Extroverted iNtuition - Ne - Ideas - Explained Correctly
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 12. 2022
- If you ever want help finding out your true Jungian personality type, please email worldsocionics@hotmail.com with 'Find my Type' in the title to book your paid Diagnostic Interview.
My comprehensive crash course on Socionics will be released early next year to a paying audience, so if you would like to be notified when it is available, please email worldsocionics@hotmail.com with 'Course' in the title to be on my 2023 reminder list.
#extrovertedintuition #cognitivefunctions #socionics #mbti #myersbriggs #imelements #entp #enfp
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: czcams.com/users/WorldSocion...
Become a Patron: / worldsocionics
Join our Facebook group: / worldsocionicssociety
Like our Facebook page: / worldsocionicssociety
Check out our Blog: worldsocionics.blogspot.com/
I’m loving these definitions, they make so much more sense than what I’ve found floating online, which is very hazy.
"The valuing of I makes these types appreciative of the unusual and interesting. These types try to broaden their horizons, trying a variety of different experiences and speculating about different possible scenarios. To them, the blatantly obvious is too straightforward to be interesting. Instead, there are always alternatives, other possibilities that should be explored or tried out to see if they have something new to offer. As such, these types like to view the world with wonder and fascination, looking to see where their curiosity will next take them".
Perception functions, Ne, Se, Ni, And Si don't rank information aside from their base instincts (equilibrium vs revolution) , so there is no 'ought or should'. Ranking information is the realm of Judgement functions (T/F)
Great video!
Best channel ever❤
Yeah I don't use Ne much, mainly in real time quickly to figure out what will likely happen while reasoning. Thanks for clarifying
I'd like to compliment you on this part of the description: "Ne...is thinking about all of the different directions and angles AROUND the thing." The best description for Ne I've ever heard. Absolutely key. And this is coming from someone who's Se is very highly developed outside of the MBTI premise, which I don't really accept because my functions don't fit it. Well done.
Good vid Jack, you're 2/2 , as well as id expect really. Yes, it sounds like Jack tries to speak from what can be, what can *only be*, it just seems like there's a lot of appealing to what makes *sense*l. It's obvious these words are carefully put. universal in-it, *the what can only be*. I also make the same basic argument, these functions go out to do very similar things in very different ways, tho they cannot be done in aid of one another. It's one or the other as far we can deduce from basic premises.
I also have to bite the bullet about how there's valid confusion between Ne and Se, how they follow similar *positional aptitudes* , yet they're total, total opposite. Then giving credence to how they're easily confused when seen from a lower resolution manner. Especially when they're viewed from afar.
What’s interesting is that while being an Ne lead yourself clearly a big part of how you evaluate whether or not a “could be” is worth your attention long term is by Ti assessing its validity.
So in some cases, to other theorists, you may even look closed off to some possibilities due to the Ti factor.
So while there is the Ne in you being about breadth like all extroverted elements. There is also your Ti which will cut away that which is incoherent and refine further that which makes sense consistently.
The Ti would serve as a sort of check valve for an ILE separating the wheat from the chaff.
Let’s play a game,
if one had to tell apart an ILE from an LII and one wasn’t allowed to look at things like Fe mobilizing vs Fe suggestive, Fi role vs Fi vulnerable and Se role vs Se vulnerable, Ni demonstrative vs Ni ignoring.
Could one just by looking ONLY at Ti lead Ne creative vs Ne lead Ti creative, in isolation, figure out their creative what which is which?
Or can we only know by looking at all the conditional background parts. As listed previously (other function positions in relation.)
I guess you could play the game by using the bold vs cautious dichotomy . And go “well the ILE has cautious Ti while the LII has bold Ti instead”
But nobody is going to look at ILE jack for example and go “wow that guys Ti is so much more subdued when compared to some LII. In fact most will find you comparable in terms of the rigorousness of your Ti. You may even match or even outwit most LII with Philosophical logic alone.
Could we the people really tell apart Ti 3d creative vs Ti lead 4Ti from a quality standpoint? As as a comparison of power levels? Of sophistication?
Or would you have no choice but to go back to the background conditions like “LII is ignoring Te so their Thinking is a more pure Ti whereas the ILE is more balanced between Ti and Te making their Ti more diluted than the pure Ti of the LII.
If so It’s like socionics is a game of background and inverse conditionalities above all else.
That’s not a criticism, it may be why the System is so well….. efficient actually.
Boy I think you asked not one but several good questions. I guess if I try to explain what you’re saying for the common people, Jack can give off the perception that he is closed off to other ideas or frameworks. What really seems to be the case is that Jack is totally and completely open to various ideas and concepts BUT he doesn’t allow this openness to new things distract from what is really important to him.
I think that as long as we continue to exist in our current incarnated meat suits, we can never possibly objectively narrow down the inner workings of the human psyche. But that shouldn’t take away from our being subjectively sure of something…. By that I mean, intuition is an interesting phenomenon onto itself. For example, do you ever know something but you don’t really know how you know this? Perhaps? After all, Jack explained it well when he said that intuition was about everything that..wasn’t…that has yet to form or manifest into physical reality… cheers!
@@Two_Paths “INTUITION (L. intueri, ‘to look at or into’). I regard intuition as a basic psychological function (q.v.).
It is the function that mediates perceptions in an unconscious way.
Everything, whether outer or inner objects or their relationships, can be the focus of this perception.
The peculiarity of intuition is that it is neither sense perception, nor feeling, nor intellectual inference, although it may also appear in these forms.
In intuition a content presents itself whole and complete, without our being able to explain or discover how this content came into existence.
Intuition is a kind of instinctive apprehension, no matter of what contents.
Like sensation (q.v.), it is an irrational (q.v.) function of perception.
As with sensation, its contents have the character of being “given,” in contrast to the “derived” or “produced” character of thinking and feeling (qq.v.) contents.
Intuitive knowledge possesses an intrinsic certainty and conviction, which enabled Spinoza (and Bergson) to uphold the scientia intuitiva as the highest form of knowledge.
Intuition shares this quality with sensation (q.v.), whose certainty rests on its physical foundation. The certainty of intuition rests equally on a definite state of psychic “alertness” of whose origin the subject is unconscious.”
C.G. Jung
and @RevRideReason, I forgot to say 'thank you'.
Pretty much, my Ti services my Ne. Makes sure I am looking to expand breadth in a way that is still coherent, and that does mean cutting out other possibilities, because logically speaking, they are NOT real possibilities, just nonsense. This is what happens for the Inventor.
This doesn't happen for the Explorer.
To see whether it's Ti or Ne in prime position, it's important to look at the general curve of what I'm doing. Yes I'm using both Ne and Ti a lot in this physical space, but I'm not someone who just beavers away in creating perfect systems. I am first and foremost an engager of people and promoter of different ideas (Ne/Fe), who secondarily does so with analytical rigour (Ti) and gives relatively little time to detail, consistency in output, sustainability or aesthetic (Si).
I suppose if we were going with the “scientific” approach, EEGs consistently measure higher alpha brain waves in the occipital O1 & O2 in those who were “typed” as stronger intuitive types. I can confirm this is the case from a 16 channel EEG I underwent while in my school’s Neurofeedback Team. I showed considerable Alpha brainwaves (8hz-13hz) which are not as high Beta brainwaves (14hz-21hz) of the average waking adult. Alpha state can be described as ideal for the contemplation and propagation of ideas and creativity as well. Studying my brainwave patterns blew me away as it indeed shows what I already know through various personality systems is that I have a calm brain that is not as engaged with the physical world with an emphasis on imagery which corresponds with my brain which averages 8hz… does it mean my brain is more efficient? Am I still lousy at getting on in the physical world, absolutely. 🥸
A conversion of thoughts into multiple ideas. Like an abstract, metaphorical shotgun blast.
What function fits best the ability to find an item lost in a random location? I had a friend come to a family reunion and they were able to effortlessly locate a child's lost toy after we had searched the whole house.
Sounds like that requires good Sensation
The reason Ne seems to be given the label of "pursuit of novelty" is because of the emphasis on NEW alternatives. I could be wrong but it appears to me that Ne doesn't emphasize alternatives which have already been discovered because that would require a refinement of the thing in order to turn it into something more than it is. You did mention that it isn't a complete destruction of Ne so I'll leave the dead horse alone because most understand Ne well enough to comprehend it's application in typing.
not sure why Ne wouldn't emphasise alternatives that have already been discovered, I think the key thing though is talking about what hasn't been considered. For instance, an Ne type could make suggestions that people may have heard about before but would not consider to be in their realm of feasibility, and the Ne type would seek to expand that realm of feasibility. That' why it's not necessarily novelty, but sure, it's pretty much a moot point and hair splitting, compared to the problems with the other Elements. Key thing though is that it isn't about chasing associations.
Is this extroverted intuition?
- Okay I was at my job once and I picked up this clear drew and right off that bat I could come up with alot of things that I could put in the drew if I had it like rocks , jewelry, pins , bages ,etc which one of coworkers said I was creative because of that though I thought I didn't have it me .
- I'm also open minded on things and is whilling to see other people perspectives along with possibilities
- I do sometimes speak metaphorically but it usually about what I'm feeling for example I compared myself to a sinking ship and my emotion with the ocean.
How does vulnerable Ne manifest for LSI and ESI?
It's a blind spot for them, so they find it very hard to see alternatives, and are inclined to not try to consider them at all, making them very single-minded, and limited to their own experiences and perspectives.
Its Like Aang(NE) and Korra(SE)
Yes, exactly
intuition is still based on sensing. to imagine an elephant, you gotta see an elephant. EVEN, to imagine that creature from the alien series, which must be the most impressive made up creature ever, you gotta see many different creatures. scorpion tail, insect carapace head, double mouth, blah blah. none of it is truly original. you can always say this part from scorpion, that part from dung beetle and guess what, that inner mouth from some type of eel. it's always a mix and match. nobody can design a truly original creature. why they don't use this internal mind's eye nonsense and make original stuff if ne is this "totally" different thing than se?
ne takes a lot of inspiration directly from seeing things. you absolutely do not need to do all ideation in your head. almost all of it comes from outside. if you study art history oor the history of philosophy etc. you will notice movements usually ended by opposite movements. cheap.
or from where jung got the most inspiration? freud. from where ausra got %99 of things and then just "dichotomized" things, jung.
i will teach you and all socionists: ne is looking at something and trying to understand the essence of it. an se user will look at a kid doing origami and go bah useless. an ne user will look at the same kid and go wait a sec! i can use this technique on my space telescope.
besides, there's no other eye than mind's eye. seeing things directly happens in visual cortex. in a dream, you still see things via visual cortex and when you imagine an apple consciously, your visual cortex still flashes for a second there.
you and all socionists are just dichotomy fetishists, lol.
You're cute. Thank you for explaining Ne accurately.
Glad you could share your truth…Hmm..according to your definition of intuition within the Socionics framework I may not fit into the Ne box. Since I tend to contemplate where things are going for our species I may not fit neatly into your definition of Ne. I spend hours contemplating how things will unfold for mankind. I often have visions of how things will turn out. All I will say is that things will continue to change drastically as they already have changed in the last two years. People will increasingly have less and less trust for authority figures including yourself… at least people will be increasingly forced to look within themselves in areas they have hitherto ignored.
PS I am not suggesting your fans will stop trusting you either. 🥸
@@Two_Paths I finally got down to seeing your video.... 2 years later, goodness! It's a thoughtful video and I appreciate it.
One thing I will say, check out my Ni video airing tomorrow, see if that fits better for you. I know you've typically typed yourself as ENFP. I believe a lot of ENFPs are likely ENFJs and a lot of ENFJs (Denzel is a classic example) are ENFPs.
@@WorldSocionics nice! I won’t miss your Ni video tomorrow. You know I am not sure in which box I fit in…I’m probably the most reclusive person who just happens to also enjoy people. But only I short bursts…mainly it’s this feeling that I do not want to become entangled with someone else unless it feels right… old soul problems I guess🥸 BUT (and I know I’ll sound crazy) I feel some sort of let’s say karmic business with you Jack… dunno what exactly but then again, maybe I’m just bored and enjoy something about your way of expression and mildness as you teach others. It’s incredibly admirable for not just me but likely for even your “enemies” within the type community. 🤓
You said its "subjective rather than objective". What do you mean by this? I mean all the other 3 extroverted functions are objective. I mean l get your point its in the mind's eye hence intuition but surely there has to be something that makes it more objective than Ni introverted intuition which is subjective. I mean why does it seek breadth more than depth l mean it's called the collective conscious not collective unconscious.
Sensation and Thinking are objective, regardless of Extroversion or Introversion. iNutition and Feeling are subjective, regardless of Extroversion or Introversion.
The point is, Jung was incorrect when he tied subjective/objective to introversion/extroversion. It doesn't make sense and leads to very weird descriptions. I talk about this in my Si video. If you try to make Sensation subjective, you get a broken person with psychosis. Similarly there is nothing objective about interpreting potential in things, or imagining what is possible. When I believe that something is possible, there's nothing objective to say that is a possibility or not.
Where Ne and Ni differ is not in subjectivity/objectivity, but rather in the approach they take to this subjective information, whether to expand the quantity of disparate possibilities, or narrow down what is possible into meaningful and certain predicted outcomes. Check out my video on Ni airing tomorrow.
@@EndlessKurtis pretty much
@@EndlessKurtis figured as much
@@WorldSocionics Why do you claim that there nothing objective to ground belief in possibilities? Isn’t your claim self-defeating? Aren’t you asserting that the very objective reality of a function (with its objective dynamics) sets the limits on whether or not it can generate beliefs in possibilities?
@@wensen4167 I never said that belief in possibilities can't be inspired by observation of objective reality. If anything, subjectivity begets objectivity, and objectivity begets subjectivity.
I said that the formation of abstract perceptions in our mind's eye, which is exactly what our comprehension of possibilities is, is entirely subjective, not objective.
Are you suggesting that this means that functions themselves don't really exist? Well, I think we can all agree that personal attitudes, such as not liking the colour blue, are subjective, not objective, right? We can also agree that the brain, particularly the amygdala, which houses and generates our personal attitudes and emotional responses, is a physical, objective thing, yes?
Isn't intuition simply....idea?