Se vs Ne - are Se types more sure of themselves?

[Kristiina]

this is inspired by a talk I had with someone and I need to make sure that I'm not wrong about versus .

This is what I proposed: and are both ways to describe objects without personal evaluation (as opposed to judging functions) and without taking into consideration the object's link to other objects (as opposed to introverted functions). observes the undisputable REAL aspects. Something either IS or ISN'T true. There is no "maybe", although the answer depends on the exact question. observes the potential COULD BE aspects. There are many overlapping truths. When there's a Ne statement, the opposite might also be true.

This means that if a person is constantly very sure about things, then they are probably Se type. For Ne types there is no absolute truth in anything. They are the "never say never", "don't say anything you might regret later" kind of people. And even if they make a statement, if you ask if the opposite is true, they will also agree! Se types say that the opposite is wrong and their version is right.


In short:
- true vs false statements and black and white thinking
- various overlapping truths and many shades of gray.


- - - - - -

Alternative explanation to vs that contradicts my version.
Se is about concrete information and Ne is about abstract information. Se types are sure about statements they make about physical/real/concrete traits of objects and Ne types are sure about statements they make about abstract/imagined inner traits of objects. types can be just as categorical and make as many true/false statements as types.

[Ezra]

I don't think the latter part necessary contradicts what you said. It's aiming for a different viewpoint. You're essentially partly talking about LEM for Se, and Ne valuers attempting to show this is wrong.

The other description is about the different kinds of information each function processes; it has nothing to do with truth values.

Nice clear, concise description though, Kristiina.

[Kristiina]

I don't think the latter part necessary contradicts what you said. It's aiming for a different viewpoint. You're essentially partly talking about LEM for Se, and Ne valuers attempting to show this is wrong.

The other description is about the different kinds of information each function processes; it has nothing to do with truth values.

Nice clear, concise description though, Kristiina.

thanks.

and LEM for Se valuers seems right to me. But the other description does contradict, because I say that Se types view things as true/false and Ne types don't. The other description says that Se and Ne types make equal amount of true/false statements, but they just make statements about different topics. IMO, you can recognize an type by noticing that they try to force even the abstract things into (narrowminded) true/false statements.

[Ezra]

thanks.

and LEM for Se valuers seems right to me. But the other description does contradict, because I say that Se types view things as true/false and Ne types don't. The other description says that Se and Ne types make equal amount of true/false statements, but they just make statements about different topics. IMO, you can recognize an type by noticing that they try to force even the abstract things into (narrowminded) true/false statements.

I still don't think that's contradicting. You've said "Se and Ne types make equal amount of true/false statements", but that just means they both make lots of true/false statements, not that Ne types don't make anything but true or false statements. See what I mean?

[Kristiina]

I still don't think that's contradicting. You've said "Se and Ne types make equal amount of true/false statements", but that just means they both make lots of true/false statements, not that Ne types don't make anything but true or false statements. See what I mean?

it does contradict!
I say - Se types make true/false statements, Ne type doesn't
opposing view - they make equal amount.

there is no "both make lots" in "Ne types don't make any".

[strrrng]

I don't think it's about being sure of yourself as much as it is being sure of reality. Se works with Ni in this way: Ni creates a subjective context, and since it's internal, is more unique to the individual (whereas Si's subjective context is based more on a standard, of sorts). Se, being external, treats reality as this separate, objective thing that simply is. So, once Ni beliefs are introduced into reality, it is done in a seemingly absolute way (whereas Ne does it in a lighter way, based more on the external context of the situation).

Point being, the Se-Ni feedback loop will appear more definite, and thus Se types may seem more certain of themselves, but I believe it is just their style.

[Joy]

this is inspired by a talk I had with someone and I need to make sure that I'm not wrong about versus .

This is what I proposed: and are both ways to describe objects without personal evaluation (as opposed to judging functions) and without taking into consideration the object's link to other objects (as opposed to introverted functions). observes the undisputable REAL aspects. Something either IS or ISN'T true. There is no "maybe", although the answer depends on the exact question. observes the potential COULD BE aspects. There are many overlapping truths. When there's a Ne statement, the opposite might also be true.

This means that if a person is constantly very sure about things, then they are probably Se type. For Ne types there is no absolute truth in anything. They are the "never say never", "don't say anything you might regret later" kind of people. And even if they make a statement, if you ask if the opposite is true, they will also agree! Se types say that the opposite is wrong and their version is right.


In short:
- true vs false statements and black and white thinking
- various overlapping truths and many shades of gray.


- - - - - -

Alternative explanation to vs that contradicts my version.
Se is about concrete information and Ne is about abstract information. Se types are sure about statements they make about physical/real/concrete traits of objects and Ne types are sure about statements they make about abstract/imagined inner traits of objects. types can be just as categorical and make as many true/false statements as types.

I think all of this is accurate.

I don't think that any of it means that Se types are more sure of themselves than Ne types are though... they're just more sure of their information, since Se deals with readily apparent (physical) states and Ne deals with possibilities. Se types could appear more sure of themselves as a result though.