By "Ni popped" you mean the idea just occurred to you? And exactly as you describe it here? How do you explain where this idea came from?
"Just occurred to you" is the correct and easy answer, yeah. I don't know. That's the tough question. Prepare yourself, I have tried to answer it:
Last year I did a course called Rationality, Action & Identity.
The main points I remembered were about action and rationality. My conclusion was that we decide on a course of action in our subconsciousness. Later we rationalise why we made that decision.
Simply said an animal would like like this:
. -<------------<--------------------<----
.| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
Senses -> Subconsciousness -> Intent -> Action
You could call subconsciousness instinct in the case of animals
Why seperate intent from action?
A cat may intent to sneak up to a bird and attack, but will not yet attack. In the meantime a dog runs up. Cat senses it. Instincts change intent. Action of attacking bird never took place.
But since we're conscious creatures it'd look like this.
(We're conscious about everything, but our subconsciousness)
. -<------------<--------------------<----
.| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
Senses -> Subconsciousness -> Intent -> Action
.| . . . . . . . . . . ^. . . . . . . . . . |
.V . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . . .. . V
. --------> . Consciousness . <---
Memory should be there somewhere too.
Consciousness is where our rationality is. If you make a rational decision. You use all input into your consciousness to make a decision. What we don't know is that (in my make-shift model) we first go through our subconsciousness.
Currently I should be writing a paper and all my rational reasons say I should stop doing this now, but I'm not doing it because.. Ehm I don't know. Probably because I'm enjoying it in the moment. Or (as I'm rationalising after I noticed my intent to NOT stop here and write my paper) this argument would fail if I do decide to quit this and start writing my paper. So I'd be proving myself wrong.
Either way. I rationalised a decision of intent (to start writing my paper). But when I measured my intent with my consciousness it was something else (not starting to write my paper). Most likely because I'm lazy and enjoying this. But I also managed to rationalise a different reason (that I'd be proving myself wrong). I have no clue whether this reason played a role in my subconsciousness. I can only guess at what made me make my decision.
Ni pops happen in your subconsciousness and I can only guess at why it got there. The following is a possible reconstruction of what happened at that specific time when my Ni popped at debate about euthanasia.
Something triggered my subconsciousness. Maybe because I was digging in my memory or thinking (consciousness) or because someone said something (senses). Both are input to my subconsciousness. Then my subconsciousness popped the first version of the speech I intended to give. My consciousness noted the intent and started digging my memory for more. Using memory about speeches to craft arguments. All this was also input for my subconsciousness. While I was still thinking about how to improve my argument I got another Ni pop. A second and improved version of my speech came forth. Then I found a counter argument. A flaw in the speech. I tried to solve it, but I couldn't find the solution. I dug and dug, but nothing. Five minutes later I got it. I could use one part of the speech and replace the rest and still make a good point. I have no clue why my subconsciousness decided to pop five minutes later, but it did. I checked my newly intended speech with my consciousness, but couldn't find any flaws and thus decided to present it.
I don't remember if that specific time went like this, but I find that what I wrote is a quite common thought process for me. I can speak and write very chaotic sometimes, mainly because when I'm writing the act and thoughts of writing make my subconsciousness pop again and thus change what I want to write, while I'm still writing. This can happen a hundred times when I write a text like this. Sometimes I just prefer to not change anything and just let my entire process of thought be written down for anyone to read. Often at the end of a text, I'll look back at the beginning and decide that it's crap. Actually halfway writing this post I already deleted my first ten sentences. They didn't fit anymore in my newly decided message.
This also happens while talking. Sometimes my subconsciouness is popping faster than I can speak. In these cases I take huge steps in following conclusions, often leaving the listener confused. Then I'll have to go back and try to rationalise why those conclusions follow. I never even consciously knew why they followed. I just knew. Often I can find out afterwards why it make sense and explain it. I often find this boring to do, because I already know it.
Popped this memory of personalitypage. Is that Si or Ni?
This is probably why INTJs have a hard time explaining their thoughts. The quote from personalitypage:
It is not easy for the INTJ to express their internal images, insights, and abstractions. The internal form of the INTJ's thoughts and concepts is highly individualized, and is not readily translatable into a form that others will understand. However, the INTJ is driven to translate their ideas into a plan or system that is usually readily explainable, rather than to do a direct translation of their thoughts. They usually don't see the value of a direct transaction, and will also have difficulty expressing their ideas, which are non-linear. However, their extreme respect of knowledge and intelligence will motivate them to explain themselves to another person who they feel is deserving of the effort.
On the INFJ page
and the INFJ themself does not really understand their intuition at a level which can be verbalized.
INTJs (like me) are probably better at rationalising their intuition afterwards. Compare my post to apemon's above me.
He's an INFJ and I'm an INTJ. INFJ accepts it as something that happens and INTJ writes a massive post trying to rationalise it. (Yes, generalisations and INFJs can also have strong T functions, like I have strong Fe)
More Ni/subsconscious pop:
- Maybe my makeshift decision model is highly influenced by the fact that I'm a Ni-dom. Naturally I place everything around the subconsciousness, because it's so important for me personally.
- The model I made is probably heavily based on some kind of perspective within philosophy or psychology. I just don't remember which one and honestly I don't care. Somehow I remember what I believe is correct, thus I remembered this one.
- This all is also very annoying when I have to write a scientific paper, because I have to use sources. This course we read some books. I can recite the interesting parts of the relevant theory, but I really don't remember in what book I read it. So I end up having to read it again. Also theory from previous courses mixes with this. So if I'm writing something I don't know if it's actually from the books I'm supposed to use. Thus I don't want to be a scientist. Uh, INTJs are the Scientists right? I prefer blogs, essays or forumposts where I can ramble on like this.
- Ugh, if I read back my subconscious is triggered again by what I'm reading and I end up wanting to add something, but that messes up the entire structure.
- I can remember theories from years ago, but never who wrote it. Maybe I just because it's what I value. I don't care if Kant or Nietzsche wrote it down. I care if I think it makes sense.
- Wait these last parts were major derails and have nothing to do with subconsciousness. It's just about that I memorise what I value and that I forget what I don't value. *smackhead*. You can admire the derail in the second entry in this list. I'll not remove it for sake of showing Ni at work.
Sigh...
I decided it was so elaborate I want the INTJ community to also read it. I copied the post here:
http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?p=4447106#post4447106
