In his 1913 classic, Psychological Types, Carl Jung proposed eight functions that helped explain the cognitive dispositions and attitudes of the personality types. One of these functions—Introverted Intuition (Ni)—is to this day rather poorly understood, contributing to theoretical inconsistencies as well as type confusion.
In this post, we will examine some competing views of Ni. In particular, we will consider whether Ni is better viewed as convergent vs. divergent in its workings, as there is ample disagreement and theoretical consequence surrounding this issue.
A Little Background
In a spirit of good faith, I’ll start by disclaiming that I’m inclined to see Ni as predominantly convergent in nature and prone to ideational consistency over time. This view is rooted in my knowledge of and interactions with INJ types, as well as my concern for establishing a logical and coherent theoretical framework for understanding the functions and the types.
I have long appreciated the approach put forth by Lenore Thomson in her book, Personality Type, where she classifies Ni, Si, Te, and Fe as left-brained functions and Ne, Se, Ti and Fi as “right-brained” functions. This allows us to tie our understanding of the functions to extant neuroscientific knowledge regarding the two brain hemispheres. Namely, the dominant and auxiliary functions of J types (i.e., Ni, Si, Te, Fe) can be roughly associated with the focus, structure, and consistency of the left hemisphere, whereas the main functions of P types (Ne, Se, Ti, Fi) are more labile and less structured in their approach thanks to contributions from the right hemisphere.
Granted, we cannot realistically expect J types to be always be focused, structured and consistent due to the potential influence of the tertiary and inferior functions. So it may be useful to remember, as we proceed, that the nature of the dominant function, including that of Ni, will not always predict the overall presentation of a particular INFJ or INTJ, as INJs use additional functions and can have divergent personal histories and backgrounds. Nevertheless, when we evaluate INJs collectively—from a bird’s eye view—there are general patterns that emerge. And it is these patterns that we typologists are most concerned with.
Thomson’s “Perspectives” View of Introverted Intuition (Ni)
Having now acknowledged my sympathies for Thomson’s hemispheric approach to the functions, let’s take a closer look at her thoughts on Introverted Intuition.
As we’ve seen, Thomson classifies Ni as a left-brained function. Consistent with this perspective, she associates Ni with left-brained attributes such as focus, structure, control, order and predictability:
The left brain won’t focus on many things at once. It depends on words and signs to make outward experience predictable and orderly… Left-brained types also need conceptual control over their outer world. For this reason, both ISJs and INJs have a strong investment in the structure of public information.
But just when I’m poised to praise Thomson for her theoretical accuracy and consistency, we encounter statements like this:
INJs acknowledge many conceptual standpoints. They experience no need to declare one inherently better than another.
Huh?
While I don’t disagree with the first statement regarding INJs acknowledgment of various conceptual standpoints, is it really true that they experience no need to declare one viewpoint better than others?
In my experience, most INJs prefer to declare one perspective better, or at least more plausible, than the alternatives. Sure, it may take some time for Ni to incubate and manifest an answer, but once it has, INJs certainly aren’t occupying a state of conceptual relativism or indifference as Thomson seems to intimate. Her assertion also seems inconsistent with her previous remarks about INJs’ interest in structuring public information. If INJs don’t wish to identify the best ideas—to separate the ideational wheat from the chaff if you will—then why the concern for shaping public knowledge?
Perhaps what Thomson is actually getting at is the ability of intuition to think outside the box, including its knack for perspective taking, and the ostensible benefits of doing so. Namely, if intuitive types possess higher levels of cognitive flexibility and creativity, they can leverage these abilities to compensate for whatever they might lack in terms of athleticism, practical know-how, etc. However, since these capacities are more or less equally present in Extraverted Intuitive (Ne) types (i.e., “NPs”), they can hardly be considered unique features of Ni.
Unfortunately, others seemed to have followed Thomson’s lead in associating Ni with “perspectives.” Personality Hacker, for instance, has nicknamed Ni just that. The problem is that NP types are equally if not more adept at perspective taking. Hence, describing Ni in terms of perspectives is a bit misleading and fails to highlight its signature strengths.
Convergent vs. Divergent Intuition
In my book, My True Type, as well as in my post on Introverted vs. Extraverted Intuition, I enumerate what I see as hallmark Ni-Ne differences. Generally speaking, I consider Ni a convergent form of intuition which is attended by a sense of clarity / certainty about its impressions or visions. Moreover, this perceived clarity tends to persist over time for INJs, with each intuition building upon (rather than undermining or competing with) the next.
In contrast, I’ve described Ne as a more divergent form of intuition, one which generates many possibilities, often with no clear stand-out. Ne users are typically less married to a single perspective and exhibit greater volatility in their ideational alliances. Consequently, they are sometimes criticized as being fickle, indecisive, or unreliable. Again, these Ni and Ne portraits are generally compatible with what we know about the two brain hemispheres, with Ni exhibiting more left brain qualities than Ne.
One foreseeable problem with this conception is how to account for INJ artists. In response, it is important to understand that INJ artists are primarily partnering Ni with their inferior function, Extraverted Sensing (Se), rather than with their auxiliary judging function (Fe or Te). In so doing, they operate predominantly in perceiving mode. As Jung observed, “Perception is his main problem, and—in the case of the [INJ] creative artist—the shaping of his perception.” Jung went on to say, however, that “only a slight differentiation of judgment is sufficient to shift intuitive perception from the purely aesthetic into the moral sphere. A variety of this type is thus produced [read: an INJ pairing Ni with Te / Fe] which differs essentially from the aesthetic [read: an INJ pairing Ni with Se].”
The manner in which we describe and classify INJs (and potentially their functions) has much to do with which functions we see them routinely employing. Thus, if the majority of INJs seem to combine Ni with Te / Fe, we will (should?) ascribe more J / left-brained attributes to Ni. By contrast, if the majority of INJs are operating more like artists, we would likely emphasize how Ni appears when interfacing with Se, which according to Thomson, is a right-brained function. In other words, our predominant image of what constitutes a “typical” INJ will shape our view of everything else, including how we conceptualize Ni.
Motives, Birth Order & INTJ / INFJ Roles
In my recent post on birth order and personality type, I proposed that variables like birth order can provide clues for understanding why individuals of the same personality type may be strikingly different from one another. We know, for instance, that siblings typically seek their own familial niche or role—be it academic, social, moral, athletic, etc.—and if a particular role is already taken, they will opt for a different one. Thus, an INJ, even if more intelligent than an older sibling, might opt for a different role if the “academic achiever” niche is already filled. This speaks to the importance of motives and environmental factors in personality development.
Moreover, if one has decided, wittingly or not, to embrace the artist role (or at least to view the world like an artist), then the mind will perceive things differently than it would for an aspiring scientist. Such motives, if sufficiently strong, may in some cases override or repurpose various propensities of our type, resulting in a different sort of lens and inner landscape.
That said, I would still expect to find certain similarities among INJ artists, for instance, as opposed to artists of other personality types. So even if INJ artists differ in important ways from INJ theorists or other INJ subtypes, they are all, in the end, INJs.
Closing Remarks
It’s difficult not to interconnect our understanding of the personality types with the life roles they commonly embrace. And even if it’s theoretically possible for any type to play any role, allowing too much conceptual leeway in this regard can effectively strip away much of what is valuable and interesting about personality typing in the first place, namely, the salient patterns of similarity among individuals of the same type. Indeed, if someone wishes to wholly identify as a unique individual, why bother with typology at all?
Same goes for the functions. If we are willing to grant a function an infinite number of roles, at some point, it becomes a useless and meaningless construct. This is why we should care about the veracity, consistency, and parsimony of our typological concepts, including how we understand and talk about Ni.
To learn more about the functions and personality types, be sure to explore our latest book:
Unsure if You’re an INJ or INP Type?
Take our Type Clarifier Tests: INFJ-INFP Clarifier | INTJ-INTP Clarifier
Annais says
Hi there!
I am surprised that you do not address the Ni’s tendency to work with symbols and metaphors. I would seriously doubt Ni being left hemisphere function for that reason, but rather one relying on both hemispheres. Hence the nature of intuition that says ‘I know this is true but need to think to explain why’. There is quite a bit of processing required to put things in precise words, unlike some other more left brain functions. It is more like mining for ore first and refining later, rather than producing cut diamonds at once, as with some other left-brain types).
I think the catch is that our Western civilization favours the rational mind and most people have no access to different modes of thinking ( through symbol, metaphors, intuitive images). Is it not what Jung has done with his black/red books? He stated that the 50 years of his research came out of this experience of capturing the images and symbols and that was definitely not left-hemisphere thinking. So the tragedy is that the Ni’s ar in the minority are not taught to tap in its real capacities. Informer times the shaman, priests, oracles, etc would be trained in a different way as an example of accessing some symbolic and mythological ways of thinking. Even our religion became vastly rational based especially after the Reformation. Our schooling teaches us to rely on Ti/Te and maybe this skews our perspective when analysing the Ni?
Also, what about the non-dual thinking being the goal of enlightenment both in the East and in Christian Mystical tradition? The ability to hold the opposites together and paradoxes that Jung suggests is a pre-requisit for the emergence of the transcendent function? As far as I understand this is the reason why Jung disliked the MBTI because it focused on the differentiating the functions while he believed it misses the point of the transcendent function. I wonder if Ni types are really working against the values of rationalism of the educational system so they absorb the cultural norm of the left brain, while developing the Ni at the same time?( I would not venture to say with certainty whether Ni is left or right brain function, but symbols and metaphors seem to be pointing to the right).
Well I am speaking from INFJ perspective, so I am not sure whether Ni-Ti would function differently from INTJ’s function stack.
I also would like to give my 2cents about the art. There are 2 types of artists. If you look on youtube, some work with incredible precision, without wasting a single stroke. I believe those are the Se artists. Others, play and move and change until the artwork looks just right. Those I believe are the intuitive artists. Some artworks show incredible technical ability and realism but little symbolism. They focus on the form. Others have as a primary goal the symbolism and I do not mean that they are less technical. Just the focus is different. Would form be Se focus while symbolism Ni focus?
What about the writers? JK Rowling and Stephen King seem to suggest vastly intuitive origin of their work and it is full of symbolism and archetypal images. They rely on building the gripping images that resonate with something deep in the psyche. Some writers/poets rely on exquisite language (form), while in others it is not the language that is the focus but the living images and symbols? (JKRowling identified as an INFJ).
Thanks for the thought provoking post.
Marina says
As a 17 years old INTJ, I always have problems with birth order and the “taken roles”, I have 2 older siblings, one of them is an engineer and the other is an artist. I like both fields so it constantly feels like I’m in the middle. But at the same time, if I choose one of them people don’t take it as if it was my choose, they just say “oh so you like (arts/science), like your brother/sister!”. No one cares about all the years that it took me to make a decision or my reasons of wanting to dedicate to one or another, at the end, i’m just “following my sister/brother’s footsteps”
Tim says
Great post. The last two paragraph’s are especially important. I see this sort of blending of type and individual focus often in the mbti community and your statement, “Same goes for the functions. If we are willing to grant a function an infinite number of roles, at some point, it becomes a useless and meaningless construct.” is hugely important for pointing out that this blending is nullifying the concept of patterns of cognitive functioning. I think often misunderstandings in the specific function and function stack lead to this kind of thinking.
yamabeth says
I do believe that birth order plays a large role in our personality development, but it has always been confusing to me as theorists usually stop at about four children. I’m the eighth of 11 children, so how would birth order affect me, or is it all thrown out the window at that point? Haha
Katy says
Hi there,
I’m an INFJ artist!
I love incorporating visual themes and symbols into my work. I work is in the animation industry so I create artwork for a narrative, it’s emotional storytelling! But instead of words like a writer, it’s storytelling with visuals, using color, lighting, pattern, etc to communicate poetic and emotional moments. There are reoccuring themes in stories, so that’s reflected in the visuals too.
I find eS types tend to think less about the underlying meaning of the visuals they’re creating and focus more on the surface appearance to make it fun and give it variety. I personally find the most satisfaction in creating a unique “atmosphere” in the environments I create that pair perfectly with the story. “Atmosphere” is a very Ni thing I feel, it’s intangible and incredibly abstract and not created by any one thing/element, it’s created when you put several things/elements together! For example I’ll consider all these things when I work: Character growth arcs, emotions, time of day, symbolism in color and pattern/shape, weather, cultural history/meaning, time period, lighting, textures. Just to name a few! Lots of things for Ni to play with. :)
I have no idea how INTJs approach things creatively, I feel their process is more opaque and difficult to explain/know. But in general when I meet someone who is a really good graphic designer – kinda betting they’re an INTJ. Graphic design is all about clarity, function, and details, something an INTJ would be good at figuring out.
Margo says
My impression is that Ni cannot possibly be a left brain function. I spent most of my life staring into space, or at grains of sand, or trees or whatever. It’s never been the purpose of Ni to do anything else with these images than to gather them, along with emotional impressions, and then arrange and rearrange the impressions like so many collages in my mind. There’s no real purpose or direction in Ni unless one makes a firm decision to externalize all that info somehow, which is a great big hassle. How could that possibly be a left brain function?
Margo G
B R says
When it comes to defining and mapping out the real world application behind function, I applaud and encourage your continued thoughts, arguments and findings. Ni has to be the most mystified function and it is in deep dives like this one that we get to be reminded of the boundaries and reasons for defining function in the first place.
S.U. says
As INTJ artist I can tell you what the process was for me.
Essential throw colors or shapes on a canvas with a general aesthetic appeal but not making too much sense. Over time imagine and paint within the colors and shapes more and more details until a story emerged. The result was something surreal containing symbols and abstractions and some kind of story. Anything that was not brought into clarity and was left impressionistic felt incomplete and unfinished.
Anything conventional like painting fruit or landscapes would bore me. Graphic design was torture because it required following to many rules.
Annais says
Came back to add. ‘Left brain’ seems to be associated with the information that is already known and rearranging it, creating order based on ‘precedent’, while right brain is about dealing with novel information, ‘creative chaos’ of sorts. So I am not sure I can buy into ‘left braininess’ of Ni.