[piscesfish]

Okay, then, but what is it about Si that you guys find I fit?
I've always viewed Si as (and I'm sure to get shut down on this, but here goes X3):

- Always looking to the past, being past oriented
- Clinging to tradition and disfavoring the experimental
- Similarly, having a mold of what things "should be like" and not often changing that mold
- Needing a practical application for knowledge accumulation and not likely to have interest in research/learning just for learning's sake [though could be all sensors]
- Being heavily in tune with the sensory world; rarely ever "tunes out" and is good at managing physical resources

I am none of these... Do I just have the descriptions wrong or something? I understand that behavior does not equal cognition, but without basing everything on "vibe" (which I do constantly; I type 75% off vibe haha), how else do you phrase things?

 

[The Portia Spider]

I based that statement on MBTI, in which I am fairly well-versed. It's not implausible to be a heavy Ni user as a Ni-dom in Myers-Briggs, it's expected. It's unfortunate that you didn't grasp Ni from my questionnaire alone, but I contend that I am more than just answers to a few questions. Calling the statement ridiculous is laying it on a bit thick. As for evidence, see the picture analysis I did on the last page, hopefully that will do.

I am now leaning more towards IEI, though EII is not totally out of the picture. I think my biggest hurdle throughout this process has been deciphering whether Model A functions and Jungian/MBTI functions are the same, and if they're not, to what extent are they different. Descriptions on various sites vary; I feel I'll just need to spend more time with the system to figure it out myself, but input from those who have already figured it out is invaluable at this point!

What you've supplied me with is what you consider to be indicative evidence for your position. Your analysis of the image overall indicates a 2D dimensionality. Potential Role function? My opinion is not set in stone, so if you have a syllogism disproving Si Ego, I would be very interested in seeing it.

Abstract thinking isn't really indicative of inuition, in my opininion.. Just like intuitives can think concretely, so can sensors think abstractly, overall it's just a preference thing. SEI's are more than capable of thinking in abstractions, but it's not where their focus is.. In a way, I think you could say that they have a more concrete view of the world that is subjective.

But, please do keep in mind that I am not proclaiming truths here, this is hardly the medium for it, especially when one is not well versed in the lingo. I think this is largely a place where people can thrust out their chests, much like a peacock, and say look at me, I am wielding the jargon!

I do look for those who know the jargon well though, through their effective use, and understanding of that Jargon, because I know that they are out there.. And one day, we may get lucky and find them. .. (P.S.. btw..In a whisper.. I suspect that Entropic could be one of them. )

 

[Entropic]

Okay, then, but what is it about Si that you guys find I fit?
I've always viewed Si as (and I'm sure to get shut down on this, but here goes X3):

- Always looking to the past, being past oriented
- Clinging to tradition and disfavoring the experimental
- Similarly, having a mold of what things "should be like" and not often changing that mold
- Needing a practical application for knowledge accumulation and not likely to have interest in research/learning just for learning's sake [though could be all sensors]
- Being heavily in tune with the sensory world; rarely ever "tunes out" and is good at managing physical resources

I am none of these... Do I just have the descriptions wrong or something? I understand that behavior does not equal cognition, but without basing everything on "vibe" (which I do constantly; I type 75% off vibe haha), how else do you phrase things?

Yes, I think you got Si backwards. Si is not about being past-oriented as much as Si is about seeking to reproduce past experiences and refining them according to an archetypal mold. Similarly, Si is not about being traditional as much as Si wards itself against dangerous options and possibilities that may corrode the personal meaning certain experiences have to them. Jung calls the Si dom as walking in a mythological world because of how detached the Si dom is from actual physical reality. Si types can have a mold of how "things should be like" but that can equally be applied to anyone, really. A lot of people have some quirk about them they don't like to change. This is only relevant to Si insofar that they may get attached to the deeper meaning a certain experience has to them, which may make them want to keep reproducing it in order to finetune and thus deepen it. Also, needing practical application for knowledge accumulation and not have an interest in research/learning for learning's sake got nothing to do with sensation. For example, as an NiTe type, I don't at all value learning for learning's sake. I think that's very typical of alpha quadra in general due to the way Ne with Ti works. Other quadras are not going to be as interested in learning for learning's sake and has nothing to do with sensation. Similarly, because I'm Te, I also want to know how to apply something I know or understand on the real world. It's related to Te, not sensation. Also, sensors are not at all necessarily heavily in tune with the sensory world; Jung describes the Si dom as the very opposite of it because their sensation is so removed from the object. Ability to managing physical resources is also more related to Te. All resource-management is Te-related.

The tl;dr of this is that you fit Te PoLR, but it doesn't mean you are not a sensor. Also, do you equal behavior with vibe? Because I don't. Si types though, definitely equal behavior with vibe.

Augusta's definition of Si is actually pretty good, I think, and is fairly in line with Jung's as well:

We view an object's internal state as the relationship between events that precondition one another. This element perceives information about how processes are reflected by one's internal state. This includes the sense of one's own condition and the sensations of people evoked by this interdependence. Interaction in space is nothing more than a reflection of one object in another. Objects reflect in other objects, evoking certain sensations in one another. Such an individual perceives external information in form of sensations evoked by ongoing events. For example, the sensation of pain is essentially the reflection within a person's mind of a relationship between his functioning body and a process occurring in some part of the body that impedes this functioning.
When this element of perception is in the leading position, the individual has the ability to change the qualities of the surrounding space and influence the sensations of people within it. He is able to avoid physical discomfort and protect others from it. This element is defined bby the ability to recreate previously experienced aesthetic sensations. An excellent example is Peter Paul Rubens, who created his paintings not from nature, but from his memory of once experienced aesthetic sensations. By paintings, he sought to evoke in the viewer certain aesthetic experiences. Such creativity constitutes the recreation of an object that is able to provide other people with aesthetic sensations that were intended by its creator. When an individual of this type is preparing something, he starts from envisioning all the associated qualities that the final product will have.
These people are able to distinguish previously experienced aesthetic sensations from new ones. They are able to "collect" and remember them. This also presupposes that such individuals are able to contra-position their sensations to those of others, the ability to contend for their fulfillment, and the ability to mold and perfect not only one's own aesthetic tastes and habits, but also those of others. We might say that such individuals have the ability to impose their understanding of aesthetics and comfortable life on other people.

And here's the link to Jung's definition of Si and the Si dom:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Psychological_Types#Sensation_2

 

[piscesfish]

Also, do you equal behavior with vibe? Because I don't. Si types though, definitely equal behavior with vibe.

Kind of, but not really. "Vibe" to me is more holistic-- I have sort of archetypes in my head of the MBTI types, and anything can trigger recognition, just someone's mannerisms or what they say or what they like or anything really. The whole concept is very fluid, and possibly quite stereotypical! I don't rely on it wholly, but often I see someone and immediately I can be like "THAT's an INTP, no question" or for whatever type. It's just a gut instinct I suppose, but the "archetypes" of sort are built from the correlation of traits from these individuals I tag. But there are defining characteristics (if you would excuse my apparent shallowness; vibe is so hard to describe!), for example the obvious INTPs have a natural awkward quality, obvious ESTPs are loud and confident, obvious ISFJs are passive... etc. It's an instant recognition thing. Damn I can be wordy sometimes, but hopefully that makes sense XP

I just don't see myself having the Si vibe (and especially not the MBTI ISFJ vibe), even with your descriptions!
"An excellent example is Peter Paul Rubens, who created his paintings not from nature, but from his memory of once experienced aesthetic sensations. By paintings, he sought to evoke in the viewer certain aesthetic experiences. Such creativity constitutes the recreation of an object that is able to provide other people with aesthetic sensations that were intended by its creator."
- If I am creating something meant to evoke emotion (painting, poem, whatever..) I don't need to be anchored by the sensory experience in order to provide that emotion. Perhaps I am still not understanding things, but to me emotions do not need to come tied with experiences; emotions are emotions and can be evoked by anything. I can use other means (color, word choice, etc.) to convey a message besides citing an event or capturing an image. I can create a new image that has just as much sentiment.

Can you describe Ni for me, if I still don't get it? What makes it something outside what I think I am perceiving? If I am Si, than evaluating Ni descriptions is key to rule them out.

 

[Entropic]

Kind of, but not really. "Vibe" to me is more holistic-- I have sort of archetypes in my head of the MBTI types, and anything can trigger recognition, just someone's mannerisms or what they say or what they like or anything really. The whole concept is very fluid, and possibly quite stereotypical! I don't rely on it wholly, but often I see someone and immediately I can be like "THAT's an INTP, no question" or for whatever type. It's just a gut instinct I suppose, but the "archetypes" of sort are built from the correlation of traits from these individuals I tag. But there are defining characteristics (if you would excuse my apparent shallowness; vibe is so hard to describe!), for example the obvious INTPs have a natural awkward quality, obvious ESTPs are loud and confident, obvious ISFJs are passive... etc. It's an instant recognition thing. Damn I can be wordy sometimes, but hopefully that makes sense XP

I just don't see myself having the Si vibe (and especially not the MBTI ISFJ vibe), even with your descriptions!
"An excellent example is Peter Paul Rubens, who created his paintings not from nature, but from his memory of once experienced aesthetic sensations. By paintings, he sought to evoke in the viewer certain aesthetic experiences. Such creativity constitutes the recreation of an object that is able to provide other people with aesthetic sensations that were intended by its creator."
- If I am creating something meant to evoke emotion (painting, poem, whatever..) I don't need to be anchored by the sensory experience in order to provide that emotion. Perhaps I am still not understanding things, but to me emotions do not need to come tied with experiences; emotions are emotions and can be evoked by anything. I can use other means (color, word choice, etc.) to convey a message besides citing an event or capturing an image. I can create a new image that has just as much sentiment.

Can you describe Ni for me, if I still don't get it? What makes it something outside what I think I am perceiving? If I am Si, than evaluating Ni descriptions is key to rule them out.

You do realize that color and word choice are parts of the sensory world? Also the way you take note of people's types is sensory as well, noting on their appearances, how they physically manifest. I agree, vibes are tricky to pin down, but I never thought of INTPs having an awkward quality to them for example. What I tend to look at is how their minds are structured, because their chosen communication differs from say, INTJs. Also, I wouldn't say ISFJs are passive, on the contrary. Can't think of a good example of an ISFJ right now though.

And I think in order to keep things clear here, it is important to focus on Ni being the intuition of time. Ni is perceiving time. I wrote this rather recently, which is a good example of Ni:

I was just thinking about that because of the way you described the perspective of time from the point of view of the olive; perhaps because of Te, I have a hard time grasping seeing how time would in a sense, run differently for an olive than it does a human being. Life spans are different yes, maturation and cellular decay differ, but at some level I do think time runs at the same fundamental rate for everyone. Our perspective differs in that a dayfly will do what most humans struggle to accomplish in a lifetime, but does it mean that the one day the dayfly lives is actually equivalent to the lifetime of a human being?

And I don't think so. Or impression of the compression and expansion of time depends from the vantage point we are looking at, but the very logic of time itself, it does not change. A day is a day and I think if anything, what's far more fascinating is all the actions that simultaneously occur within that day; for some beings it means their demise, for others, rebirth, and so it goes on and on in this cyclical property that we call time.

I never once thought that while the universe itself may be finite that time has a clear beginning and an end; I always found that extremely dubious and it seems that the more we explore theoretical physics, the more it also seems that there is indeed no real beginning or end of time. Of course the question becomes, then what is our conceptualization if we so to say, always existed?

I am not sure how I feel about whether an object can always objectively exist or not, since human beings define existence in terms of being and non-being so being can only be a property in relation to non-being, but I do not believe in a real end. The end is merely the transmission to something new or, if you are into the holographic principle, in a sense, we actually never existed at all.

I also like Lenore Thomson's definition of Ni as a matter of perspective:

* Introverted Intuition would prompt us to liberation our sense impressions form their larger context, thereby creating new options for perception itself. For example, we might find ourselves wondering why people feel so strongly about getting a good tan. We remember reading somewhere that before the Industrial Revolution, being tan marked one as a manual laborer, because it suggested work out of doors. After the Industrial Revolution, it was pale skin that suggested correlations aren’t relevant today, but a good tan is still considered attractive. Why is that? We consider raising the question as a topic of conversation, but we’re pretty sure our friends will think we’re observing a situation instead of enjoying it.”

“Introverted Intuition moves us in the opposite direction. It tells us that changing our frame of mind can change the world. For example, a recent article advises the parents of a fussy or demanding baby not to describe the fact as difficult but to recognize that such children have vivid, strong, and rich personalities. This is how Introverted Intuition works. The material facts remain the same, but we organize them in a new conceptual pattern that changes their meaning and gives us new options for behavior.”

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/129792-lenore-thomsons-introverted-intuition.html

Also, suggesting that one can better understand what something is by understanding what it is not through comparison and contrast to something else suggests that you may be a negativist to me, which is more in line with SEI also.

This is Augusta's definition of Ni:

All processes take place in time; they have their roots in the past and their continuation in the future. Time is the correlation between events that follow each other. This perceptual element provides information about the sequence of events and people's deeds, about their cause and effect relationship, and about participants' attitudes towards this — that is, about people's feelings that these relationships engender.
Such an individual perceives information from without as feelings about the future, past, and present. For example, a sense of hurriedness, calmness, or heatedness, a sense of timeliness or prematureness, a sense of proper or improper life rhythm, a sense of impending danger or safety, anticipation, fear of being late, a sense of seeing the future, anxiety about what lies ahead, and so forth. At any given moment of one's life one has such a sense of time. One cannot live outside of time or be indifferent toward it. Thus, a certain sense of time is an integral part of the individual's psychological state at any given moment. This perceptual element defines a person's ability or inability to forecast and plan for the future, evade all sorts of troubles, avoid taking wrong actions, and learn from past experience.
When this element is in the leading position, the individual possesses innate strategic abilities and is able to choose the most optimal moments for different activities: when to give battle, if necessary, and when to avoid battle, when that would be more appropriate. Interaction in time might be interpreted as the ability to avoid collisions with objects and hence avoid objects' reflection within oneself.

And here's Jung's:
Psychological Types - Wikisocion

The most apparent in the Ni dom is its use of symbolic imagery that seems detached from anything actually observed in the real world and the like. Jung recaps the example of the man suffering from vertigo as describing the experience as being struck by an arrow in the heart.

Ni works a lot in this kind personal and symbolic imagery, and the more strongly attuned the Ni type is to Ni and the content in the collective unconsciousness, the better they will be at producing such imagery as well, such as when I described the previous ILI's partner's personality as akin to someone who is walking in this winter landscape down this small trail with some trees spread out. A strikingly Scandinavian landscape, because she is Norwegian. The sky is bleak and there's a gentle snowfall going on though the snow is somewhat melting. you can also see some smoke rising up from some houses in the distance etc.

 

[ruskiix]

In what ways does enneagram 1 make one more like an EII? Does this only apply to MBTI INFJs? Please elaborate

Depends on the individual. I really don't mean to generalize c: But the particular xSTJs that bother me are close-minded and conservative, and the SPs that I don't get along with as well just have completely different values than I do (Se and I don't get along haha)

EII's Fi description for me is incredibly hard to distinguish from the Fe of an INFJ 1. Fi is described as adhering to your standards over what others want but all 1s do that. For me the question was, where do those standards come from? For me, they're all built on an Fe experience of others. I experience others the way I experience myself, even with no frame of reference for what they're going through, and actively forget myself during.

I don't see Si types lookin at vibes the way intuitives do, but I may be misunderstanding Entropic. The way you describe archetypes and vibes is very Ni to me, and focusing on how sensory information conveys that vibe doesn't indicate being a sensor--otherwise INFJs wouldn't likely be artists as much as they are. I think how abstractly you use those sensory cues can be meaningful. I use them in very NOT literal ways. Like a drawing of a still life to relay a relationship experience--I've distilled both concepts to their essence.

Looking at Se vs Ne inferior might help. My Se inferior is probably stronger than most but I find I'm extremely into power games which I don't take seriously (Si types I know do take them seriously). I'm intensely aware of power dynamics and maneuvering by others. I notice 8s instantly because of it.

Also, for me, the socionics romance style subtypes helped me decide between INFj and INFP. I definitely prefer aggressors and hate caretakers. I provoke and challenge like the INFp victim subtype, which is described as throwing down a gauntlet. My ISFJ cousin also challenges people but wants to win--she wants them to rise to the occasion effectively, but doesn't like to lose the way I do.

 

[piscesfish]

EII's Fi description for me is incredibly hard to distinguish from the Fe of an INFJ 1. Fi is described as adhering to your standards over what others want but all 1s do that. For me the question was, where do those standards come from? For me, they're all built on an Fe experience of others. I experience others the way I experience myself, even with no frame of reference for what they're going through, and actively forget myself during.

I don't see Si types lookin at vibes the way intuitives do, but I may be misunderstanding Entropic. The way you describe archetypes and vibes is very Ni to me, and focusing on how sensory information conveys that vibe doesn't indicate being a sensor--otherwise INFJs wouldn't likely be artists as much as they are. I think how abstractly you use those sensory cues can be meaningful. I use them in very NOT literal ways. Like a drawing of a still life to relay a relationship experience--I've distilled both concepts to their essence.

Looking at Se vs Ne inferior might help. My Se inferior is probably stronger than most but I find I'm extremely into power games which I don't take seriously (Si types I know do take them seriously). I'm intensely aware of power dynamics and maneuvering by others. I notice 8s instantly because of it.

Also, for me, the socionics romance style subtypes helped me decide between INFj and INFP. I definitely prefer aggressors and hate caretakers. I provoke and challenge like the INFp victim subtype, which is described as throwing down a gauntlet. My ISFJ cousin also challenges people but wants to win--she wants them to rise to the occasion effectively, but doesn't like to lose the way I do.

Agree. Agree. Agree. Honestly, I know I am MBTI INFJ, despite what the others on this thread might think X3 I agree 100% that using sensory information to determine abstract archetypes does not make one a sensor-- if anything, it verifies Ni-Se.

Interesting about the relationship styles! Despite being unable to overcome my shitty relationship fears and therefore never being in a relationship, I would imagine I would do best with a casual, constantly challenging each other, "best friend" relationship style rather than one more romantic and openly supportive haha. I'll look more into that aspect of socionics!!

 

[ruskiix]

Agree. Agree. Agree. Honestly, I know I am MBTI INFJ, despite what the others on this thread might think X3 I agree 100% that using sensory information to determine abstract archetypes does not make one a sensor-- if anything, it verifies Ni-Se.

Interesting about the relationship styles! Despite being unable to overcome my shitty relationship fears and therefore never being in a relationship, I would imagine I would do best with a casual, constantly challenging each other, "best friend" relationship style rather than one more romantic and openly supportive haha. I'll look more into that aspect of socionics!!

Duals are very helpful too. I'm very drawn to ESTJs but they're very obviously not my dual--ESTPs are. I understand them instinctively and our interactions just go perfectly. ESTJs are excellent partners for me except for their distrust of Ni. And their strong Te makes it much harder for me to explain myself in a way they can accept when they don't agree already. ESTPs understand me and seem to love my intuition.

 

[spiderfrommars]

My Se inferior is probably stronger than most but I find I'm extremely into power games which I don't take seriously (Si types I know do take them seriously)

Huh? What about Si would cause them to take these Se-style power games seriously? By definition, they don't value Se.

 

[Ixim]

Agree. Agree. Agree. Honestly, I know I am MBTI INFJ, despite what the others on this thread might think X3 I agree 100% that using sensory information to determine abstract archetypes does not make one a sensor-- if anything, it verifies Ni-Se.

Interesting about the relationship styles! Despite being unable to overcome my shitty relationship fears and therefore never being in a relationship, I would imagine I would do best with a casual, constantly challenging each other, "best friend" relationship style rather than one more romantic and openly supportive haha. I'll look more into that aspect of socionics!!

The first step on knowing is realising you know nothing. So, let's be quiet a little, shall we?

Just tell me how you see these things and what you see:









Just describe. There is no wrong answer. Also which painting do you like more: #3 or #4 ?

 

[piscesfish]

The first step on knowing is realising you know nothing. So, let's be quiet a little, shall we?

Just tell me how you see these things and what you see

In all due respect, don't tell me to "be quiet a little." That sounds quite belittling to me, and I don't appreciate it.

I'll give the picture analysis a shot c:
The first one (I had to click on it to see it) reminded me of the Confederate flag at first XP Then I recognized the light sabers.
I see a balloon in the second one. Pretty plain to me.
I didn't like how dark the third one was-- I kept leaning in to try and get more of it! I'm trying to pin a time period on it; 1500s maybe? Doesn't really do much for me.
The fourth one was cool. Picasso, maybe? I immediately got the sense of fear, anguish, despair, etc. It actually disturbs me a bit; but I can appreciate the artist's ability to strike that emotional cord.

I definitely like the fourth one best.

The last one: scissors? Like the balloon, there's not much for me to get.

 

[Ixim]

Ok. Here is what I think:

I highly doubt that you even have Fi. Fi would be immediately stricken with awe of baroque paintings. Fi highly values light/dark themes. Things like De Naachtwacht(posted pic by none other than Rembrandt) pr like Supper in Emaus by Carravaggio. Chiarooscuro yes? Plus from your questionnaire and the talk with the others you don't really seem Fi. No idea where you got that. I'll agree with them.

However! you aren't an EII. You are an IEI! NiFe. Hell, even your cog fncts stack suggests that! Only a Ni valuer would choose Picasso over Rembrandt. Or in other words: only a Se valuer would pick Rem over Pic. We are talking about clear picks, not "this looks slightly better". That's why I posted that. You can't use Se for aquat hence the sentence like "I see scissors-wtf?". But what if I asked you a question like "What would happen if we took scissors and combined them with...a lightsabre?". Can you imagine results? I am fairly certain you can. Furthermore, what everyone else was talking about SiFe kinda makes sense, but only in the meaning that you most likely do use Fe. Here's just a check:

If you could do any of the following, which one would you do:

a) Bring peace to the world
or
b) make certain your family is well looked for the rest of the life(maybe even next gen=

hm?

as for N vs S. I'd clearly put you in N pole. There's no doubt about that. Just tell me do you prefer to:

a) fantasize
or
b) look after yourself, others etc?

Finally, would you prefer an activity that:

a) led you to a state of higher understanding
or
b) improved your physical conditions?

Fell free to be as eloquent as needed.

 

[piscesfish]

Ok. Here is what I think:

I highly doubt that you even have Fi. Fi would be immediately stricken with awe of baroque paintings. Fi highly values light/dark themes. Things like De Naachtwacht(posted pic by none other than Rembrandt) pr like Supper in Emaus by Carravaggio. Chiarooscuro yes? Plus from your questionnaire and the talk with the others you don't really seem Fi. No idea where you got that. I'll agree with them.

However! you aren't an EII. You are an IEI! NiFe. Hell, even your cog fncts stack suggests that! Only a Ni valuer would choose Picasso over Rembrandt. Or in other words: only a Se valuer would pick Rem over Pic. We are talking about clear picks, not "this looks slightly better". That's why I posted that. You can't use Se for aquat hence the sentence like "I see scissors-wtf?". But what if I asked you a question like "What would happen if we took scissors and combined them with...a lightsabre?". Can you imagine results? I am fairly certain you can. Furthermore, what everyone else was talking about SiFe kinda makes sense, but only in the meaning that you most likely do use Fe. Here's just a check:

If you could do any of the following, which one would you do:

a) Bring peace to the world
or
b) make certain your family is well looked for the rest of the life(maybe even next gen=

hm?

as for N vs S. I'd clearly put you in N pole. There's no doubt about that. Just tell me do you prefer to:

a) fantasize
or
b) look after yourself, others etc?

Finally, would you prefer an activity that:

a) led you to a state of higher understanding
or
b) improved your physical conditions?

Fell free to be as eloquent as needed.

I think I was always under the impression that Socionics elements were different than Jungian cognitive functions, which is why I identified with general EII descriptions. You guys have convinced me otherwise, and I thank you all for it c:
And yes, I've known I'm not a Sensor c; Not to knock my lovely helpers on this thread, but y'know...

1) A-- can't pass up world peace!
2) What do you mean by look after yourself? Like stay in the present? If so, I more often fantasize, for sure.
3) A (assuming my physical conditions weren't particularly lacking beforehand)

 

[Ixim]

I think I was always under the impression that Socionics elements were different than Jungian cognitive functions, which is why I identified with general EII descriptions. You guys have convinced me otherwise, and I thank you all for it c:
And yes, I've known I'm not a Sensor c; Not to knock my lovely helpers on this thread, but y'know...

1) A-- can't pass up world peace!
2) What do you mean by look after yourself? Like stay in the present? If so, I more often fantasize, for sure.
3) A (assuming my physical conditions weren't particularly lacking beforehand)

1) A is Fe just so you know. B was Fi and what I would do. Why? Because WP is an exercise in futility. People would break the peace as soon as it started by quarreling over a plum tree or something stupid like that.

2) B was Si and was supposed to be about comfort, coziness, past/present bridge etc. Which doesn't matter because I foresaw that you'd say A anyhow. A is Ni btw.

3) A is quite clearly an N choice. Which one isn't important. B was an S choice.

I'd just conclude with the fact that you are NiFe(or FeNi). Which one of those two is up to you. Hey! At least you know which combo it is now, right? Wasn't that just awesome?

But if you don't feel like it, you should revise. I highly suspect you are. And this coming from an S person who generally talks in no nonsense style means that it is quite obvious and most likely true. Others like Entropic et al prolly are more qualified than I am, but most of them are N's so they can tell you a possibility or sth like that, not a fact. Me, otoh, just gave you a fact. Plus, again, do note your cog fnct stack. I'll go even above and beyond:

Keys 2 Cognition - Cognitive Processes

That is official Nardi's cog.fnct test. Hope this all helps!

Plus, if you really are Ni, you should be reassured by the strength of my directions and the overall strength of my tone. Like, "finally someone who doesn't BS around and actually guides me somewhere". Is this true as well?

 

[piscesfish]

Plus, if you really are Ni, you should be reassured by the strength of my directions and the overall strength of my tone. Like, "finally someone who doesn't BS around and actually guides me somewhere". Is this true as well?

Yes

 

[nichya]

I tend to see a clear difference of general preferences and some elements indeed that differ for INFP and INFJ liking. Ni vs Ne as in limits, boundaries, or space wrapping leaves of connections, restriction vs. infinite patterns, unfinished and random pattern explosions, realistic but faceless human anatomy (which makes me uncomfortable) vs. emphasize on a face and a self with more abstract, warm contours even the lack of contours, hazy colors BUT the expression "Only a Ni valuer would choose Picasso over Rembrandt. @Ixim" seriously strikes me, I mean a little dictating, no? I see what you mean by intuition vs. sensor but specific Ni? (edit: well nevermind if you used it to refer intuition generically as I see you have pruned Fi down in another post hence were comparing Ni, also this makes my mind wander to places as whether artists have a relief / aspiration effect on their paintings so I'll just stop :tongue: and allow the thread go on in the direction it needs to go on - confession: I just happened to skim the last pages and pick on an unnecessary detail )

 

[westlose]

Ni is a function strongly linked to time. It's quite hard to differenciate Ni from Si, because they are both two functions that work from a certain level of abstraction.

Si doesn't take reality as it is, but creates sensory archetypes from these data. There is also the notion of confort, and Si-users are good at recreating those sensations. They are "traditionalists" (this word is bad), in the sense that they already have those archetypes in their mind, and they will tend to rely only on the previous subjectively good sensations.
On the contrary, Ne is expanding those possibilities, and tries to discover new potentials.

Ni is different, because focused on the meaning of things. "All the processes have their root in the past, and their consequence in the future". The way I understand this statement, is that if you focus on the meaning of something, you will try to understand his "roots", or origin. And all these processes will make sense. If you know in which direction the car is driving, and for what reason, you'll know where this car is going.

So are you very aware of the future? Have you got detailed long term plans? Can you predict things? Does processes over time make sense to you?

Do you feel disconnected from your body, and his internal states? Have you got a strong and dominant vision in your life, that you would dream of making it a reality?

I agree with others, I'm only doubting between SEI and IEI.

"Types that value Ne prefer to try out an opportunity rather than consider all possible ways in which it could not work out. They pick a few options and stick with them, in contrast to introverted intuition Ni types who pick one option and continue to doubt that option. "

Also, be careful of Ti Hidden Agenda lol.

 

[Ixim]

Yes

I will finish this off with a choice:

a) minimization or avoidance of negative emotions, prevention of quarrels, scandals, and other situations causing emotional instability, which is valued as more important than creation of positive emotional effect.
b) maximization of positive emotions. Even small doses are enjoyed. Against the backdrop of the dramatic, turbulent emotions every small occurrence deserving a positive response is seen as an occasion for joy and uplifts their spirits.

 

[piscesfish]

I will finish this off with a choice:

a) minimization or avoidance of negative emotions, prevention of quarrels, scandals, and other situations causing emotional instability, which is valued as more important than creation of positive emotional effect.
b) maximization of positive emotions. Even small doses are enjoyed. Against the backdrop of the dramatic, turbulent emotions every small occurrence deserving a positive response is seen as an occasion for joy and uplifts their spirits.

A. (Which is probably Fe, as opposed to Fi?)

 

[Ixim]

A. (Which is probably Fe, as opposed to Fi?)

Actually both of those were Fe. One was for SEI, the other for IEI. Actually if you wanted to say Fi vs Fe it would Fi a vs Fe b because it sure sounds like one. But it isn't.

Did you do Nardi's test?

+/- theory doesn't have to be right. It's merely a what if.