Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
one of my Ni aha moments led me to the following:

Ne/Si = abstract & conscious real time experience [Ne] + concrete & subconscious past memory/filter [Si]

Se/Ni = concrete & conscious real time experience [Se] + abstract & subconscious past memory/filter [Ni]

I see a lot of people refer to Ni as future oriented and Si as past oriented, I disagree to an extent. They both stem from past experience. Si is clear and detailed past experience and that's why the past is trusted for Si users, because it is vivid and clear -- Si users store clear physical impressions. Ni is fuzzy and abstract past experience, and this is the reason Ni users get gut feelings about situations -- ITS NOT MAGIC -- it's the SAME as Si except it's not the sensory experience that comes to mind, its the abstract meaning of the experience that comes to mind.


Anyone agree?

I see a lot of Ne/Si users [even dominant Ne users] speak clearly about past experiences. They can describe past situations in detail. Whereas a lot of Se/Ni users [even dominant Se users] speak about "vibes" of past situations. Detail [Si] vs Vibes [Ni].

Si vs Ni example (regardless of position in top 4 functions) :

Ne/Si user - This reminds me of the last time we went to 7-Eleven and Twenty One Pilots was playing on the speakers and they didn't have the candy I wanted, remember how pissed we were? [emphasis on detail, no extraction of underlying meaning]

Se/Ni user - I got a feeling this 7-Eleven isn't gonna have the candy because they usually don't have it there. I don't know why I got this gut feeling but I just know it won't be there. [emphasis on the underlying meaning of the past, ignored the actual details]

They are both going back to the same past oriented situation, but one remembers the actual details and one remembers the abstract lesson instead of the detail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
I got this minus the latter Se/Ni user experience. Could you give another example?

But I think this could apply in my case to some people and relationship with them - I don't know why something is going to work out or not but my instincts are usually right. My Si is also s**t which has also made me question if my understanding of Se vs Ne is inaccurate.

But thank you for this. Many sites offer long theories about the cognitions but they lack clear concise examples of these differences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
I got this minus the latter Se/Ni user experience. Could you give another example?

But I think this could apply in my case to some people and relationship with them - I don't know why something is going to work out or not but my instincts are usually right. My Si is also s**t which has also made me question if my understanding of Se vs Ne is inaccurate.

But thank you for this. Many sites offer long theories about the cognitions but they lack clear concise examples of these differences.
no problem at all

lets say for example purposes that the Se user was with the Ne user that day at 7 Eleven...

The Ne user because of Si remembered the details [Twenty One Pilots on the speakers, "remember how angry I was" etc] whereas the Se user forgot about the details like the music playing and the emotion and instead held on to the meaning or lesson of the situation -- in this case the meaning being that convenient stores don't carry enough supply of that candy -- this is what Ni stored in the persons mind, instead of the realistic details like Si did. It's a shitty example i'll admit lol but I made it basic for the purpose of easy understanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,026 Posts
Si vs Ni example (regardless of position in top 4 functions) :

Ne/Si user - This reminds me of the last time we went to 7-Eleven and Twenty One Pilots was playing on the speakers and they didn't have the candy I wanted, remember how pissed we were? [emphasis on detail, no extraction of underlying meaning]

Se/Ni user - I got a feeling this 7-Eleven isn't gonna have the candy because they usually don't have it there. I don't know why I got this gut feeling but I just know it won't be there. [emphasis on the underlying meaning of the past, ignored the actual details]

They are both going back to the same past oriented situation, but one remembers the actual details and one remembers the abstract lesson instead of the detail.
I relate so much to Ne/Si in your example. People who know me well say that I have a vivid memory of the past, recalling things that they don't.

Now I'm wondering if I'm actually INFP or ISFJ instead of ISFP. Hmm.

Anyway, thank you for your concise explanation. I think this is the most relatable and clear explanation of Ni paired with Se that I've read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
566 Posts
Makes a lot of sense, i think also depending on which function you're inferior in, you'll have a harder time relating to. Example: Se is clear and concrete real timinformation, while Ne Is fuzzy and abstract. Well, I agree that I live the present moment through real and concrete information, I but I also relate to "fuzziness" a little bit because I'm a very zoned out person, which is due to being an Ni Dom. My memories are never clear in detail, always in moods and big picture concepts; so yes I agree with your Ni realization (aren't those just the best) :proud:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pensive Fine

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Makes a lot of sense, i think also depending on which function you're inferior in, you'll have a harder time relating to. Example: Se is clear and concrete real timinformation, while Ne Is fuzzy and abstract. Well, I agree that I live the present moment through real and concrete information, I but I also relate to "fuzziness" a little bit because I'm a very zoned out person, which is due to being an Ni Dom. My memories are never clear in detail, always in moods and big picture concepts; so yes I agree with your Ni realization (aren't those just the best) :proud:
You brought up something that I know is flawed in my post but I cant figure out how to fix it yet and that is how the placement of each functions affects everything because you have a point, as an intuitive dominant it can seem like we live in a fuzzy/abstract real time experience so saying that is exclusive to Ne is probably bad wording, same thing with Se users not having clear memory, I think there has to be some overlap there because I notice strong Se users have clearer memory than strong Ni users but at the same time their memory isn't as detailed as a strong Si user. I fully believe that you experience a lot of overlap with your ignoring function, so that could be the reason we still feel like we live in a fuzzy abstract world because of Ne overlap...

Or

instead of saying Ne is fuzzy abstract experience maybe we can say it's objective abstract & fuzzy real time experience meaning it's detached from personal experience, because that's what separates Ne from Ni. although "objective abstract & fuzzy real time experience" is a mouth full lmao
 

·
Heretic
ESI 5w4 9w8 2w1
Joined
·
10,704 Posts
Anyone agree?
Jung agree, that should in theory count a tiny little bit, even in Ti types who tend to reject authorities.

Firstly a general description:
I have often been asked, almost accusingly, why I speak of four functions and not of more or fewer.
That there are exactly four was a result I arrived at on purely empirical grounds. But as the following consideration will show,
these four together produce a kind of totality. Sensation establishes what is actually present,
thinking enables us to recognize its meaning, feeling tells us its value,
and intuition points to possibilities as to whence it came and whither it is going in a given situation.
In this way we can orient ourselves with respect to the immediate world as completely as when we locate a place geographically by latitude and longitude.
Secondly the definition: (Might be a bit hard to penetrate, but oh well)
35. Intuition (from intueri = to look into or upon) is according to my view, a basic
psychological function (v. Function). It is that psychological function which
transmits perceptions in an unconscious way. Everything whether outer or inner objects
or their associations, can be the object of this perception. Intuition has this
peculiar quality: it is neither sensation, nor feeling, nor intellectual conclusion,
although it may appear in any of these forms. Through intuition any one content is
presented as a complete whole, without our being able to explain or discover in what
way this content has been arrived at. Intuition is a kind of instinctive apprehension,
irrespective of the nature of its contents. Like sensation (q.v.) it is an irrational
(q.v.) perceptive function. Its contents, like those of sensation, have the character
of being given, in contrast to the 'derived' or 'deduced' character of feeling and
thinking contants. Intuitive cognition, therefore, possesses an intrinsic character of
certainty and conviction which enabled Spinoza to uphold the 'scientia intuitiva' as
the highest form of cognition. Intuition has this quality in common with sensation,
whose physical foundation is the ground and origin of its certitude. In the same way,
the certainty of intuition depends upon a definite psychic matter of fact, of whose
origin and state of readiness however, the subject was quite unconscious.
Intuition appears either in a subjective or an objective form: the former is a
perception of unconscious psychic facts whose origin is essentially subjective; the
latter is a perception of facts which depend upon subliminal perceptions of the
object and upon the thoughts and feelings occasioned thereby. Concrete and abstract
forms of intuition may be distinguished according to the degree of participation on
the part of sensation. Concrete intuition carries perceptions which are concerned with
the actuality of things, while abstract intuition transmits the perceptions of
ideational associations. Concrete intuition is a reactive process, since it follows
directly from the given circumstances; whereas abstract intuition like abstract
sensation necessitates a certain element of direction, an act of will or a purpose. In
common with sensation, intuition is a characteristic of infantile and primitive
psychology. As against the strength and sudden appearance of sense-impression it
transmits the perception of mythological images, the precursors of ideas (q.v.).
Intuition maintains a compensatory function to sensation, and, like sensation, it is
the material soil from which thinking and feeling are developed in the form of
rational functions. Intuition is an irrational function, notwithstanding the fact that
many intuitions may subseqently be split up into their component elements, whereby
their origin and appearance can also be made to harmonize with the laws of reason.
Everyone whose general attitude is orientated by the principle of intuition, i.e.
perception by way of the unconscious, belongs to the intuitive type (v. Type).
According to the manner in which intuition is employed, wheter directed within in the
service of cognition and inner perception or without in the service of action and
accomplishment, the introverted and extraverted intuitive types can be differentiated.
In abnormal cases a well-marked coalescence with, and an equally great determination
by the contents of the collective unconscious declares itself: this may give the
intuitive type an extremely irrational an unintellibible appearance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
I relate so much to Ne/Si in your example. People who know me well say that I have a vivid memory of the past, recalling things that they don't.

Now I'm wondering if I'm actually INFP or ISFJ instead of ISFP. Hmm.

Anyway, thank you for your concise explanation. I think this is the most relatable and clear explanation of Ni paired with Se that I've read.
Interesting, I'm an ISFP and I came down to say that whilst I'm an ISFP I really relate to the Ne/Si description! I'm very aware of the past and have very vivid memories. But I think surely Se isn't just limited to to that exact moment and then you forget. If we're so aware of our surroundings surely we'd remember the details we observed to clearly which is why we have such good memories?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
566 Posts
Interesting, I'm an ISFP and I came down to say that whilst I'm an ISFP I really relate to the Ne/Si description! I'm very aware of the past and have very vivid memories. But I think surely Se isn't just limited to to that exact moment and then you forget. If we're so aware of our surroundings surely we'd remember the details we observed to clearly which is why we have such good memories?
Si is not memory, good memory does not equal Si (although typically Si egos have pretty good memory, but that's not the essence of what Si is). I previously wrote a pretty detailed description of how Si is misunderstood somewhere on this forum, but im too lazy to go find it so ill just rewrite here lol. Si is subjective sensory experience. Si takes in real time, concrete information, then processes it through past sensory experiences (or through the memory of detailed sensory impressions). Have you ever smelt a flower, plant, candle, or any scent in particular and you were transported back to a memory and felt like you were actually there, reliving it all over again? That's what Si is, which is why it's considered "past focused." Not that Si users live in the past, it's more so they prefer to process real-time sensory experiences through past impressions of them. I hope I made sense and I'm definitely willing to clarify if you have any questions!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
Si is not memory, good memory does not equal Si (although typically Si egos have pretty good memory, but that's not the essence of what Si is). I previously wrote a pretty detailed description of how Si is misunderstood somewhere on this forum, but im too lazy to go find it so ill just rewrite here lol. Si is subjective sensory experience. Si takes in real time, concrete information, then processes it through past sensory experiences (or through the memory of detailed sensory impressions). Have you ever smelt a flower, plant, candle, or any scent in particular and you were transported back to a memory and felt like you were actually there, reliving it all over again? That's what Si is, which is why it's considered "past focused." Not that Si users live in the past, it's more so they prefer to process real-time sensory experiences through past impressions of them. I hope I made sense and I'm definitely willing to clarify if you have any questions!
Thanks for trying to clarify but I've always struggled with distinguishing between Se and Si. I get what you say about how Se is experiencing it and Si is relating it back to the past but surely people don't just smell something or go somewhere and not think about it being familiar or anything? If someone is so aware of the present moment as Se is described as being, surely they'd remember going places and seeing things and would automatically compare? Se descriptions seem to place Se as being unable to see anything but the present moment, spontaneous kind of function...but I don't think anyone is that extreme so how do you distinguish between the two functions?

Following your candle thing as I was actually in a Yankee Candle shop last week and systematically smelled every single candle in there- there were scents that I simply liked or disliked and there were scents that made me think of a certain place or person or event. So using the raw experience vs past relation...I did both. They seem very closely linked.

When I think of the intuitive functions I remember someone once explaining it like Ne creates the dots (generating lots of possibilities) and Ni joins dots (rather than creating all sorts of scenarios and possibilities and going off on tangents, they use what's currently there to see the big picture). I've yet to come across a description of any of the other functions that makes it easy to understand like that does
 

·
Heretic
ESI 5w4 9w8 2w1
Joined
·
10,704 Posts
Thanks for trying to clarify but I've always struggled with distinguishing between Se and Si. I get what you say about how Se is experiencing it and Si is relating it back to the past but surely people don't just smell something or go somewhere and not think about it being familiar or anything? If someone is so aware of the present moment as Se is described as being, surely they'd remember going places and seeing things and would automatically compare? Se descriptions seem to place Se as being unable to see anything but the present moment, spontaneous kind of function...but I don't think anyone is that extreme so how do you distinguish between the two functions?
The best way to distinguish is to cut away the past completely.
There is only now for both Si and Se.
Se wants to relate to the sensations of the moment.
Si wants to control how the sensations impact the self.

Si is picky and tries to shield the self from sensations that are disturbing.
Sure memory guides such a person, but memory also guides the Se person.
The focus on memory and past is entirely misplaced.
There is only now for both Si and Se as functions,
what happens to their content after it has been sensed is another matter.
It is like trying to track a product after it has been produced.
Anything that happens after is not something that the producer should have direct credit for.
It wasn't the producer who packaged and shipped it.
Yet in the way people talk about Si on this forum, you sort of get that impression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Following your candle thing as I was actually in a Yankee Candle shop last week and systematically smelled every single candle in there- there were scents that I simply liked or disliked and there were scents that made me think of a certain place or person or event. So using the raw experience vs past relation...I did both. They seem very closely linked.
Sounds very reasonable for Fi-Se. Your main function is always relating everything to what it means to you. Fi also uses memory, but in different way to Si. All the functions have to work together of course.

As I understand it Se is active perception. You experience things in the moment. Si is passive perception. It observes the environment and takes it in as information. That is why there is a difference between your vivid memories and the Si complete structure of sensory information. Se is fragmented and coloured by experience.

You could look at Si as a librarian, making sure all the information is in the right place, with Ne browsing all the shelves to get new ideas from what already exists.
Se on the other hand is like a cluttered room. Ni lives in the room and knows exactly where everything is. Ni spends most of its time sorting through all the stuff to find out what could go together, but the organization is always implicit.

(and no, I'm not saying anything about how messy Se-users and Si-users are, just how their brains are structured)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Sounds very reasonable for Fi-Se. Your main function is always relating everything to what it means to you. Fi also uses memory, but in different way to Si. All the functions have to work together of course.

As I understand it Se is active perception. You experience things in the moment. Si is passive perception. It observes the environment and takes it in as information. That is why there is a difference between your vivid memories and the Si complete structure of sensory information. Se is fragmented and coloured by experience.

You could look at Si as a librarian, making sure all the information is in the right place, with Ne browsing all the shelves to get new ideas from what already exists.
Se on the other hand is like a cluttered room. Ni lives in the room and knows exactly where everything is. Ni spends most of its time sorting through all the stuff to find out what could go together, but the organization is always implicit.

(and no, I'm not saying anything about how messy Se-users and Si-users are, just how their brains are structured)
Whats the difference between Si observation and Ni observation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Whats the difference between Si observation and Ni observation?
Ni doesn't really observe. It just structures the sensory experiences that Se has observed.

You could group the percentive functions like this:
Si and Se: observation
Si and Ni: structuring of information
Ni and Ne: idea generation
Se and Ne: exploration
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 · (Edited)
Ni doesn't really observe. It just structures the sensory experiences that Se has observed.

You could group the percentive functions like this:
Si and Se: observation
Si and Ni: structuring of information
Ni and Ne: idea generation
Se and Ne: exploration
aha... makes complete sense. love it.

could you possibly provide an example of Se observation paired with Ni idea generation vs Si observation with Ne idea generation?

Also does being an Ni dominant and inferior Se mean that this person doesn't observe much?

Me personally I feel I don't observe many things physically but I pick up on small things that most people don't pay attention to like someone's tone and I pick up metaphysical things like their energy and their personality and idiosyncrasies. Basically i'm always studying people beneath their surface.. Is that not observation? It's not sensory observation but I am still observing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
aha... makes complete sense. love it.

could you possibly provide an example of Se observation paired with Ni idea generation vs Si observation with Ne idea generation?
I'll do my best:

My favourite example of Se is Sherlock Holmes (who I'm pretty sure is intended as an ESTP). He enters the crime scene and interacts with it. Observing every blade of grass individually, dust on the shelves, every tear in the curtain or stain on the carpet. It's focused and direct. Ni then looks for patterns within the information. What is out of the ordinary? If the whole apartment is messy, then the dust isn't important. If you see a hat, maybe the wearer was bald... it's an unstructured process, but it tends to find out what is missing from the complete picture.

Ne on the other hand isn't structured at all. Si saves all of the information and it uses Ne to find out what might be missing. Si could remember all of the symptoms of a number of diseases for example, but it needs to extrapolate from the available information in the real world to find out what disease a patient might have. Sure, the patient isn't peeing, but is that because he he has too much sodium, is it because his bladder is obstructed or is it because he hasn't been drinking for days? Ne can quickly generate a few options and then Si has to decide which is most consistent with the facts.

Of course this means that both functions have to work together to get anything done. Ne without Si gets stuck generating ideas and never gets anything done. Si without Ne gets stuck in past ways of doing things and never gets ahead. Ni without Se gets stuck inside one theory, even if the facts don't support it and Se without Ni just keeps on exploring its environment without ever learning from anything.

Honestly, I'd probably need to write a full book to get to the bottom of this, but this will have to suffice for now.

Also does being an Ni dominant and inferior Se mean that this person doesn't observe much?
I've noticed that having an inferior function doesn't usually mean that you don't use the function, just that you don't have a lot of control over its use. I've noticed this most with ENTJ's. They have lower Fi and they tend to be emotional rollercoasters. They just don't know how to feel about things.

The same is true for inferior Se. You observe all the world around you constantly, it's just that you're not always 'tuned in' to it. When Ni is working hard, Se can get overshadowed, to a point where you don't even realize your surroundings anymore. Other times, Se is 'on' and suddenly you're drunk at a party, wondering how you even got there in the first place. Or in a less extreme example: you taste something you like and are suddenly convinced it's the tastiest thing you've ever had in your entire life.

With age, people get more control over their lower functions, making it a little easier to get a grasp on all of these weird impulses you've been getting your entire life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I'll do my best:

My favourite example of Se is Sherlock Holmes (who I'm pretty sure is intended as an ESTP). He enters the crime scene and interacts with it. Observing every blade of grass individually, dust on the shelves, every tear in the curtain or stain on the carpet. It's focused and direct. Ni then looks for patterns within the information. What is out of the ordinary? If the whole apartment is messy, then the dust isn't important. If you see a hat, maybe the wearer was bald... it's an unstructured process, but it tends to find out what is missing from the complete picture.

Ne on the other hand isn't structured at all. Si saves all of the information and it uses Ne to find out what might be missing. Si could remember all of the symptoms of a number of diseases for example, but it needs to extrapolate from the available information in the real world to find out what disease a patient might have. Sure, the patient isn't peeing, but is that because he he has too much sodium, is it because his bladder is obstructed or is it because he hasn't been drinking for days? Ne can quickly generate a few options and then Si has to decide which is most consistent with the facts.

Of course this means that both functions have to work together to get anything done. Ne without Si gets stuck generating ideas and never gets anything done. Si without Ne gets stuck in past ways of doing things and never gets ahead. Ni without Se gets stuck inside one theory, even if the facts don't support it and Se without Ni just keeps on exploring its environment without ever learning from anything.

Honestly, I'd probably need to write a full book to get to the bottom of this, but this will have to suffice for now.



I've noticed that having an inferior function doesn't usually mean that you don't use the function, just that you don't have a lot of control over its use. I've noticed this most with ENTJ's. They have lower Fi and they tend to be emotional rollercoasters. They just don't know how to feel about things.

The same is true for inferior Se. You observe all the world around you constantly, it's just that you're not always 'tuned in' to it. When Ni is working hard, Se can get overshadowed, to a point where you don't even realize your surroundings anymore. Other times, Se is 'on' and suddenly you're drunk at a party, wondering how you even got there in the first place. Or in a less extreme example: you taste something you like and are suddenly convinced it's the tastiest thing you've ever had in your entire life.

With age, people get more control over their lower functions, making it a little easier to get a grasp on all of these weird impulses you've been getting your entire life.
awesome write up, you're really helping me catch on to all of this...

so the Ne Si explores multiple abstract ideas in real time from known sensory data

and the Se Ni explores multiple sensory data points in real time to generate a singular abstract theory


I understand how Se connects to Ni [Se explores sensory information and Ni takes it and generates a theory to sum all the Se data points up]

But i'm not understanding how Ne connects to Si [Si stores the sensory information but what is Ne doing with that Si information? does it start with a Si point and then just start imagining alternatives?]

also awesome explanation for the inferior function, makes complete sense.

thank you very much
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
But i'm not understanding how Ne connects to Si [Si stores the sensory information but what is Ne doing with that Si information? does it start with a Si point and then just start imagining alternatives?]
Exactly that.
I notice that it can be hard for me to explain Ne, since it's so far from how I think. Luckily you picked up on what I meant to say ;)

Also, no problem. I like doing stuff like this. It helps me understand these things as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
I am normally skeptical of these, but that's actually a pretty good idea based on my experience. I usually speak of the past in general terms. Even when referencing specific events I will describe them in broader strokes. On the other hand the Si users I know tend to be quite specific about describing past events, even if they are only using inferior Si.

Interesting, I'm an ISFP and I came down to say that whilst I'm an ISFP I really relate to the Ne/Si description! I'm very aware of the past and have very vivid memories. But I think surely Se isn't just limited to to that exact moment and then you forget. If we're so aware of our surroundings surely we'd remember the details we observed to clearly which is why we have such good memories?
It is not just having memories; everyone has those. A lot of it has to do with the amount of detail you assign to your memories. Since I use Ni to categorize my experiences based on relational meaning, I have less use for specific data about those events than someone who uses Si to categorize by comparison to past sense impressions would. An Ni/Se user has just as much memories as someone who uses Si/Ne does, but those memories are not treated in the same fashion.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top