[SuperunknownVortex]

About Ni and Si.​

First, I have a better and clearer understanding of every other cognitive processes except Ni (introverted intuition) and Si (introverted sensing).

My first problem with the two is memory. As I read articles and comments on the Si function, I feel that somehow Si is equivalent to memory and the past. Perhaps I may be mistaken. But if that were the case then all of us would have a high Si because most of our lives are centered around our memories which were formed in our past. For instance, we learned what the standard for a 'tree' was, and that standard for a 'tree' allowed us to discern between a 'tree' and, say, a 'rock'. For some of us the standard of a 'tree' was unsatisfactory so we created a different standard for a 'tree'.

Now, I often reflect on the past (whether it be my own, another persons or through history) to create or uncover a significant pattern or a 'meaning'. Say, for instance, as I reflect on my friend's past by reflecting on what I've learned in my education and my experience I uncover that every time he or she binge drinks he or she has a feeling of abandonment which reminds him or her of the parent that abandoned him or her. Though I myself don't understand this cycle myself because I don't do or have experienced it I feel that it nevertheless exists in the other person, and I'm able to predict their behavior much more. Is that Ni or Si at work here?

Another example is this. In high-school, I would study philosophy. I would then in my mind wonder what the implications would be if everyone would do if so-and-so was true based upon what I envision myself as wanting to do without the 'standards' created by whomever or whatever. But I often wondered to myself what the 'standard' was for, say, morality and ethics. Is there even such a 'thing' as morality and ethics? How would my life be different if I began to see an entire concept in a different way? Am I being hindered by what we define as moral or ethical? I was more focused on my interpretation thereof and not the world itself.

This all sounds a bit muddy, but I hope that it does make some sense! I do want to understand whether or not I use either Ni or Si more than the other.

 

[Xplosive]

From my understanding both Ni and Si keep an storehouse of information (as they both serve the purpose of being introverted perception functions) - one is pattern/impression based the other literal details.

That sounds like Ni-Fe at work to me - but I'm not 100% sure.

 

[vocalist]

One application of Si that comes to mind: When my siblings and I each learned to drive, my ISTJ brother (with Si as his dominant function) already knew how to get pretty much anywhere in town; he remembered just from having been a passenger for so long, how to get to every place he'd ever been. I, on the other hand (with Si way down at no. 8), had zero confidence in my ability to find my way anywhere, and even sometimes had to travel a certain route two or more times before it was adequately cemented in my head. Even now, I still often find myself thinking my destination is one way, only to discover once I get there that it wasn't where I thought it was...I am severely directionally challenged.

Ni is like knowing exactly what you want or what is going to happen, and then seeing it through. An analogy I have comparing it to Ne, is shopping for a gift. Ne might be inclined to just go to the store and browse every shelf to get ideas for the perfect gift; Ni, on the other hand, will wait to get an idea first, then go to the store and buy that gift straight away without bothering to explore other options.

 

[Everyday Ghoul]

In my opinion, this is the best "plain English" explanation of Ni, that I've ever seen. Credit to the forum member Harley.

In my own words, I would say Ni is a lens of perspective.
It's about looking inwards and reflecting on how something is the product of of someone(s) past actions, looking at what it is today, or contemplate on what it might mean in the future. For example an Ne might look at a measuring cup and think "hmm, sure this can used to measure ingredients, but if I want to get creative I could use it as a hat, a holder to hold my pens, a vase to hold my flowers etc." Ne wants to find ways to use a measuring cup outside the conventional way of measuring food ingredients.

Ni on the other hand, would look at that same measuring cup and think, "this measuring cup is used to measure food ingredients, which in the past was the domain of woman since they were expected to carry on domestic duties. Yet today both men and women are expected to take share in such duties, so now this measuring cup is not a symbol of oppression but rather equality. Also notice how this measuring cup is only using the metric system even though I am not American. The measuring cup can also be a symbol of American capitalism and dominance, since it uses a measuring system no other country is using". Ni is not interested in manipulating the cup in any way like Ne, but rather sees how the cup is the product and symbol of different thoughts and movements (feminism, capitalism etc.)

As for examples, I think a really good example of Ni would be the domino scene for V for Vendetta
If you look at the first comment in the link for that video, someone writes that the dominoes represent the people that were killed during the regime, and the last domino represents V himself. The dominoes aren't just dominoes they are symbols that represent the oppression of the government. And notice how the dominoes are arrange so that they create a V? This is meant to represent that all those people in died during the regime, their deaths, and their pain, is what made V. He is a man who is made up of the pain and suffering of others.

I can't "define" Si, but, based on my observations of Si users, I'll list some traits, that I relate to it. Si users seem to have the most keen awareness of their physical environments, out of all the types. For instance, when my ESTJ sister visits, she considers my room to not be clean, because she's quick to notice, that I didn't dust my fan and dresser. My ESTJ father, used to try and impress me, as a child, with his ability to walk up to a clover patch, and pick out a four leaf clover, from a standing distance, within five seconds. A child I know of, who would seem to have good use of Si, could pick out anything, that stood out in the environment. For instance, at the ballpark, he noticed, that one of the light fixtures, was turned in the opposite direction of all the others. His ESFP mother, said she never would have noticed.

This honed sensory awareness probably develops, because it is minute sensory details, that trigger Si's disengaged mode. For instance, seeing a pair of earrings, that draws up a flashback type memory. There's no conscious way of telling what sensory cue will trigger this, so they just become very in tune with their whole sensory environment, as it's always some minute sensory detail, that triggers it. It remains subjective, fitting the qualifications for an introverted function, because the pair of earrings would have to have subjective importance, to trigger that flashback memory.

Si, also, seems to be a bit "rigid", much like Te. It isn't questioning. It has sort of a "What is, is, and what works, works." vibe. If you want to correct an SJ child, there's no need to tell him why his behavior was bad, only to tell him, that it was bad. He'll commit it to that storehouse, and recall, when he runs into that situation again, that he shouldn't repeat his behavior. There's no need to know why he shouldn't. If an SJ runs into a situation, that is familiar or relatable to them, they just use what they know has worked before. In a situation, that is completely foreign, they are apt to be very hesitant and uncertain of how to proceed.

Si catches a lot of negative flack, but any Te user would have to be a bit envious, of the extra bit of efficiency, that Si allows the xSTJ. The wider range of experiences the Si user has, the narrower his focus is allowed to become. An xSTJ, with a few years on the job, will kick ass, at his/her job.

 

[SuperunknownVortex]

I can't "define" Si, but, based on my observations of Si users, I'll list some traits, that I relate to it. Si users seem to have the most keen awareness of their physical environments, out of all the types. For instance, when my ESTJ sister visits, she considers my room to not be clean, because she's quick to notice, that I didn't dust my fan and dresser. My ESTJ father, used to try and impress me, as a child, with his ability to walk up to a clover patch, and pick out a four leaf clover, from a standing distance, within five seconds. A child I know of, who would seem to have good use of Si, could pick out anything, that stood out in the environment. For instance, at the ballpark, he noticed, that one of the light fixtures, was turned in the opposite direction of all the others. His ESFP mother, said she never would have noticed.

This honed sensory awareness probably develops, because it is minute sensory details, that trigger Si's disengaged mode. For instance, seeing a pair of earrings, that draws up a flashback type memory. There's no conscious way of telling what sensory cue will trigger this, so they just become very in tune with their whole sensory environment, as it's always some minute sensory detail, that triggers it. It remains subjective, fitting the qualifications for an introverted function, because the pair of earrings would have to have subjective importance, to trigger that flashback memory.

You're examples are helpful, by the way.

I, too, can do this, but I feel that it may be Se.

For instance, say that I'm at an amusement park. Since my occupation is groundskeeping, I notice around me that the sidewalks are poorly edged; the hedges haven't be properly hedged; there is trash everywhere but the trash cans are overfilled; that limb on that tree is a hazard to the amusement park goers. I refer back to this standard I've developed while working as a groundskeeper. But then I might wonder who decided an edged sidewalk was attractive in the first place or what the whole point of my line of work is (which, I suspect, sounds more like Ti).

Or another instance when someone brews a 'bad' batch of coffee. I drink the coffee and say, 'yuck, it's too strong!' I might have a 'flashback type memory' if it's a person who consistently brews a 'bad' batch of coffee (ex., my poor, old grandmother...), but most of the time I go through in my head why it's 'bad'.

But those flashback type memories are so weird. I don't know when I have them per se, but when they happen they bother me greatly. For instance, I'll drive past by the house where my best-friend lived. As I stare at the house, I feel so weird. I remember certain 'things' about it: it smelt like cats; there was barely any lights turned on; the basement floor was concrete and therefore cold at night. I accept these 'facts', but I wonder about the meaning of the 'memories' that are brought about by simply looking at the house.

Another example of that is when I was in counseling. The counselor drew on a white-board 'past', 'present' and 'future'. The 'present' and the 'future' were clearly defined with potential goals and subsequent problems. But the 'past' was empty. When I began to explore the 'past', those 'flashback type memories' would occur and I would feel so uncomfortable in the moment as I began to, I suppose, understand the 'details' of what had happened before and associate them with the clearly defined 'present' and 'future'.

 

[Holunder]

First, I have a better and clearer understanding of every other cognitive processes except Ni (introverted intuition) and Si (introverted sensing).

I really can't say anything about Si, but I described my notion of dominant Ni here. Tertiary or inferior Ni however is more simplistic.

Another example is this. In high-school, I would study philosophy. I would then in my mind wonder what the implications would be if everyone would do if so-and-so was true based upon what I envision myself as wanting to do without the 'standards' created by whomever or whatever. But I often wondered to myself what the 'standard' was for, say, morality and ethics. Is there even such a 'thing' as morality and ethics? How would my life be different if I began to see an entire concept in a different way? Am I being hindered by what we define as moral or ethical? I was more focused on my interpretation thereof and not the world itself.

I'd say this is neither Ni nor Si, but Ti.

Ni on the other hand, would look at that same measuring cup and think, "this measuring cup is used to measure food ingredients,

Stop there and you got it about right. Why should I look at a measuring cup and think about equality? That's pure Ne!

 

[UncertainSomething]

Si is introverted sensing, basically means anything that was once sensed is stored, understood and is used on demand.
Ni is introvert iNtuition, basically means finding patterns and interpreting what will happen and is used to advance ahead.

Si users understand how to deal with things on the spot from a detailed memory shaped by the senses. Step by step from past experience and gained knowledge.
Ni users understand how something will turn out and the likely consequences of any given action. Step by step of future implications and analyzing concepts.

Think thats about right give or take but I'm sure it could be improved.

 

[azrinsani]

Si is about memorizing objects
Ni is about memorizing connection between objects

Ni is used mostly by INTJs and INFJs. One key characteristics of INTJs is there strong appetite for doing diligent research
INTJs will apply Te to turn those connections into results

I think that's what being smart is all about... It's about the ability to see patterns between objects

 

[Tucken]

Si to me is giving your memories details or impressions, then it could be used for something in the present. Si means a good memory for "details" but I much doubt it means better memory.

Imagine that you were to recreate something. Si means to "remember extras" about the original IF the original was added to memory. With Si you don't just remember that you used to have a bike at the age of 6 and that it was great. You remember the colours and the patterns of the bike, and everything else that stimulated you enough. Maybe the crack in the handle or the joy (feeling) of riding it and were you went for the rides.

Like I have this great memory for exactly what I was doing at the amusement park. What I ate and when and with whom. Arrival time, departure. Where I laughed and how hearty. What is new and what has changed since last time> I need a "memory update", that's quite Si I believe. It's individual what the person finds interesting I suppose.

When you learn you add new information to older knowledge - connecting the dots. Si is like the orientation to add more knowledge and I suppose Ni means to interpret knowledge. With Si you want a lot of info before moving forward and with Ni you work that process backwards. Some thoughts, can't really back it up:tongue:

 

[azrinsani]

What about Ni?

 

[Munchies]

muddy indeed.

There isnt a Si-Ni scale in your head which reads a certain % of which you use more than the other, your brain isnt a computer, you thikn differently for different situationssssssssssss, But some people are more inclined to think emotionaly than technical, perceiving than judging and also a tendency to think deep rather than superficial (N vs S)... all at the same time depending on your mood if you will act more extroverted than introverted. But your mood has more of an impact on all of these "functions" as a whole

 

[Narrator]

The person I would consider having the best handle on the connections between ideas who I've known for a while had a powerful Ti, not Ni.

I always found Si descriptions to be a limited description of a much wider function, or a description of a very select part of the way in which I think and process information, connected mainly to emotions, not so much theories.

My memory is bad, but I lead with Si, Si does not necessarily equal memory, and I wouldn't say it means a person thinks shallowly either, necessarily. If I were to call my memory anything, I would call it selective, and at a push, intuitive, in the non-MBTI sense of the word. If I were to describe the way I think, I'd call it fluid - like emotions (In the sense of different styles of thinking) - and mostly one track.

 

[SuperunknownVortex]

Si to me is giving your memories details or impressions, then it could be used for something in the present. Si means a good memory for "details" but I much doubt it means better memory.

Imagine that you were to recreate something. Si means to "remember extras" about the original IF the original was added to memory. With Si you don't just remember that you used to have a bike at the age of 6 and that it was great. You remember the colours and the patterns of the bike, and everything else that stimulated you enough. Maybe the crack in the handle or the joy (feeling) of riding it and were you went for the rides.

Like I have this great memory for exactly what I was doing at the amusement park. What I ate and when and with whom. Arrival time, departure. Where I laughed and how hearty. What is new and what has changed since last time> I need a "memory update", that's quite Si I believe. It's individual what the person finds interesting I suppose.

When you learn you add new information to older knowledge - connecting the dots. Si is like the orientation to add more knowledge and I suppose Ni means to interpret knowledge. With Si you want a lot of info before moving forward and with Ni you work that process backwards. Some thoughts, can't really back it up:tongue:

I really liked your description! It's easier to understand and clearly distinguishes two of the most 'mysterious' cognitive processes.

 

[dude10000]

Si perhaps can be best conceived in terms of familiarity and unfamiliarity, in terms of what is phenomenally stable and what is phenomenally unusual. By understanding the signposts that we attach ourselves to within the general flux of sensation, we gain an awareness of continuity and security. This is why SJs value trust, commitments, priorities, citizenship, traditions etc. more so than other psychological types.

As a consequence, Si shouldn't be confused with details, since Si is suspicious of new details outside of its comfort zone.

Ni is insight. On the surface, it is predictive, allowing the imagination of unfolding sequences of events. At a deeper level Ni is analytic, synthetic, and synoptic-- immediately apprehending the relations between concepts and/or events, bringing together variegated sets of ideas in a vision of unity and completeness, and giving a feel for the limits and boundaries of a given problem-space, thus seeing around the corners of an issue. Ni allows us to ask Kantian questions such as "how is knowledge possible?" or to reflectively reject such questions as poorly formed or unintelligible.

 

[dude10000]

The person I would consider having the best handle on the connections between ideas who I've known for a while had a powerful Ti, not Ni.

Ti is more about modeling, developing frameworks, clarification, explanation, et cetera. This ranges from an INTP scientist generating new theoretical principles, to an ISTP building the perfect jump shot by learning new training methods, getting tips from coaches, clarifying what needs to be practiced, etc.

 

[TeeKwug]

I cannot relate to Ni in the slightest. However, Si being my tertiary, I think I may understand a little. If I remember correctly Si reflects back on the past and the information achieved then. Someone correct me if im wrong but I believe Si is at work when, after studying in a certain room one day, I do well on the test the next day in the same room. I see my environment and that triggers what I did in that room the previous day to come to me. The detailed data (subject matter that was studied) is linked to sensory information (the sight, perhaps smell of the room). Would anyone else say this is an accurate analysis?

 

[NeedsNewNameNow]

I can't "define" Si, but, based on my observations of Si users, I'll list some traits, that I relate to it. Si users seem to have the most keen awareness of their physical environments, out of all the types. For instance, when my ESTJ sister visits, she considers my room to not be clean, because she's quick to notice, that I didn't dust my fan and dresser..

I believe Se has the most keen awareness of their surroundings. But for Si.. since they are comparing the present environment against what was.. they are quick to pick up on things that our out of place, unclean, etc.

 

[amnorvend]

Ni and Si are actually pretty different. They're both Perceiving functions, so they have to do with how people prefer to take in information.

Si is preoccupied with learning from experience. When Si users need information, they'll think to past experiences.

Ni on the other hand is concerned with having an internal vision and bringing it to fruition. They will tend to reach conclusions based on abstract ideas and vision. Usually, there's an "aha!" moment involved.

But if that were the case then all of us would have a high Si because most of our lives are centered around our memories which were formed in our past.

Remember that you use all of the cognitive functions a lot. After all, would you claim that everyone who doesn't prefer Se is blind and deaf? Or that someone who doesn't prefer Fi has no emotions? Not at all.

Now, I often reflect on the past (whether it be my own, another persons or through history) to create or uncover a significant pattern or a 'meaning'. Say, for instance, as I reflect on my friend's past by reflecting on what I've learned in my education and my experience I uncover that every time he or she binge drinks he or she has a feeling of abandonment which reminds him or her of the parent that abandoned him or her. Though I myself don't understand this cycle myself because I don't do or have experienced it I feel that it nevertheless exists in the other person, and I'm able to predict their behavior much more. Is that Ni or Si at work here?

This sounds like Si being driven by Fe. Si would say "in the past such and such has caused this person to feel x." Ni would cause a person to reach that decision without necessarily having any prior experience with it. It would say something like "x would make a person feel this way" without the user necessarily knowing why or how they knew that.

Another example is this. In high-school, I would study philosophy. I would then in my mind wonder what the implications would be if everyone would do if so-and-so was true based upon what I envision myself as wanting to do without the 'standards' created by whomever or whatever. But I often wondered to myself what the 'standard' was for, say, morality and ethics. Is there even such a 'thing' as morality and ethics? How would my life be different if I began to see an entire concept in a different way? Am I being hindered by what we define as moral or ethical? I was more focused on my interpretation thereof and not the world itself.

This is definitely N at work. If I had to guess, I'd say Ne. Mainly because you're spending time generating possibilities and putting together "what if" scenarios. Ni would probably be more concerned with figuring out how to do away with the standards they didn't like (without spending a whole lot of time figuring out why they're bad or what the alternatives would be).

 

[SuperunknownVortex]

This sounds like Si being driven by Fe. Si would say "in the past such and such has caused this person to feel x." Ni would cause a person to reach that decision without necessarily having any prior experience with it. It would say something like "x would make a person feel this way" without the user necessarily knowing why or how they knew that.

This is fascinating! The example I gave is more or less specific, but I wonder: would it be possible for and, if so, how would Ni generate that 'insight' without any prior knowledge? Or in the example I gave, could it be that Ti verified the 'insight' generated by Ni as 'true' based upon certain criteria?

Also, I wanted to add something I forgot: in my childhood and adolescence I'd have these vague impressions or insights about the future of myself and others but, at the time, had no actual data to verify or deny the validity of those impressions or insights I had. Near the end of high-school and when I went to college, I spent a great deal of time learning to determine whether or not my impressions or insights about, say, myself, my family or society as whole (all of which had stayed with me for a long time) had any validity to them based upon certain principles (whether the principle was a biological principle, a psychological principle, or a philosophical principle). And I usually had this vague notion of what I wanted my future to be like with any prior 'experience', and, surprisingly, I've acted on even in times I've felt I've been distracted.

This is definitely N at work. If I had to guess, I'd say Ne. Mainly because you're spending time generating possibilities and putting together "what if" scenarios. Ni would probably be more concerned with figuring out how to do away with the standards they didn't like (without spending a whole lot of time figuring out why they're bad or what the alternatives would be).

I agree that this is N at work, but I disagree that it was Ne.