It'd not be that easy to explain it in short words well enough but lets try. First, we have to drop the false assumption like Si is mostly living or sticking in the past, which seems to be widespread misconcept. Otherwise it won't be possible to even explain it here. Who knows, maybe for some people it manifests so (maybe it's F+SI, making a person sentimental and nostalgic about past, idk?) but not for me and this isn't T trait anyway to see things that way.Question: How do you view SI and how do you see it manifest in you? We can then dig in. You might be an ESTJ, but lets explore it better since there is definitely Ne going on in your posts (it could have been in third place all this time, but let’s see, right?)
I'd say it's like when I perceive some object, I also perceive impression of it, which can later be postprocessed and analysed asynchronous way and learn from it, see consistencies, things to reuse in future, things what could be improved and so on, while the perceived object itself isn't there any more (but it often becomes a goal to implement during this analysis process) - it's rather its "afterglow" by then. That's also how Jung explains it and easy to relate for me. Jung tells for SE user it's vice versa - mostly about object itself while subjective impression of it is suppressed, which isn't the case for me. Heard of impressionism as art style? I guess that's from where it got its name.
I noticed Si in my childhood clearer, it manifested as overinterpretation of senses, sometimes as a "bad vibe" in the room or in people, although objectively it wasn't there, it was my subjective interpretation of information. But at later ages something changed and I was never aware of this phenomena any more. Probably senses adjusted and developed better, making it mostly invisible if you don't know where to look.
But it has not gone anywhere, it's still there like it always was - I just confused it with being Ne earlier. Tbh, I learned to clearly see what this SI is by analysing some of my long term sexual fantasies - those are the most "rigid" and specific "objects" in my mind which my personal preference of interpretation has formed and rehashed over decades for now Thus they don't disappear and go anywhere, making them the best source of study.
Lets expect that some new information comes in: I'd say it's snapshotted and like hashed - my mind in most cases doesn't store individual details but rather mathematical hashes of the whole situation and/or knowledge. Sensory information interpretation I had at the moment that experience happened, is stored in that snapshot too, adding it a bit subjective touch. This is also from where clearer personal preference comes about some situations and stuff for me and also some kind of "rigidness" sometimes - that's why it's also called subjective. While NE doesn't have clear personal preference about interpretation of information, that's why it's called objective.
Now when I need to think or place judgement about something, analyse it, measure or compare, this SI "database" is constantly accessed for proof, evidence and backup while forming thoughts and decisions. New perceived objects are unconciously and quickly compared with already known ones by hashes, which often triggers links and associations between various data, prob based on similarities and differences of snapshot hashes.
NB! the latter could probably be reason why people might let them be mistakenly fooled like it's Ne as it's explained in mbti, like I initially let myself get fooled by it!
Simplified example: you'd know you're reaching to the end of forest because the lightning conditions have changed, not by comparing every single tree. I experience that as quick mental flashes and can now conciously notice it, although it happens really fast. It's pretty much about sensory data, which is why it's called S. In many cases it's barely visual and often not at all - then it manifests just as a mental image of knowledge. My mind doesn't compare and search links between data by comparing individual pieces of it - otherwise it'd be too slow to process anything and reach anywhere for such person.
You can imagine it easily when thinking how Arnold as Terminator landed earth and searched clothes for him, how it was illustrated on his sensors Or you can think of how for example, SoundHound music search works inside - by matching the data using their hashes not by comparing every single piece of it one by one.
This subconcious system seems to also be responsible for being a consistent person - the more I know and have experienced, the less amount of inconsistency and quality changes in whatever I do. Btw this has caused some misunderstandings with my partner before I became aware of it - never understood why others aren't consistent in their doings thus seem to learn somewhat slower if at all, or the quality of doings is unstable.
One simple example I could bring, could be that lets say I ate some food in restaurant and it was really good. When I happened to revisit same place again but this time the quality of the same food has lowered or something has changed because different cook this time, my mind tells instantly that it's not the same thing any more which I wanted, because snapshot of the perceived object has changed.
Now you can rather easily see why I initially confused this "network" for being NE which it isn't any way.
I'll add simplified visual illustration of this system which might make it easier to imagine. I can't even put NE anywhere on this pic as I can't conciously see how it affects my thinking patterns and up to which level, if at all. According to most information, talking to others and analysing by myself, I seem to be T dom and you prob won't place bet on F any more by yourself. I've heard from various sources, perception doms seem to make sense of perceived data using judgement while judgement doms use perception to help to validate/backup their judgement. The latter is case for me while former for my partner, I can see it.
Btw I've asked a few other TJs explain their mind and saw some general similarities as well, with the above. Ofc the perception is different, which makes some differences.
No idea about how it manifests in different positions (or in conjunction with F, as perception and judgement aren't often used alone independently, thus different combinations play out differently) as I've had hard time to figure this all out even for myself But I'd dare to tell I barely believe anybody who has unconcious form of it, could really explain it that way I did above. Same way I can't tell conciously what N is. No evidence so far that tert/inf are actually usable tools, although we prob do something with them unconciously.Something that could be a bit revealing (but maybe I misunderstood you?) that I thought you said just earlier in this thread is that you don’t review the past much, but you can see how someone close to you with Si first does review the past. How much do you think SI would review the past if in dom? Aux? Tert? Inferior?
I'd say it this way: it's rather not about reviewing past or living or it but it's related to having higher preference to rely on what you know and have eperienced as a backup for new thoughts - because those are already proven facts and solutions, so there must be truth in them. One just has higher preference about that, compared to relying on anything too abstract and vague, which has little to no link with reality - thus you can only blindly rely on them and couldn't be able to validate it -> judgement would throw error. I'd compare it to a computer reading a bad sector from disk which has invalid/partially missing data and then trying to guess how the program should behave
I rarely look conciously at past as what use it'd have - what's gone is gone, what'd be the use of it? Unless something related triggers something funny or useful, then I spend a few sentences about it and go on.
I'd say my first preference is not usually about reinventing the wheel again when I already have answer or solution at hands, which is clearly proven from experiences. For example, you use hammer to hit nails not just some random weird tool or screwdriver, just because it sounds more exploratory. It's much faster that way and no that much point in the opposite unless the situation requires it. Especially when it's something which isn't totally unknown. But when I don't know the answer or solution, I brainstorm it, which doesn't have anything to do with any N as it's a totally concious approach one knowingly uses. I've heard from some N doms that they even can't do that way on demand as it's not how it works.What about methodology versus figuring out new ways to do things? Exploring new thoughts? Postulating new theories? What portions do you think these should represent in the SI to Ne axis from dom to inferior? Have you seen your tag line? Think of how you see these playing out in yourself. How much do you prefer tried and true methods versus trying something brand new that you figured out on your own? Tried and true “This works and has worked versus theory?
But in our current age 40+ - how much do you experience and see something anyway, which is totally unique and unseen from earlier and has no links with known knowledge and experiences? I don't think it happens that often, given the accumulated life experience
Btw I wouldn't be surprised if there could be other people out there who have mistaken that what I explained as SI is NE in their opinions - confusing part here is this network of information but most likely some of that is similar for all people because of the neural system our brains have inside
Also would be interested in, where do you (or anyone else) see NE in this post? Curious to know (again, this curiosity comes from personal preference towards such topics not from any N) as it might bring some clarity to the concept itself, also might help to see others if they're mistyped themselves as NE person.
Still in doubt you see xNP in me not (S)TJ? Tbh when I finally realized that mindset / mental model for myself, it was initially a bit "scary" to realize which strengths but also blind spots and faults come with it.
Also may I ask, what's been the main reason for you to not believe it ?