White Intuition as Imagination of Damage

So, before voicing our line of thought, let’s try to summarize all the information we currently have about Ni. What is this function usually associated with? Image No. 1 presents a list of the most widely known associations, provided with explanations of these associations broken down by socionic traits - based on the research of V.L. Talanov. The traits that contribute the most to the property in question are listed first, and in parentheses are the traits whose contribution is also significant but still less than the first ones.

Ni itself, we recall, is calculated using the formula: {3*intuition + 3*decisiveness + introversion + irrationality + dynamics}, and victimity, as belonging to the corresponding small group of “white intuitives”, is defined through a set of traits simply as {intuition + decisiveness + dynamics}.

References to the publications by V.L. Talanov used in the calculation of properties:

vk.com/wall-168821911_34659 VICTIM PROPERTIES (V. Talanov)
vk.com/wall-168821911_20726 MORE ON SOME LITTLE-KNOWN CLUSTERS OF WHITE INTUITION
vk.com/wall-168821911_20714 SADOMASOCHISM AND SOME CLUSTERS OF WHITE INTUITION
vk.com/wall-168821911_26257 ON RELISHING UGLINESS, PROVOKING PAIN AND FEAR, AND ENDORPHIN RELEASES
vk.com/wall-168821911_35405 NEUROSCIENCE ON WHITE INTUITION

As it turned out, the core meaning of Ni and the small group of victims (belonging to which is defined by the difference in the strength of Ni and Si, with an additional emphasis on dynamics) is not at all about parasitizing someone else’s time resource (according to the author’s previous assumption: vk.com/wall-168821911_51199), and not about protecting one’s internal existential essence from encroachments by the external world (the latter is much more related to questimity). The tendency toward plot fantasies, toward a dream-like wandering of imagination through distorted reflections of the real world, also has some relation to Ni, but rather to its irrational-introverted form. However, in calculating Ni properties, its decisive component is much more important than the introverted one. It is quite possible that plot fantasy does play an important role in defining Ni, but here it seems important to clarify what exactly these fantasies are about, what themes they touch on - it is obvious these themes must be colored by the pole of socionic decisiveness. Masochism as such is also not quite suitable for the role of defining Ni (the connection of Ni with masochism, considered an outrageous artifact of socionics by many, will be discussed ahead). Endorphin high in response to pain or its anticipation is not only determined by strong Ni, but also by the contribution of cheerfulness and declatimity (https://vk.com/wall-168821911_20714) which makes it characteristic not only of all victims, but also partially of Beta sensors, and thus a marker property of this quadra.

The core meaning of victimity, as the difference between the strength of Ni and its antagonist Si (with an additional contribution of dynamics), is quite specific and connected with a certain social role - namely, the role of a dependent victim in a relationship with a dominant, forceful partner (https://vk.com/wall-168821911_20714?z=photo-168821911_457241511%2Fa50273fea37981c006).

But how does a Ni subject even strive for such a role, what leads them into it, and why are they evolutionarily more successful in it than another subject in the same role?

To answer this question, let’s return to the question of what Ni actually is. And here, in our view, the most correct approach is to find this definition by comparing the properties of Ni with those of another related intuitive function - Ne.

So, both Ni and Ne are defined by us as intuitive functions, that is, in layman’s terms - functions of fantasy, of IMAGINATION. Both Ni and Ne are ways of imagining something that does not initially exist in reality, but as a result of their operation, it becomes possible to realize.

We define Ne as the imagination of FREEDOM. A subject with strong Ne is distinguished by imagining that they possess some freedom of action, certain opportunities greater than those assigned to them by surrounding reality. As a result - they begin to perform actions that do not follow directly from the logic and relations of the already established reality, and as a result, often do indeed free themselves from its shackles, gaining more freedom. The pursuit of freedom, the defense of the right to freedom - one’s own and that of others - is a key property of all types we define as infantile. On the contrary, the essence of painful Ne is the idea of personal unfreedom (in the form of an obligation to someone, which cannot be broken, or simply ideas that the world is harsh and immutable). If at the same time Se is also strong, then such people tend to restrict others’ freedom as well, escalating prohibitions and punishments out of principle - “just in case”.

The definition of Ne is clear, but what about the victims, what do they imagine? Until quite recently, we defined Ni as “imagination of dangers”. However, as statistics showed, this is a fundamentally incorrect definition. Intuitive functions (both Ne and Ni) are the only ones among all 12 that consistently underestimate real dangers! (see attached Image No. 3).

A good understanding of danger and, as a consequence - the desire for safety, the desire to make the environment safe - is a rational-sensory property, with additional accents toward negativism, introversion, and dynamics. Leaders here are LSE and ESI, while the outsiders are those with program Ne, though positivist victim types lag just a little behind in underestimating danger.

Now, if we talk about “imagination of dangers” as a global feeling of anxiety and threat (imagination of some indefinite danger from the entire surrounding world, point 5 on the list), then this property really is, yes, more strongly associated with Ni than any other function (see Image No. 4). But even there, in fact, only EIE and ILI - combining strong Ni with negativism and constructivism - rank high. Whereas IEI isn’t much more anxious than average, lagging behind program Fi types, and LIE isn’t anxious at all.

Let’s reason logically, contrasting Ne and Ni, and thus try to understand what exactly occupies Ni’s imagination.

Ne is a static function, Ni is dynamic. Statics = overcoming environmental influence. Dynamics = adapting, adjusting to the environment to survive and/or draw resources from it. Statics is stubborn, heroic, inclined to defend “truth” - as they see it. Dynamics is more often cowardly, willing to yield to circumstances, submit to the powerful, and humiliate itself to get what it wants. The position of a static, even an introvert, and even more so an extrovert: “I do”. The position of a dynamic, especially an introverted dynamic: “Something is happening to me, something is being done to me”. Recall that Ne is an extroverted function, and Ni is an introverted function, so these theses apply in full. If we combine this with intuition, a static-extroverted position would look like: “I imagine that I am free to do something in the external world”, and a dynamic-introverted as “I imagine that the external world is doing something to me”.

Further, Ne is a peripheral function, and Ni is central. That is, Ne is adapted to a low-competition, generally benevolent environment, while Ni is adapted to a highly competitive one, full of dangers and enemies. In the case of Ne, this is easily explained in reverse: If the environment is hostile and unforgiving, then imagining yourself free to act as you please often just makes you an easier target. Only a relatively friendly or at least neutral environment allows room for experimentation, without punishing mistakes instantly. However, Ni adapts to precisely this hostile environment - it learns to survive where external influences would be deadly, or at least cause severe damage.

So, DAMAGE is the key word. Absorbing the meanings of decisiveness, dynamics, and introversion, it can be defined as: “hostile forces are doing something destructive to me”. This is precisely what fills the imagination of a subject with strong Ni. He or she is constantly searching within themselves and their world for damage and harm which, as it seems, someone or something could have inflicted or has already inflicted. Namely, this can include:

A special place in Ni is occupied by the phenomenon of death, as an irreversible form of damage. Contemplation of death – personal or collective, in the form of a global apocalypse of one nature or another – often fascinates subjects with strong Ni, especially if they are negativists.

What is the evolutionary-adaptive role of Ni? Clearly, imagining that you are damaged for no reason is pointless and even harmful, as it distracts attention from immediate survival tasks.
But let us recall that Ni is a function of adaptation to a highly aggressive environment, where subjects surpass you in physical strength, agility, and resourcefulness (as sensors surpass intuitives in this regard). Apparently, the key factor here is deception of predators through mimicry.
We will not consider pre-installed mimicry, like protective coloring – obviously, this is the lowest level of Ni development, where it is realized even without participation of the nervous system, directly through genetic selection. For comparison, we can point to, for example, fangs and claws in predatory Se-species, or the especially elongated and complex intestines in peaceful herbivorous Si-species that specialize in processing coarse plant food, etc. Let us consider only cases where mimicry is already a derivative of mental activity, that is, a restructuring of the individual’s behavior in response to external stimuli.
The essence of mimicry in this case is unusual, unexpected behavior for the predator, that is, essentially deceptive behavior by the prey, causing the predator to ultimately refrain from attacking.
Mimicry can be both passive and active. Active mimicry – scaring off with unusual postures, unpleasant smell, imitation of death, etc. – that is, with a reference either to the possibility of infection due to contact with something “poisonous”, “decaying”, or simply with the expectation that no one will want to get involved with such an unpleasant subject. Passive mimicry – hiding, trying to blend into the background, “disappear from the world”.
In any case, it must be understood that mimicry is essentially impossible unless the subject, in one way or another, is aware that at the moment of encountering the predator (or even beforehand) they must portray themselves as somehow different, already damaged – sick, dead, or inedible for some other reason. And they must imagine this first of all for themselves, so the body has time to react and the predator notices this reaction.
Alternatively, this behavior can work in the background or be activated when entering a potentially more dangerous environment. The latter suits subjects who react more slowly, more introverted by nature, while active mimicry is for subjects and species with a faster life pace – extroverted.

And what about humans?
A provocatively unpleasant manner of speech and behavior is quite typical for Ni, especially if we are not talking about deep introverts. It is also typical for Se; however, if we take, for example, forum quarrels where no actual redistribution of material resources occurs, Ni probably even surpasses Se. The latter, not seeing the point of application of forces, often prefers to remain externally correct or even leave the discussion. Simply put, Se provokes only if it sees what exactly it can get in the end, whereas for Ni (especially when combined with extraversion – i.e., a deficiency of Si, and thus sufficient stenicity), this is more of a default behavior style.
Even more typical for Ni (and probably exclusively for it) is the use of imagery in appearance or personal style that is associated with something lifeless, diseased, contagious (skulls and skeletons, blood, themes of zombies, vampires, werewolves, ghosts, etc.). In contrast, Se prefers themes that emphasize not its injuries but rather their absence (“I’m so strong that enemies can’t even scratch me”). Overall, Se, when building its image, likes to use visuals demonstrating power ready to crush any opponent (predatory wild animals, weapons and military equipment, “cool”, high-status things – indicators of resource availability, which can be redirected and unleashed on an opponent at any moment, etc.)
The combination in culture and art of the former with the latter, Ni with Se, creates images that form the core of socionic decisiveness. In short, such images can be called “the strength of the damaged”. These are berserkers, orcs, all sorts of super-strong undead, including devil-like entities.
By repelling judicious subjects, these images play an important role in the formation of a subculture of the decisive, where the values of struggle, overcoming through pain are declared the norm, and the whole culture is permeated with psychological games of dominance and submission (which, the more decisive they become, the fewer actual “game” elements remain in them).

If we take a community dominated only and exclusively by Ni (and that does happen), then it usually forms around the theme of a more or less fatal damage inflicted on its members by some external factor and their subsequent reflection on this topic. As a resolution, the community may practice symbolic rebirth into some new state close to death (or following death).
There is a significant difference between the four Ni sociotypes in terms of what images they prefer to use.
Thus, the negativist-constructivist and at the same time a questim ethical intuitive extrovert (EIE) often chooses the role of a suffering, tragic victim, calling on others to take revenge on their offenders. Due to ascending extraversion, EIE rarely limits the imagination to harm done only to themselves, more often than other types they touch on the topic of a collective enemy harming all their kin, rallying them into a Holy War against it.
ILI, another negativist-constructivist, but at the same time a declatim and unvalued Fe type, tends to ponder some global evil of unclear nature, the struggle with which is pointless – one can only humbly accept their fate. As a logician, ILI enjoys developing themes of a global apocalypse supposedly coming for us all, and of personal death, during which a final separation from other existences of this world occurs.
IEI, in this regard, is the complete opposite of ILI. The culture of damage is used by IEI to create a romantic image of themselves and the surrounding reality, as well as a pretext to shift the burden of earning a living onto other people (“I’m a broken, fragile flower, because of my traumas I feel the invisible strings of this world – so what do you want from me, to work like a draft animal?!”).
Finally, LIE prefers to use their damage as an excuse for “I have nothing to lose now”, which pushes them toward more intensive action in pursuit of new goals. In fact, any road to success involves mistakes and the traumas that follow, but only LIE, as a resilient declatim-positivist-emotivist, is ready to follow that road to the end.

The tendency toward masochism in all four victim types also becomes understandable if we realize that the sense of their own damaged state is an important part of their identity, one they do not try to get rid of – on the contrary, they are sometimes even willing to deepen it. Because it either provides an internal reason to act and involve others in that action (more common among extraverts), or to avoid any actions and emotions (more common among introverts).

Now let’s briefly talk about the contribution of Ni to decisiveness.
When considering Ni in the animal world, one should always keep in mind the fact that, in most cases, predators and prey are usually creatures of different species, and therefore no interaction between them can be established. However, in humans, Ni’s attraction to Se plays a central role in the sexual behavior of decisive quadras. Moreover, it turns out that it is precisely the synergy of this attraction that creates the decisiveness factor in its full scope - whereas separately, Se and Ni may exhibit decisive traits, but to a much lesser extent. So how does this work?

As mentioned above, a marker of Ni is the desire for the role of a dependent-submissive victim next to a powerful partner. Se tends to perceive their partner as their property or, at the very least, as part of their domain of control. Obsessed with fantasies about their injuries, Ni, constantly reporting them to a partner with strong Se, causes them anxiety. Specifically, Se feels they are losing control of the situation. Someone has harmed their partner (from a sensory-static point of view, everything is driven by someone’s specific will), thereby penetrating their domain of control and encroaching on their dominance. This someone must be found and punished! And this is where Ni has complete creative freedom, limited only by the degree of personal cunning and selfishness (total decisiveness) of the particular victim. Victim-type girls who provoke their boyfriends with “go fight them”, because they are sure someone offended them - this is the simplest and most widely known example.

However, when coming into close contact with other people, Ni also shifts its attention to them, to their real or imagined injuries, and begins to tell the partner who and why hurt them before (even if they hadn’t noticed it themselves). If the partner is judicious, such obsessive attempts to find hidden enemies in their surroundings will likely be seen as a general neurosis of the Ni-holder, and they may even try to “treat” them (most likely unsuccessfully, since for Ni the factor of its damage is the basis of personality). But if Ni meets a decisive sensory partner, they willingly pick up on Ni’s suspicions and sometimes begin to see them as a call to action. Why wouldn’t they - someone not particularly perceptive on their own has just had their eyes opened to the injustice being committed against them, and thus, the reasons for aggression toward competitors become much more abundant.

All this also works on a global scale. Wars often do not start because a strong Se country wants to take something from another. Usually, Se senses the opponent’s strength well, and if they are roughly equal, it rarely strikes first. Taking into account political alliances, where the weak counterbalance the strong with numbers, this is often the case, and wars then are rare and start only under extraordinary circumstances (for example, the emergence of a third force that no one previously suspected). But it’s a completely different matter when the ideas inflamed by provocateurs come into play, saying that someone infringed on our national dignity, took something from us, damaged our interests. In a situation of fragile equilibrium, such a catalyst can become (and often becomes) the deciding factor in the outbreak of a new war.

It should not be assumed that Ni necessarily CONSCIOUSLY aggravates the situation, provoking conflicts and wars in the manner described above. No, this is far from always the case. Probably, only a combination of Se with Ni in one person (i.e., strong material ambition + a sense of being fatally wounded) gives rise to a psychopathic personality, which is a cunning instigator and hidden aggressor in one. If Se is weak, Ni by itself does not carry a conflictual potential but gains one only in conjunction with a Se-partner who begins to play the role of avenger.
In any case, the subject with strong Ni is sometimes absolutely sincerely convinced of the presence and exceptional depth of their trauma of one origin or another. They are as sure of this as, for example, someone with strong Ne is sure that they possess a superior freedom of action and unique abilities to change the world.
To the same extent that strong Ne constantly destabilizes external reality, trying to find something new in it to gain more freedom, strong Ni constantly scratches at its inner psychological reality, its traumas, which may have been initially quite real but, due to constant attention, acquire truly phantasmagoric proportions.

And finally, one last thing. It may seem that the concepts of freedom and damage belong to unrelated categories, and there are no transitional states between Ne-subcultures of the free and Ni-subcultures of the damaged. But there are, and in abundance, and this boundary is permeable in both directions. First of all, the very realization that you are damaged automatically frees you internally from the need to follow the rules of life as a “normal” person. And if you manage to convince others of your damage - then you are free not only internally, but also according to formal external norms. On the other hand, if you consider yourself freer than those around you, they immediately begin to suspect that something is wrong with you, that you were damaged or “abnormal” from the beginning. And if they wish, they can convince you of that as well. Thus, if one tries to formulate the slogan of pure irrational intuition (not differentiated into Ne and Ni), it comes out something like: “Something is clearly wrong with me, but now I’m free to do whatever I please.”

Appendix

Probable worldviews of socionic intuitive types (with emphasis on the location of their intuitive function in the personality structure):
IEI: “I want to be so damaged that I don’t have to do anything.”
ILI: “I want to be so damaged that I don’t have to feel anything.”
ILE: “I want to be so free that I can forget about any informal relationships.”
IEE: “I want to be so free that I can forget about any formal rules.”
EIE: “I must become the center of society’s attention because I am especially damaged and I know who harms us, who is to blame.”
LIE: “I must do this (whatever it may be), because I am especially damaged (normal people won’t be able to, they’ll be afraid - but I have nothing to lose).”
LII: “I must understand how this works, because I am freer than others from stereotypes of thinking.”
EII: “I must understand and accept anyone’s personality, because I am freer than others from prejudice.”

More on Ni

← Back to Ni