Is holding on to something is Si? - Page 2

Is holding on to something is Si?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 15 of 15
Thank Tree16Thanks

This is a discussion on Is holding on to something is Si? within the SJ's Temperament Forum- The Overseers forums, part of the Keirsey Temperament Forums category; Originally Posted by Hicks If I'm not mistaken there is a nostalgic quality to Si, so at times maybe. Nostalgia ...

  1. #11

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    If I'm not mistaken there is a nostalgic quality to Si, so at times maybe.
    Nostalgia is associated with the past and mood, but I think it gets used synonymously with Si a bit too much. So Se sees the physical characteristics of an object in real time, and in those with higher access it's not parted out/isolated.. it's not just an object.. its taking in the whole, the all of sensate data in the environment.. as it moves and mixes and interacts, it's never static, always flowing. My question about Si, is when it encounters a new object, something it's never encountered before... what is that process? Where is the first impression born, if not Se? Does the Si user perceive the first impression via Ne, or Se?

    It must be Ne. What an Si user perceives or takes in from the extnernal must be Ne, they just don't 'look at it' or are less 'consciously aware' of it. So the external data is absorbed via Ne, but they only pay attention to the inner, subjective sensate impressions of Ne uptake. Yay, Nay, Cray?

    Edit: Sorry @Hicks , I'm not actually directing this at ya lol.. I'm more or less rambling to myself. Don't feel obligated to respond!

    I bet you we are perceiving with more than Ni, Si, Ne and Se. There is on average 11 million pieces of data coming at us, while we process about 40 of it. ha ha ha. A nice slice of humble pie.
    Last edited by ultracrepidarian; 07-06-2019 at 01:04 PM.
    HIX thanked this post.

  2. #12
    Unknown

    Edit: Sorry @Hicks , I'm not actually directing this at ya lol.. I'm more or less rambling to myself. Don't feel obligated to respond!

    Oh thank god !!!! I didn't know the answer and for a sec I started to feel faint.

  3. #13

    Quote Originally Posted by ultracrepidarian View Post
    Nostalgia is associated with the past and mood, but I think it gets used synonymously with Si a bit too much.
    Heh nostalgia to me is a feeling. You know, Feeling feeling. I think ISFJs have it way more than ISTJs.


    So Se sees the physical characteristics of an object in real time, and in those with higher access it's not parted out/isolated.. it's not just an object.. its taking in the whole, the all of sensate data in the environment.. as it moves and mixes and interacts, it's never static, always flowing. My question about Si, is when it encounters a new object, something it's never encountered before... what is that process? Where is the first impression born, if not Se? Does the Si user perceive the first impression via Ne, or Se?
    I can only speak for myself and of what I observed of myself if that helps. As a datapoint. As an ISTJ.

    But first I'll say, the idea of "and mixes and interacts, it's never static, always flowing" made me go

    No, yeah, I know you said that was Se but... yeah, my world, I try to keep it as static as possible, the perceptions. I'm fine with having to deal with quick responses in immediate physical situations* but my perception is still maintained as very static, things are not "flowing". I hope that made sense.

    *: (not crazy complex new situations requiring Ne)


    And when I encounter a new object... I want to immediately identify it and place it inside distinct boundaries. Categorise it, know what it is. And when I can do that, I do actually see more distinct object boundaries. I just see / am aware of the object itself way more CLEARLY. While the object remains unidentified, it's just a blotch of colours, shapes etc., a blotch of sensory data.

    I don't prefer that. I prefer identifying it, to know what it is. Then it becomes distinct... then I can deal with it comfortably.

    I of course usually identify objects immediately, but sometimes if I take a little time with something very new, then I can notice it's like this.

    Without identification, ofc I can still run around ok if I have to, if it's not to be too complex actions. Actually for navigation (physically, in the world), I do this a lot. I have no problem with it. But when it comes to actually dealing with objects in front of me beyond just finding my way around or beyond managing objects without really paying attention to their function (e.g. I am moving things around, then I just need to know what space they take up etc), then I want full object identification.

    Also, when the object is complex, I will approach it very cautiously and do not want to fuck up things with it basically. If I sense it's not too risky (i.e. I won't damage the object, etc), I will sometimes "poke" at it a bit, try things with it, though I don't really like to do that too much. But I can get more information from it that way sometimes. Otherwise, I just try to observe and break down its details, identify all the concrete bits of the object, e.g. by checking them against each other, with relative comparisons, and yes logical reasoning also can contribute here. Then I'll be able to deal with it.

    Best though is if I have an instruction manual - sometimes literally a manual yes - for it. Heh. It detailing all its features, so I can line them up and have a really distinct idea of all bits of the new object that are to be identified otherwise.

    So... when it is a NEW *and* COMPLEX object, I will really really get stopped in my tracks. Same for NEW COMPLEX situations. If I'm forced to respond fast, I will jump in nearly "blindly" and try to just take whatever actions I can see as most sensible, as far as possible to even see something sensible.

    So as for first impression...... if you subscribe to Beebe's ideas, you can call it shadow Se.

    Did this help?

    As for Ne. No, there is no way that I would absorb the new object or situation with Ne. My ability to deal with out of the box perceptions is too weak for that. Nah. I have to get and collect all concrete details first, put them together, build the big picture. Then that you could sortof call Ne though I don't think it's directly Ne.

    As far as I even subscribe to functions. I just still have this thread in my subscribed threads (if I post in a thread, I get subscribed to the thread automatically).
    Last edited by grumpytiger; 07-09-2019 at 02:33 PM.
    jcal, Aridela, ultracrepidarian and 1 others thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14

    Thanks @grumpytiger . I really appreciate you sharing how you break perception down for something that doesn't immediately get sorted in the sensory storehouse. That you think its more Se than Ne, is actually very helpful. Because you see, I was under the impression that Ne, while being an inferior, would still be 'more consciously accessible' than shadow Se. Otherwise, what the *F* is the inferior doing? Why are we so focused on the tert and inferior to begin with? Why do we count them 3 and 4 in the stack? What you say makes sense though.. because even in function tests (which I hate for a number of reasons, but let's just go with that as a 'kind of' measure for purposes of this thread) will often show say, an ISTJ scoring higher in both Se and Ti than Ne or Ni or Fe or sometimes... Fi (tert). So I have to chew on this more... but your feedback is super appreciated. One other question, if your up for it... when and how do you experience yourself using Ne?

    Any other Si-users wanna chime in?

  6. #15

    Quote Originally Posted by grumpytiger View Post
    Heh nostalgia to me is a feeling. You know, Feeling feeling. I think ISFJs have it way more than ISTJs.




    I can only speak for myself and of what I observed of myself if that helps. As a datapoint. As an ISTJ.

    But first I'll say, the idea of "and mixes and interacts, it's never static, always flowing" made me go

    No, yeah, I know you said that was Se but... yeah, my world, I try to keep it as static as possible, the perceptions. I'm fine with having to deal with quick responses in immediate physical situations* but my perception is still maintained as very static, things are not "flowing". I hope that made sense.

    *: (not crazy complex new situations requiring Ne)


    And when I encounter a new object... I want to immediately identify it and place it inside distinct boundaries. Categorise it, know what it is. And when I can do that, I do actually see more distinct object boundaries. I just see / am aware of the object itself way more CLEARLY. While the object remains unidentified, it's just a blotch of colours, shapes etc., a blotch of sensory data.

    I don't prefer that. I prefer identifying it, to know what it is. Then it becomes distinct... then I can deal with it comfortably.

    I of course usually identify objects immediately, but sometimes if I take a little time with something very new, then I can notice it's like this.

    Without identification, ofc I can still run around ok if I have to, if it's not to be too complex actions. Actually for navigation (physically, in the world), I do this a lot. I have no problem with it. But when it comes to actually dealing with objects in front of me beyond just finding my way around or beyond managing objects without really paying attention to their function (e.g. I am moving things around, then I just need to know what space they take up etc), then I want full object identification.

    Also, when the object is complex, I will approach it very cautiously and do not want to fuck up things with it basically. If I sense it's not too risky (i.e. I won't damage the object, etc), I will sometimes "poke" at it a bit, try things with it, though I don't really like to do that too much. But I can get more information from it that way sometimes. Otherwise, I just try to observe and break down its details, identify all the concrete bits of the object, e.g. by checking them against each other, with relative comparisons, and yes logical reasoning also can contribute here. Then I'll be able to deal with it.

    Best though is if I have an instruction manual - sometimes literally a manual yes - for it. Heh. It detailing all its features, so I can line them up and have a really distinct idea of all bits of the new object that are to be identified otherwise.

    So... when it is a NEW *and* COMPLEX object, I will really really get stopped in my tracks. Same for NEW COMPLEX situations. If I'm forced to respond fast, I will jump in nearly "blindly" and try to just take whatever actions I can see as most sensible, as far as possible to even see something sensible.

    So as for first impression...... if you subscribe to Beebe's ideas, you can call it shadow Se.

    Did this help?

    As for Ne. No, there is no way that I would absorb the new object or situation with Ne. My ability to deal with out of the box perceptions is too weak for that. Nah. I have to get and collect all concrete details first, put them together, build the big picture. Then that you could sortof call Ne though I don't think it's directly Ne.

    As far as I even subscribe to functions. I just still have this thread in my subscribed threads (if I post in a thread, I get subscribed to the thread automatically).
    Thank you, your explanation makes a lot of sense.

    In my case I tackle every new object I encounter with Ne first and categorise it with Si at a secondary stage.

     


    'Oh, look there's a massive tree over there. I wonder what kind of tree it is. I remember we had trees like that in my hometown but they were much smaller - more like bushes really. I wonder if they have the same species of trees in Northern Europe? Perhaps
    I should check when I get back home.

    *takes phone out, uses cool plant identification app*

    'Oh it IS a sweet chestnut tree. I wonder if I can get some chestnuts if I come here in autumn?'


    Se only works for like a second or two, then the other functions take over. I *could* use Se, but I find it draining to do so. Regardless, I can use Se relatively well when I choose to, because I had to level it up in the past.
    Last edited by Aridela; 07-12-2019 at 08:59 AM.
    ultracrepidarian thanked this post.


     
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] Struggling to focus on the current project - to busy focusing on the next.
    By CowardlyPal in forum ENTP Forum- The Visionaries
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-09-2018, 09:10 PM
  2. Am I really Si-dom ? Does Si-Fe beat Si-Te ? :3
    By Mr inappropriate in forum What's my personality type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-01-2015, 09:55 AM
  3. [INFP] Holding back or holding in
    By Sonne in forum INFP Forum - The Idealists
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-07-2014, 06:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:47 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0