- Type: TiSe
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Adaptive
1) Jness – Nah, it wasn’t this for me. Back about 15 years ago when I only knew about dichotomies I had always typed myself as a P type. After learning about Socionics I understood functions and Ni as a Pi type. They are described as more go-with-the-flow while the Ji types are more rigid. Since I’ve always been viewed and described as an easy going, go-with-the-flow type of person who suppresses her own judgments I switched over to Pi lead. This was supported when studying Jung and later on finding this system as well. In other words: I’m not dumb 😛
2) Fe & Agreeableness – I agree that many Fe descriptions in MBTI sound like Big 5 agreeableness, but I wasn’t going by those descriptions. My Big 5 agreeableness scores actually tend to be quite low and I’ve never viewed Fe as caring about others and Fi as selfish.
Jung’s definitions hold the most weight for me. @Auburn told me that Jung just didn’t understand Fe or Fi very well and I didn’t find that argument to be very convincing. Jung’s Fe isn’t directive at all. Jung’s Fe types are easily swayed by the ethical opinions of others and can come across as having multiple personalities due to their ever-changing ethical conclusions. Fi is expressionless and cold.
Personally I’m not all that great at harmonizing. I’m pretty combative and argumentative, but my opinions on ethical matters change drastically and quite often.
3) Ji+Ne vs Ni – I agree with your first point as I know many Ne dominants who think they are Ni dominants including my sister.
On the second point: Most people I know in the typology community associate aha moments with Ne. It’s funny when this happens, too, and you can see the aha happening with them in the moment. This isn’t something I tend to experience personally. Typically when someone is sharing their big, exciting A-Ha realization with me I tend to finish their sentence in a “yeah I know” type of way that always takes the wind out of their sails.
“Ni knows come from the unconscious and passive accumulation of data-points throughout decades of life– all of which mesh into a tapestry that gives them archival knowledge which they access whenever something simply needs to be looked up.”
Yes, it’s called web-thinking and it’s how I’ve always described my mental process. It is why I never have to take notes on anything.
Ni is not viewed as Pi: Pretty much every other source I’ve come across acknowledges Ni as Pi, so I’m not sure which sources you are referring to. Other than that I can see the first point being valid for some people. Still I have to wonder because when I worked for customer service at call centers thousands of customers told me that my speaking was hypnotic and I was putting them to sleep. My first attempt at my typing video was 10 minutes of rambling just to answer the first question about A.I. by going into an exhaustive narrative involving the history of human innovations and psychological discovery to outline my conclusion that it has all been leading up to my prediction of the final outcome that A.I. represents hope for humanity. I ended up sending a different video instead with just a summary of that rambling, but the summary ended up coming out as rambling as well. I was self-conscious about forgetting a lot of names and dates, but Beebe calls that a symptom of “Demon Si” in Ni dominants.
There’s a part in your Ni description that states Ni can emphasize hope. It’s also a big part of Socionics’ Ni+ description which is the Ni of the NiF+. Hope is one of my most overused vocabulary words.
“These qualities are what make Ni a Conductor function, and tilted towards being conservative, wary, superstitious and pessimistic.”
From what I have read most descriptions of Ni actually are like that. It’s especially true of Ni- in Socionics which is the Ni of the NiT-.
Now, putting all other systems aside and just looking at Cognitive Types as its own isolated system with its own set of unique types I’m STILL not seeing FiNe in me.
Psychologically I’m having trouble seeing how you came to the conclusion of my Fi in my videos when I make jokes and hyperbole when speaking about my relationships, but then turn around and speak very seriously about my choices leading to a total metamorphosis.
Vultology-wise I’m really having trouble seeing the Fi. I see zygomatic tension and flat cheeks. My smile looks nothing like Marilyn Monroe’s or Princess Diana’s. It looks just like Kate Beckinsale’s and Cate Blanchett’s. My upper lip has a pronounced Cupid’s bow naturally when resting that makes it look like it is pulled more upwards than straight across, but that is not due to any muscular tension at the nose.
My movements still look to me to be more similar to NiFe III- than the FiNe II- -. @Auburn even said he could see how my movements were similar to theirs, but he could see some differences that he just want able to explain. Personality-wise I see far more similarities between myself and the NiFe types as well. The FiNe types go on and on about personal growth and existentialism and I almost never talk about those subjects. Even with the art I do I make it a point to depersonalize them from myself and focus on universal topics of interest.
So while at first I was excited about being typed FiNe and being compared to the many I admire and really giving it serious consideration, it’s still just not making any sense to me. It’s not because I haven’t done my research and have a false understanding of the functions. There’s still a very good chance, in my opinion, that I am actually mistyped in this system. I’m willing to admit I’m wrong if I can receive better explanations than “Jung doesn’t understand the functions” and “I can’t explain the differences.” It’s also a challenge that I’m going through such lengths to keep my identity protected on this forum, I know, so I’m not expecting much more explanation on my vultology anytime soon.