Nice. Ni in my operable paradigm, is not merely about being communicable in myself with patterns and sucessful in my meta-patterns--usually due to serendipity that's not discerned. I've become aware there are unexamined meta-paradigms about paradigms that can be defaulted to and then contain and characterize others and then the user defaults to social and personal intentions that aim at harmony and privacy, in our cases, usually in ways that are not clearly negotiated to be functional. This video while teaching some features of Ni is a meta-paradigm about paradigms that characterizes in an interesting way. I loved the others, this too, but given my type this one required my response to get a ping back on my sense of stuff. An Ni work higher in a user who expresses from it, not merely about it, can get translated with lack of clarity in the user themselves, due to values that are unexmained guiding the user. This can foster equivocation in arbitrary ways linguistically, archetypally even meta-paradigmatically, etc, due to language and ideas not being tracked well. There are evaluations that happen autonomically that don't get critiqued analytically, and organically examined and labeled, and for the work to gain clarity and order. There are default thrulinings, disruptions of others, and more possibilities, and ways other functions draw the user and the user draws others into Ni...and if these are not tracked, one gets a poor database of data, and database for functional characterizing and database for discerning bases, and skills these aid and that aid these bidirectionally. Ni itself doesn't exactly question--critique, far as I hear you and myself, but it moves the way the body does and interfaces and stores what a mind is suited. It's taken for granted. Its hand grabs what is grabable, its nose smells what it can smell--skilled or not...but if it communicates this in the user that smells are for hands, and hammers are structured with smells...and we all use the words "smells" and "hammers", because we have noses and hands and so all smells are hammers and smells and all objects are hammers and smells. It says everything,so it ends up not being falsifiable in a relevant way and leaves ideas unclear. All the while the user is knowing smells and hammers are the case, the user will be right content wise. If it communicates in itself poorly, it'll be wrong form and function wise, leading to poor inner understanding and communication that is defaulted to due to values, not insight into how insights work and have to work. This is tricky to track in oneself without intimacy and going slow and letting the function have a mapping out and modeling with other functions and people and situations etc. I also notice how often our other functions if you will intercept, contaminate and enhance etc a feature of Ni, a communication of Ni, a use of Ni...and then these can even be communicated wrong. I'm not saying there is no clarity possible with Ni...which would be unclear about clarity and how it is implied it is the case if you lose clarity. But working through Ni, I find noting all this I've said(there's way more, but this is more useful for how you like to be) makes it quality and the user competent and not passively or actively dominating or persuading of other minds in illegitimate ways.
An illustration that'll hit your preferred and easier way of understanding is this. An understanding is a type of creature. Ni can figure out creatures of the mind and access with the body creatures of the body. The user gathers parts and functions of creatures in both mind and with body. It then can either render yet to be discovered creatures, taxonomize creatures, interface with creatures etc. If the user in this process of discovering and making creatures that can be discovered, loses track of the discovery process and the nature of creatures, we get fantastic creatures. Chimeras made of parts that hold in the users mind, but cannot work anywhere in the mind's environment or understand the outer environment as a compare and contrast. If this chimera gets presented as functional due to the user speaking of their parts, while not knowing how they have to function in the mind and bodily encountered environment, they become delusional in their heads on their understanding, while being functional with this use of the understanding and communication of parts other people can grant...but till they gather the parts and put them together to see how they work as a creature and environment, they like the maker of the chimera don't know they're dealing with a false understanding that works as used parts, but is characteristically flawed as a whole. As a result the holistic advocacy is false, even of the parts and their use can be communciated and received as functional and thus true, faithful. Another illustration is every communication of a 👉 is like a painting, people can recognize you saying the colors and put together pictures they may like, understand use--all of the above even. As you learn more you get paintings themselves that are types of colors that make other paintings. You track people's color capacity and painting skills. In this process if you start using colors and paintings to communicate in ways that are not true to capacity and skills, you end up confusing yourself and others. On a different topic that you csn use to organize the previous, I see in people of an agreeable sort and the like a weird set up of lack of fixedness due to noting movement(and not tracking condition) and also noting many fixings--this noting makes one FEEL uncertain. Yet meta-wise the tracking and autonomic organizing is fixed in them. So it's like "I'm aware we all believe and think and act different and socially and out of my values I want to do no harm and also allow an abstracted freedom--but everyone is already in my awareness. The first makes me feel humble, the latter makes me feel functional."
The cat😍👏 It is just so absolutely beautiful!🥹 And a good visual representation of Ni - because the cat is a symbol of so many things - for me a symbol of care and just pure being. Do you think Ni’s perspective and Fi’s understanding of peoples motivations can look like each other? Is the big difference that Fi is more related to the self?
Hehe thank you! I agree that she is. And hehe I do think that cats can often represent Ni, in how they just stare out the window all day and reflect and time their movements so effectively, whereas dogs can represent Se in how active and playful they are. And yes! They can very often look like each other. The biggest difference is mainly that Fi is a judging function, so it is assessing and making conclusions about the ethics or identity of a person or thing whereas Ni is not doing quite that.
For me a lot of dogs represent Fe. A dog I know gets nervous if someone walks to fare behind when we talk a walk in the forest. He wants to make sure we are all together🥹
As an ENFJ, i must ignore Ni like the plague to get through the day because once I step into Ni, it’s OVA, nothing is getting done and I’m in a tail spin !!!! 🤣🥲😅 🙏
Every time that you are hearing from a spirit, that you are hearing from your own intuition.. that you believe that a sign is happening.. you are **reallyy** hearing from ERI! 🐱
I think this is a really informative on Ni though really brought out all the stops with the cards and analogies, using characters people are accustomed to was a good move too, speaking from my fi I know media I like being discussed/referenced can get me more interested
Nice. Ni in my operable paradigm, is not merely about being communicable in myself with patterns and sucessful in my meta-patterns--usually due to serendipity that's not discerned. I've become aware there are unexamined meta-paradigms about paradigms that can be defaulted to and then contain and characterize others and then the user defaults to social and personal intentions that aim at harmony and privacy, in our cases, usually in ways that are not clearly negotiated to be functional. This video while teaching some features of Ni is a meta-paradigm about paradigms that characterizes in an interesting way. I loved the others, this too, but given my type this one required my response to get a ping back on my sense of stuff.
An Ni work higher in a user who expresses from it, not merely about it, can get translated with lack of clarity in the user themselves, due to values that are unexmained guiding the user. This can foster equivocation in arbitrary ways linguistically, archetypally even meta-paradigmatically, etc, due to language and ideas not being tracked well. There are evaluations that happen autonomically that don't get critiqued analytically, and organically examined and labeled, and for the work to gain clarity and order. There are default thrulinings, disruptions of others, and more possibilities, and ways other functions draw the user and the user draws others into Ni...and if these are not tracked, one gets a poor database of data, and database for functional characterizing and database for discerning bases, and skills these aid and that aid these bidirectionally.
Ni itself doesn't exactly question--critique, far as I hear you and myself, but it moves the way the body does and interfaces and stores what a mind is suited. It's taken for granted. Its hand grabs what is grabable, its nose smells what it can smell--skilled or not...but if it communicates this in the user that smells are for hands, and hammers are structured with smells...and we all use the words "smells" and "hammers", because we have noses and hands and so all smells are hammers and smells and all objects are hammers and smells. It says everything,so it ends up not being falsifiable in a relevant way and leaves ideas unclear. All the while the user is knowing smells and hammers are the case, the user will be right content wise. If it communicates in itself poorly, it'll be wrong form and function wise, leading to poor inner understanding and communication that is defaulted to due to values, not insight into how insights work and have to work.
This is tricky to track in oneself without intimacy and going slow and letting the function have a mapping out and modeling with other functions and people and situations etc.
I also notice how often our other functions if you will intercept, contaminate and enhance etc a feature of Ni, a communication of Ni, a use of Ni...and then these can even be communicated wrong.
I'm not saying there is no clarity possible with Ni...which would be unclear about clarity and how it is implied it is the case if you lose clarity. But working through Ni, I find noting all this I've said(there's way more, but this is more useful for how you like to be) makes it quality and the user competent and not passively or actively dominating or persuading of other minds in illegitimate ways.
An illustration that'll hit your preferred and easier way of understanding is this. An understanding is a type of creature. Ni can figure out creatures of the mind and access with the body creatures of the body. The user gathers parts and functions of creatures in both mind and with body. It then can either render yet to be discovered creatures, taxonomize creatures, interface with creatures etc.
If the user in this process of discovering and making creatures that can be discovered, loses track of the discovery process and the nature of creatures, we get fantastic creatures. Chimeras made of parts that hold in the users mind, but cannot work anywhere in the mind's environment or understand the outer environment as a compare and contrast. If this chimera gets presented as functional due to the user speaking of their parts, while not knowing how they have to function in the mind and bodily encountered environment, they become delusional in their heads on their understanding, while being functional with this use of the understanding and communication of parts other people can grant...but till they gather the parts and put them together to see how they work as a creature and environment, they like the maker of the chimera don't know they're dealing with a false understanding that works as used parts, but is characteristically flawed as a whole. As a result the holistic advocacy is false, even of the parts and their use can be communciated and received as functional and thus true, faithful.
Another illustration is every communication of a 👉 is like a painting, people can recognize you saying the colors and put together pictures they may like, understand use--all of the above even. As you learn more you get paintings themselves that are types of colors that make other paintings. You track people's color capacity and painting skills. In this process if you start using colors and paintings to communicate in ways that are not true to capacity and skills, you end up confusing yourself and others.
On a different topic that you csn use to organize the previous, I see in people of an agreeable sort and the like a weird set up of lack of fixedness due to noting movement(and not tracking condition) and also noting many fixings--this noting makes one FEEL uncertain. Yet meta-wise the tracking and autonomic organizing is fixed in them. So it's like "I'm aware we all believe and think and act different and socially and out of my values I want to do no harm and also allow an abstracted freedom--but everyone is already in my awareness. The first makes me feel humble, the latter makes me feel functional."
The cat😍👏 It is just so absolutely beautiful!🥹 And a good visual representation of Ni - because the cat is a symbol of so many things - for me a symbol of care and just pure being.
Do you think Ni’s perspective and Fi’s understanding of peoples motivations can look like each other? Is the big difference that Fi is more related to the self?
Hehe thank you! I agree that she is. And hehe I do think that cats can often represent Ni, in how they just stare out the window all day and reflect and time their movements so effectively, whereas dogs can represent Se in how active and playful they are.
And yes! They can very often look like each other. The biggest difference is mainly that Fi is a judging function, so it is assessing and making conclusions about the ethics or identity of a person or thing whereas Ni is not doing quite that.
For me a lot of dogs represent Fe. A dog I know gets nervous if someone walks to fare behind when we talk a walk in the forest. He wants to make sure we are all together🥹
Thanks, makes sense with the difference between Ni and Fi😊
As an ENFJ, i must ignore Ni like the plague to get through the day because once I step into Ni, it’s OVA, nothing is getting done and I’m in a tail spin !!!! 🤣🥲😅 🙏
😂 I get this! But also, if you get into Ni in the morning, you can use it to help you pan out the day and then reserve way more energy!
Every time that you are hearing from a spirit, that you are hearing from your own intuition.. that you believe that a sign is happening.. you are **reallyy** hearing from ERI! 🐱
You my friend, have discovered one of the greatest mysteries of our millennia.
@@DeezyRYG Yes.. I discovered it with my Ne, you see. 🤓
@@Pinkywinkykinky Threw paint at the wall until you found some stuff out, huh? Always intrigued me.
@@DeezyRYG I honestly just made it up on the spot 🙏Eri brings the creativity out of me.
I think this is a really informative on Ni though really brought out all the stops with the cards and analogies, using characters people are accustomed to was a good move too, speaking from my fi I know media I like being discussed/referenced can get me more interested