Nancy Napier talking about the future self (Ni-user?)

Hey there o/

She's an Ni user but imo she's not Ni-lead. She seems J-lead. Probably TeNi.

ayoungspirit Unfortunately this ghost of mine has no time in this deathtime (atm) to write careful nice posts like the one above, nor to shout backwards much in da box or play some practical jokes on members of dead bodies of the forum *uhhh.how.spooky.was.that?*. But hey (follow the ghost): her eyes are quiiite sharp, her Se-lock-ons are cutting and violent. She seems very heavy on both Ni and Se. Don't ya think?

Thanks for the reads! I think it would be safe to refer to her as a Ni-user, as suspected.

I have been fascinated with the concept of consulting with one's future self in order to realize an answer, as this is an idea I've seen referenced enough placed that I actually believe it to be something that is real to some people. The video gives a nice chance at perhaps finding a correlation between type and these experiences, since the woman in the video frequently has had these experiences (or so she says). I don't think many people here would be surprised if this is a experience only Ni-users can have, but of course, this is way to early to say.

Personally, I relate very little with the contents of this speech, which would perhaps indicate that I'm an Si/Ne-user. Even when hear about people having "hunches", I can't really relate. Ideas, sure, but I'll always know whether an idea is "correct" or not.. Problem is always the premises, which I always see clearly, but often are impossible to decide on whether are true or not (meaning that my ideas often just lead to new questions).

Having Ni, how do you guys relate to some of the stuff she says? Would you say that you have hunches? I'm especially curious about these experiences from here video:
@04:00 - she had "become" the person she had a future image of (at 01:00)
@05:00 - not knowing where the images of the future will "lead you"
@09:00 - meta-perspective/transcending the problem at hand
@10:00 - let the dynamic created by your intention/synchronicity guide you through the day (??)

Interesting peek at your experience, from the inside! thanks for sharing. I can see why you're questioning being a Ti-lead(if that's what the question mark next to your type-designation is indicating).. from what you write it doesn't seem like Ti is a huge part of your conscious experience (compared to the perception functions). Especially strange to me is the fact that you sometimes think in symbols.. Se/Ni is fascinating!

For the record, I'm not really fascinated by Napier (I didn't know who she was until yesterday), as much as I'm fascinated with idea of there perhaps existing a "future self"-archetype, or sub-personality. I don't feel like it would be all that misguided to call this "adviser" for a future self though.. If there is a connection with Ni, then indeed it probably would feel like the information provided was as if it was "given" to you by someone..

I suspect that Si users also have a sub-personality that provides deep insights, but not in the form of a "future self", but instead in form of a "wise self". I think both can provide very similar-looking services to the person as a whole, but by different means, one uses the predicting abilities of Ni, the other uses the vast experience of Si.

It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this!

Ah.. It wasn't really clear from what I wrote, but I only referred to what you mentioned about your own function-use, and from that it seemed like you down-played your Ti/Fe-cycle a bit, I wasn't really analyzing your post for functions. Not that I would really be comfortable with doing that.. Need to learn more about the functions first!

However, you actually hit the type I believe myself to be in your last post, which is interesting! I do think I'm Ti-lead. And again, interesting insights on the "symbolic aspect" of Se/Ni..

I do have a tendency to play around with concepts until I reach something "symmetrical" (meaning a "complete" system, no contradictions, and more often than not, it's vague with little practical value). It's as if I can't put the matters to rest until I have forced system to be formed .. compulsively aching for closure. I think it's a hard indicator of judgment- and thinking-lead.


This caught my eye. A new angle to view how inner symbols/manifestations of sub-personalities perhaps are inherently different between the different cognitive types (or rather, functions). Interesting, I'll have to explore it!

I found an interesting paragraph from a Dario Nardi slide show (link) regarding the influence of Ti, that could correspond with my writing style, and that could explain why heavy Ni users attribute it more to a Ti lead, as it happens to be truly a "Ti" and "Se" behaviour :

Thinking & Back-Tracking
• Sensing-Thinking folks tend to
evoke F3 and verbalize their thought
processes as they work a problem.
• Verbalizing occurs as quick
sequential conclusions followed by
backtracking to re-do answer.
• Example: “So if A is true, and B and
C are not, then D; no wait, C could
mean that E is… yes, then E not D.”
• For Ti folks (ESTP, ENTP, INTP,
and presumably ISTP), regions F3
and F4 are highly active when
engaging in problem solving.
Sometimes all of Fp1, Fp2, F3 and
F4 light up.
• For Te folks, only Fp1 and maybe
O1 (visualize problem and decide)
are evoked, almost never F3 or F4

However, I only verbalize my thoughts and backtrack to arrange the sequences when I purposely write the explanation to a problem, and probably more for wording than for logic consistency. Most of my free thinking and speculating happen non-verbally, outside of paper. I get outside of my desk and wait for it to "come clear" in my mind, eventually "sleep on it" and am happy enough if I just "get it" at some point. I find actually quite taxing to write anything explicit down, and procrastinate a lot, preferring to be contemplating the flow, not even taking notes most of the time... but when I do it for worthy reason, I try to do it properly. For example, I will be really happy to finish this post and resume my lazy skimming of data, all this meticulous writing is exhausting 

I am only thinking about it now, but I could find the process especially taxing because of the lack of clarity or closure. When I write, I do it in two steps. I am firstly guided by my first inspiration and candidly put down what come, sometimes a lot more than I would like, without slowing down. Then, when I eventually reach the end of my trail of thought, I do some backtracking, get new trails of thought and write more, and need more backtracking, and get in a loop. Don't misunderstand me, I like the automatic writing part, but correcting can be tedious (even if beneficial). Like I suggested, in this cases, it is really tempting to let it go.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Edit : Lately, and thanks to my life adjustments, I can rejoice in having a more peaceful mind. This translate in a more compact expression, as you can see.

ayoungspirit: My free thinking feels more active than what I understand from how yours is. While it usually just starts without me telling it to, I am often conscious of many different threads of thoughts that are popping up in my head, with sudden ideas sometimes emerging randomly, often combining elements from the different things I've been thinking about before hand. I've never gotten sudden ideas popping into my head completely out of the blue, usually I'm thinking/exploring when it happens.. but good ideas usually come with much more ease if I've been thinking about the matter for a couple of days beforehand.

When I write my thoughts down, I often feel like I'm assembling a jigsaw puzzle.. I'm trying to combine several thoughts into a natural whole. Perhaps this is a bit different from your thought, from what you write, your process do indeed seem a bit more streamlined.. I usually have several exact points that I want to express, and often times some more points emerge as I'm in the writing process.

I procrastinate a lot too.. the process of writing things down is tiresome, because I feel like I have to refine everything I want to express. When I first am in the process, thing loosens up and come forth easier. I do feel like precision is important, though, and often backtrack/edit to make things more condensed and clear. 

I can't really relate to how non-verbal thinking would work.. I don't know if I do it much or not.. I've been curios about it, but I'm just not sure.. I do sometimes use models in my head, but I think that a lot of my thinking is verbal.

Here are some more thoughts on Ni/Se that relates to the theme in this thread. Some relevant posts by Erifrail:


Perhaps the "little bursts" mentioned here is what is referred as hunches in the daily language?

I wonder if a Ni-user well-versed in the world of numbers would actually be able to just "come up" the next number in line.. without having to first discover the pattern and then deducing the next number. I wonder if the person would instead just get flashes of what the next number in would have to be (sense of the inevitability), just from observing the row for a brief time. Is this what is meant by what Erifrail writes here? Of course, the question assumes that the person is not consciously aware of what the pattern is, and that he is not so familiar with the row that it has become a part of his "automatic memory" (like how many people have learned the decimal multiplication table by heart).

Not too long ago, a friend of mine and I sat down and did some of those puzzles you see in IQ-tests. At the time I was maybe two months into MBTI, and had started thinking that people truly think differently, not just more or less efficiently. My friend is pretty bright, good at solving insight problems, and I thought it would be interesting to see if he would solve the tasks differently than I would. To begin with, we were solving the tasks quite similarly, both of us were able to discover what the pattern in the puzzle was, and from that, deduce which of the option had to be the answer. But after a while we reach a puzzle that I was able to discover the pattern in, and he was not. I, of course, knew what the answer had to be, because the pattern was clear before my eyes after some exploration, and all I had to do was deduction. He on the other hand, apparently didn't have clue... until I asked him to just guess what he thought the solution was. And low and behold, out of the six possible answers, he picked the right one. I was amazed, and wondered whether it was sheer luck, or if he actually had an idea behind picking that exact solution (whenever I guess, it truly is random.. I'm unable to solve the puzzles without discovering the pattern).. He gave me some obscure explanation that he didn't seem too sure of himself.. pointed at some "random" elements here and there that made very little sense to me. The pattern of the puzzle wasn't a very hard one, it was just the matter of discovering it that was hard, but the cues he had looked at to solve the puzzle seemed very different from what I had found and looked at. It was a pretty eye-opening experience, and pointed out to me that there are real differences in how people problem solve.. I am assuming that he is a high-Ni user.

The Doctor: Admittedly, the post went a bit outside what the title of the thread suggests... But as I've written somewhere earlier in the post, it was more the contents of the video that I was curios about, and their implications regarding to CT and functions, than the actual person in the video. I'd say we've been exploring/sharing our experiences, rather than debating.. I guess it's meta-thinking we've been doing? Hehe.