensory overload or biological hypersensitivity with the cognitive function of Sensing limits the understanding of how we actually integrate reality.


-Giammarco

 

[TomasM]

Forgive me for saying so, but I think you should expand your concept of 'S'. What you are describing are the biological characteristics of a person.

A person can have impaired 'hardware' (biology) while still possessing a highly disciplined 'software' (cognitive Sensing) that seeks order and presence in the physical world. Confusing sensory overload or biological hypersensitivity with the cognitive function of Sensing limits the understanding of how we actually integrate reality.


-Giammarco

Yes, there is a difference in the sensory input (biological) and the sensing cognitive processing. The two are however linked because someone who has an increased input from the senses will generally have a greater capacity for processing the tangible and real in the now.

I was once in a relationship with a high sensory input and sensing temperament. She was an ESTJ and together the complimentary of the two was enhancing to a high degree. She didn’t have the intuitive but she could process high levels of sensory input rapidly and when we were out these two states would play off one another such that she could rapidly assess through sensory awareness, communicate it, and then I would intuitively process it to identify future outcomes.

So you’re right but it’s not isolated from the biological. The biological is enhancing it.

People who have diminished sensory input are more likely to lean on (preference) their intuitive cognitive processing.

 

[Wyote]

Chicken or egg scenario strikes again

 

[hush]

I find the idea of diminished sensory input interesting because INFJs are often found to be HSPs. This is the opposite of diminished sensory input - you're hyperaware of and have a heightened sensitivity to sensory input. How does this fit into the picture?

 

[AkarItaly]

Yes, there is a difference in the sensory input (biological) and the sensing cognitive processing. The two are however linked because someone who has an increased input from the senses will generally have a greater capacity for processing the tangible and real in the now.

I was once in a relationship with a high sensory input and sensing temperament. She was an ESTJ and together the complimentary of the two was enhancing to a high degree. She didn’t have the intuitive but she could process high levels of sensory input rapidly and when we were out these two states would play off one another such that she could rapidly assess through sensory awareness, communicate it, and then I would intuitively process it to identify future outcomes.

So you’re right but it’s not isolated from the biological. The biological is enhancing it.

People who have diminished sensory input are more likely to lean on (preference) their intuitive cognitive processing.

I don’t mean to be rude, but I must stay analytical: I respectfully disagree with the idea that higher input equals higher capacity. It’s a bit like saying all left-handed people are more intelligent—>it’s a correlation that doesn’t describe the totality. Your ex girlfriend's case is a great example, it doesn't represent the whole spectrum of her type.

In my view, true 'Sensing' as a function,is the ability to subtract that noise to find the essentiality of the object. It’s not about how much you 'receive' (biology), but about how much you can 'order' (cognition). As a woodworker, I don't need 'super-vision' to make a perfect joint; I need a mind that forces the physical matter to align with a precise, internal logical grid.

High biological input doesn't always translate into better cognitive Sensing. In many cases, an 'overflow' of sensory data (like hyperesthesia) creates noise, not clarity.

-Giammarco

 

[hush]

In my view, true 'Sensing' as a function,is the ability to subtract that noise to find the essentiality of the object.

I was just about to write something like this, but you beat me to it. In my mind, sensing is mastery over that input. I think of an Se-dom as a master of the senses. The body and the natural world as both their paint and canvas

 

[TomasM]

High biological input doesn't always translate into better cognitive Sensing. In many cases, an 'overflow' of sensory data (like hyperesthesia) creates noise, not clarity.

We could disagree with each other but we won’t get anywhere because MBTI doesn’t account for capacity - and that was what I was saying originally.

With respect to my past SO it didn’t create noise and she was proficient at processing sensory input. Of course she was a highly intelligent T so the blending starts to occur and that makes it even more difficult to ascertain truth.

What you’re suggesting is that noise is introduced and the processing becomes more difficult. I think this is an individual experience without measured capacity. Because MBTI doesn’t measure capacity it can’t definitively state what you’re suggesting.

I’m speaking from intuitive observation that extends out from the mean (S-N) and more towards two or more standard deviations. I’m looking at more specific extreme cases to put forth the hypothesis. MBTI can’t be relied on without including capacity and that’s why I’m forced to look at it from a different perspective.

 

[hush]

Pardon me, just some thoughts, but I wonder if the preference for intuition is what leads to difficulty with processing sensory input. You have less experience with it because your perceptions are focused on different data, so when you engage with it, you're a bit clumsy. It's not that I don't notice the world when I'm focused on it, it's just that I'm often not focused on it because I'm lost in my thoughts

Imagine someone being focused on their senses 75% of the time, their intuition 25% of the time. Compared to someone focused on intuition 75% of the time, senses 25% of the time. One of the two is going to be much more comfortable with handling those senses, whereas the other might be more overwhelmed when they're put in that position. It's sort of like putting a basketball player on a soccer field. Might end up with a soccer ball to the face and a skinned knee

 

[AkarItaly]

We could disagree with each other but we won’t get anywhere because MBTI doesn’t account for capacity - and that was what I was saying originally.

With respect to my past SO it didn’t create noise and she was proficient at processing sensory input. Of course she was a highly intelligent T so the blending starts to occur and that makes it even more difficult to ascertain truth.

What you’re suggesting is that noise is introduced and the processing becomes more difficult. I think this is an individual experience without measured capacity. Because MBTI doesn’t measure capacity it can’t definitively state what you’re suggesting.

I’m speaking from intuitive observation that extends out from the mean (S-N) and more towards two or more standard deviations. I’m looking at more specific extreme cases to put forth the hypothesis. MBTI can’t be relied on without including capacity and that’s why I’m forced to look at it from a different perspective.

I agree that MBTI doesn't measure 'capacity', but that’s precisely because it’s a model of cognitive orientation, not raw processing power.
Sensing exists to provide an anchor, not just to collect volume. Even in 'extreme cases' (standard deviations), a high capacity for sensory input without the cognitive 'will' to order it remains biological noise, not a structured experience of reality.
Using your logic, a camera with 40-megapixel sensor is inherently a better photographer than a human with a 12-megapixel eye. It’s a fallacy. The 'truth' of Sensing isn't in the raw volume of the input, but in the discipline of the output.
I believe it is precisely through the clash of ideas that we grow. In my view, questioning one's own theory is what ultimately strengthens it.
I’m not looking to attack your theory as much as I am searching for insights for a constructive debate.

-Giammarco.

 

[TomasM]

I wasn’t looking for a debate and I’m not really looking to MBTI as a foundation for the origin of intuition. MBTI or specifically Jung tying intuition and sensing was a starting point but it was never really anything that I saw as a foundation for better identifying intuition and consciousness. It was only Jung’s genius that gives it merit so I reflect on it occasionally. I don’t believe Jung fully understood what intuition was but he was certainly way ahead of his time when it came to identifying and orienting it within a somewhat rudimentary set of attributes.

I’m also not developing a theory. It’s more of an analysis by looking at what science and case studies offer. I believe there are a higher number of intuitives in this environment and within this discussion there is more likely to be an understanding through shared experience. I don’t care who uses the information so if it helps derive something within or outside of this environment then that is a plus in my book. It’s open source development and the end result helps anyone that wants to further understand intuition as it pertains to their own identity and life experience.

If people disagree then that’s perfectly fine and I’m certainly not offended. I do sometimes come across as overly direct so if it feels personal then just know that it’s not personal on my side.

I value anyone who wants to add to the discussion and really don’t mind if it extends into the fringes of consciousness - because it has and I do think it’s all relevant.

 

[hush]

I'm not sure if it feels like a debate to me, just an exploration of ideas, sharing different thoughts and perspectives. I enjoyed the conversation and had a good time hearing from everyone : )

I think having more minds participating in these discussions leads to greater and more thorough understanding. Someone to stop you and make you think of something you might not have on your own

 

[AkarItaly]

I wasn’t looking for a debate and I’m not really looking to MBTI as a foundation for the origin of intuition. MBTI or specifically Jung tying intuition and sensing was a starting point but it was never really anything that I saw as a foundation for better identifying intuition and consciousness. It was only Jung’s genius that gives it merit so I reflect on it occasionally. I don’t believe Jung fully understood what intuition was but he was certainly way ahead of his time when it came to identifying and orienting it within a somewhat rudimentary set of attributes.

I’m also not developing a theory. It’s more of an analysis by looking at what science and case studies offer. I believe there are a higher number of intuitives in this environment and within this discussion there is more likely to be an understanding through shared experience. I don’t care who uses the information so if it helps derive something within or outside of this environment then that is a plus in my book. It’s open source development and the end result helps anyone that wants to further understand intuition as it pertains to their own identity and life experience.

If people disagree then that’s perfectly fine and I’m certainly not offended. I do sometimes come across as overly direct so if it feels personal then just know that it’s not personal on my side.

I value anyone who wants to add to the discussion and really don’t mind if it extends into the fringes of consciousness - because it has and I do think it’s all relevant.

I appreciate the transparency. My only point is that I refuse to be a mere passenger of my biological hardware; I prefer to remain an active architect of my reality.

I value this 'open source' exchange, even if we are looking through different lenses. Raw data is just noise until someone decides what to do with it. No offense taken on my side.I enjoy the friction of ideas; it’s the only way to polish our perspectives.

-Giammarco

 

[AkarItaly]

I'm not sure if it feels like a debate to me, just an exploration of ideas, sharing different thoughts and perspectives. I enjoyed the conversation and had a good time hearing from everyone : )

I think having more minds participating in these discussions leads to greater and more thorough understanding. Someone to stop you and make you think of something you might not have on your own

Exactly, a great exchange of views!

-Giammarco

 

[TomasM]

Telepathy Tapes - Season 2 Interview

I’ve said it before, but I believe there is an element of these extrasensory capability among the INFJ community. This is especially the case for those who associate with ND (neurodivergence) and experience some of the symptoms or traits associated with the autism spectrum (often spoken about on this forum).

This video is a summary for season 2 and I’ve done some work on season 1 [earlier in this thread]. I would like there to be more details (transcripts, summaries, supporting videos) around all of the episodes should anyone have the time.

Anyway, enjoy the summary and let me know what you think.

 

[TomasM]

Telepathy Tapes - S2E1
Near Death Experiences and the Continuum of Consciousness

I often explore a wide range of elements related to consciousness in this thread because intuition is often described as an unconscious or subconscious sense. This attribute elevates subjects surrounding consciousness as key candidates for analysis and observation when researching or attempting to uncover the origin of intuition.

Summary (AI generated with guide rails):
The Telepathy Tapes — Season 2, Episode 1 opens by deliberately widening the scope beyond telepathy to tackle a much larger question: whether consciousness is entirely produced by the brain or whether it can exist independently of it. The episode centers on near-death experiences (NDEs) as a test case for this question, weaving together historical accounts, contemporary research, and personal narratives that challenge a strictly materialist view of the mind. The hosts frame NDEs not as fringe curiosities, but as recurring, cross-cultural phenomena with strikingly consistent features—lucidity, heightened awareness, and long-lasting psychological transformation—often reported when measurable brain activity should be severely compromised or absent. This episode sets the tone for Season 2 by positioning consciousness as a continuum rather than a switch that simply turns off when the brain shuts down.

The discussion is anchored by the account of Eben Alexander, whose experience carries particular weight because of his professional background. Alexander is a Harvard-trained neurosurgeon and former academic faculty member who spent decades operating on and studying the brain. He recounts his own NDE during a severe bout of bacterial meningitis that left him in a deep coma, with his neocortex—the region responsible for thought, perception, and memory—functionally offline. Despite this, he describes an elaborate, structured, and vividly coherent experience that he insists was “more real than ordinary waking life.” The episode emphasizes the tension between Alexander’s medical credentials and the implications of his experience: if consciousness can occur with no functioning cortical activity, then prevailing neuroscientific models may be incomplete. By closing on this paradox—rigorous academic training colliding with an experience that defies conventional explanation—the episode underscores its central thesis: consciousness may not be confined to the brain alone.

 

[TomasM]

The NDE of Doctor Eben Alexander

His experience was highlight in the post prior to this. Even if you don’t believe in what NDE’s appear to represent, he does a great job of descriptively communicating his experience.

Dr. Alexander has done quite a few interviews so if you find yourself interested in his story or the overall case, you should be able to find plenty of information.