what a loaded questionOriginally Posted by Someone in the thread about Si
I suppose the word "system" could be defined in ways in which it sort of works to describe Si (or Ni), but Si and Ni are "systems" the way Fi is "social rules and etiquette". By this I mean that I can see how from a Static perspective (especially Ti or Fi dominant) Si and Ni might be thought of as systems, just as how from a Fi PoLR perspective, Fi might be thought of as "social rules and etiquette". See the quoted post below for an explanation:
Allow me to explain how systems are related to information aspects/elements...Originally Posted by Joy
Ti and Fi are about systems, or the relationships between fixed things (or even fixed relationships between fixed things). Perhaps Ti and Fi are best described as a network or structure. In order for a system to exist, there must be points in the system which are fixed so that other parts of the system may be built upon them.
Ni and Si, on the other hand, are the ever changing relationships between events. Because of the changing nature of Ni and Si, they cannot be used to build other parts of a "system" upon them. (That would be like trying to build a house on quicksand, or trying to use water as glue, or trying to nail jello to a wall.)
A system is a method of classification, a set of related definitions, the interrelated parts of a whole, a complex organization of interconnected or interdependent components. Those are all static things. Even if aspects of a systems have "cause and effect relationships", that is not in itself what defines it as system.
Point being, because "cause and effect relationships" is not the best definition, and because the definition works better to describe other information aspects/elements, I do all that I can to avoid using the word "system" when talking about Si or Ni. And if someone wants to insist that Ni and Si are best defined as "systems", I'll argue the point as tenaciously as I would someone saying that Fi is about "social rules and etiquette".