Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 49

Thread: How Si Works

  1. #1
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How Si Works

    So the Si descriptions I've read seem to focus on the manifestations of it (health, comfort) rather than how it works - so if anyone possesses knowledge of the inner workings of Si, step forward please. (c:

    Some general definitions I've come up with so far:

    -passive accumulation of sensory data and the ability to determine which data is and which isn't applicable to current situation
    -the ability to determine the most workable and efficient physical response to sensory stimuli
    -knowledge of how to use and manipulate available objects in the environment to suit one's purposes
    -the ability to adapt to changing situations and identify the path of least resistance
    -awareness of relations between the body and objects in the environment
    -knowledge of what the body needs in order to achieve a desired state

    What do you think?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  2. #2
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  3. #3
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    So the Si descriptions I've read seem to focus on the manifestations of it (health, comfort) rather than how it works - so if anyone possesses knowledge of the inner workings of Si, step forward please. (c:

    Some general definitions I've come up with so far:

    -passive accumulation of sensory data and the ability to determine which data is and which isn't applicable to current situation
    -the ability to determine the most workable and efficient physical response to sensory stimuli
    -knowledge of how to use and manipulate available objects in the environment to suit one's purposes
    -the ability to adapt to changing situations and identify the path of least resistance
    -awareness of relations between the body and objects in the environment
    -knowledge of what the body needs in order to achieve a desired state

    What do you think?
    Is manipulating objects in the environment Se>Si? (I dunno, I'm still trying to flush out some of this myself)
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  4. #4
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    Is manipulating objects in the environment Se>Si? (I dunno, I'm still trying to flush out some of this myself)
    It is.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  5. #5
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    It is.
    What about "knowledge of which objects in the environment to use to suit one's purposes" - do you think that fits?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    very abstract and not very useful.

  7. #7
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    very abstract and not very useful.
    What's written as a whole or Jem's post before yours? I think the other points listed are pretty good in terms of the way an Si person would experience the base function internally. The third one originally listed does too, so long as it's qualified that it's more a use of Se with an Si agenda (arrangement to achieve a more pleasureable environment).
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  8. #8
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    very abstract and not very useful.
    lol that was a perfect polr hit
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dolphin View Post
    What is a useful description of Si in your opinion? Getting your own chips? Please enlighten us.
    ah, such a daunting task.

    IM element exemplae are on an endless list of wikiprojects in the back of my head that will never be compl

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    What's written as a whole or Jem's post before yours? I think the other points listed are pretty good in terms of the way an Si person would experience the base function internally. The third one originally listed does too, so long as it's qualified that it's more a use of Se with an Si agenda (arrangement to achieve a more pleasureable environment).
    i meant all of it, except this bullet, which i sort of like:

    -knowledge of what the body needs in order to achieve a desired state
    the rest of it is not exactly steve material that i just don't even try to understand, but it's not something that makes enough sense to me so that i would worry about trying to deal with it especially.

    edit: jxrtes' last post, otoh, is a good example of steve material.

  11. #11
    calenwen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cardiff
    TIM
    ISXj
    Posts
    949
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    very abstract and not very useful.
    I think this post is not very useful.
    Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves.
    John Muir

  12. #12
    Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,457
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    So the Si descriptions I've read seem to focus on the manifestations of it (health, comfort) rather than how it works - so if anyone possesses knowledge of the inner workings of Si, step forward please. (c:

    Some general definitions I've come up with so far:

    -passive accumulation of sensory data and the ability to determine which data is and which isn't applicable to current situation
    -the ability to determine the most workable and efficient physical response to sensory stimuli
    -knowledge of how to use and manipulate available objects in the environment to suit one's purposes
    -the ability to adapt to changing situations and identify the path of least resistance
    -awareness of relations between the body and objects in the environment
    -knowledge of what the body needs in order to achieve a desired state

    What do you think?
    I like this. You point out how Si is about filtering relevant/irrelevant sensory data to suit one's own needs. And yeah the idea of least resistance - excellent.

    Can you relate to this?
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...7&postcount=17

  13. #13
    Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,457
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Se is about localizing the object in sight directly, such that it it has no value or connation except what's contained in the object itself. A "sharp arrow" means just that it's a "sharp arrow". A station wagon is just a station wagon.

    Si is about the object interacting with other objects, such that it's value and connotation is dependent on how it affects other objects as well. Incidently, how the presence or absence of an object affects a person and her internal state, or how the parts of a mechanical device smoothly interact to generate internal motion or cohesion.
    Exactly

  14. #14
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve View Post
    I like this. You point out how Si is about filtering relevant/irrelevant sensory data to suit one's own needs. And yeah the idea of least resistance - excellent.

    Can you relate to this?
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...7&postcount=17
    Wow - yeah, completely. I didn't know all that stuff was Si. lol
    Si people frequently go through a day where each day has a different character, and there’s this core feeling as to the flow of the particular day.
    I thought that was a personal weirdism. (c: When I think back to different occurrences, I remember the particular feel of the situation first and foremost.
    Smells or sights can act as triggers as well. For example, seeing a piece of furniture that was in the house of a deceased grandparent can suddenly bring the perceiver back to the time period where they saw the furniture in its proper place in the grandparent’s house. They will also likely recall exactly what the room looked like in striking detail, and all of the personal attachments and associations they had with that room, house, and grandparent within the context of the room and house ...
    Yeah, that always happens to me. I see something or smell something and these memories and associations pop into my head. Or I walk by a place and think it funny how different I felt walking by another time. I don't really assign different feelings to places, because I feel different every time I'm there - but I do remember all the different feelings I had, like stored files that I can play at my leisure.

    Edit: Same with people too - I remember the particular way my relationship with a person felt when I think back to different situations. Because it feels different every time I interact with the person. No matter who it is - could be the postman. lol That might be SiFe though.

    Thanks for posting this! How did you come up with it?
    Last edited by Rubicon; 08-14-2008 at 08:01 AM.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  15. #15
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    Not sure if niffweed was joking, but the OP didn't seem abstract to me at all. If anything it captured exactly what I thought Si was in very sensible and easy to understand terms.
    thanks (c:
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  16. #16
    Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,457
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    Wow - yeah, completely. I didn't know all that stuff was Si. lolI thought that was a personal weirdism. (c: When I think back to different occurrences, I remember the particular feel of the situation first and foremost. Yeah, that always happens to me. I see something or smell something and these memories and associations pop into my head. Or I walk by a place and think it funny how different I felt walking by another time. I don't really assign different feelings to places, because I feel different every time I'm there - but I do remember all the different feelings I had, like stored files that I can play at my leisure.
    I'm exactly the same. Furthermore this should illustrate that Ne egos experience the same Si as Si egos, and that the "super-id" functions are indeed strong for a person. The only difference between Si ego and Si super-id is the vantage point, but they experience the same function strongly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem
    Edit: Same with people too - I remember the particular way my relationship with a person felt when I think back to different situations. Because it feels different every time I interact with the person. No matter who it is - could be the postman. lol That might be SiFe though.
    I experience this too, especially with close friends/family. Remembering how someone appeared and the vibe they gave off, and how they blended with a particular situation is really central for me emotionally, and I have a lot of feelings attached to that blending. When I think of the situation, the feelings come with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem
    Thanks for posting this! How did you come up with it?
    My pleasure . As I was developing a better sense of Socionics, I had been talking with some Se-valuing people like Ashton, Jadae, Krae, Sarah, Raisonpure, Ajax, etc, and I could just see that the way I talked about my experience of things, and the things I focused on externally were different from how they focused on external experience. They would pretty much talk about the bottom line of what happened in and of itself. I always was into immersing myself in the external experience and talking about certain details that affected the overall theme, while they were removed from it and talked about it discretely. So I thought, "If I do THAT differently, then all that other stuff having to do with being in the flow of external experience I do must be part of Si too", and I just extracted the rest from that essence. And it made sense because the idea of "external field dynamics" seems to fit in with that stuff I remembered from my experience. I was experiencing my externals (environment) by immersing myself in it and it would affect me internally (field), and the feeling would evolve over time (dynamic).

    As a Ti ENTp, I tend to focus heavily on my Si as the Ne sub does Fe, so Si for me is something I like to explore, constantly experience, be fed an unlimited supply of, while I interpret it and play around with it through Ne and Ti.

    How'd you come up with your description?

  17. #17
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Si is about readily observable, immediately apparent cause and effect relationships. Here are some examples of use of one's Si:
    • My boss told me that I should buckle in my ladder when I drive around with it in the back seat because that way if I slam on the breaks at a high speed it won't smack into anyone in the front seat.
    • Peter and I were watching a TV show and someone hooked an IV up to a corpse. He said, "What's going to pump that liquid through his body if his heart isn't beating?"
    • If someone's cold, they could put on a sweater or turn the thermostat up, and then they won't feel as cold.
    • If you wear a belt, your pants are less likely to sag or fall down.
    • Filling in the holes on the side of the ladder prevents it from whistling when it's on the top of your vehicle while driving down the highway.
    • Adding some colorful accents to an otherwise neutral room would make it more pleasing to look at.
    • You probably feel achy and lack concentration right now simply because you haven't slept as much as you should lately.
    Last edited by Joy; 08-14-2008 at 02:47 PM.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  18. #18
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As far as abstract vs. not, the theory itself is in abstraction. In order to accurately explain any of the information elements/aspects, it is necessary to use descriptions/explanations that are too abstract for most people to easily/immediately understand. It's helpful to provide examples, but that's about all you can do to make the abstact nature of the theory easier to understand.

    There's simply no way to significantly lessen the degree of abstraction used when accurately explaining/describing Socionics information aspects/elements, so if you're looking for a theory that doesn't use concepts such as "external vs. internal" or "object vs. field", go study Jung or MBTT.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  19. #19
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  20. #20
    xyz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    7,709
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Si is what it is. Stop trying to pin it down!
    "Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities..."

    - Voltaire

  21. #21
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    907
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LokiVanguard View Post
    Si is what it is. Stop trying to pin it down!
    Si iS


    INFp

    If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)



  23. #23
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wittmont View Post
    Si iS


    IEI-Fe 4w3

  24. #24
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kioshi View Post
    Some members in this forum seem unable to appreciate types outside their quadra. That's their problem. Not all of us have this problem.

    Some of us use socionics is to help us learn to appreciate our differences, not to rationalize social and communications incompetence.
    I do agree with this sentiment.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  25. #25
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My feedback on that Si description:.



    Si – External Field Dynamics (EFD)

    Si to me actually seems similar to Ni in many ways. Both are dynamic field functions, and both have this fundamental essence that seems to develop and emerge over time. The Ni essence of course deals with internals and sees interconnected dynamic processes that are happening beneath the surface, while Si focuses on the flow and interaction of things that exist in the external environment. With both Dynamic Field Functions, the perceiver is a part of what’s being seen, personalizes the experience, and harmonizes themselves with the flow.

    Noted.

    A Si person achieves harmony with the external environment around them (primarily the physical environment – in which people can also be included, as well as the way those people in the environment make the perceiver feel). Everything the Si-perceiver experiences around them has a character and makes them feel a certain way. They are constantly taking in experience; watching things go by, gliding from one point in time through the next. If you compare Si-eyes to Se eyes, the Si-eyes will look much more even keel and stable – even “flat” or constant, because they are experiencing inter-connectedness with their surroundings, as their surroundings pass through time. Si-eyes are one with what they are seeing, whereas Se-eyes are more likely to dart from point to point like a laser-targeting system, leaving what they have just seen in the past, and constantly moving on to something else.

    Not sure what this means. If it means a sense of being connected to my surroundings, I don't relate to it at all. But, let's see the rest --

    Si people frequently go through a day where each day has a different character, and there’s this core feeling as to the flow of the particular day. In fact, their environment may even seem different to them on one day or even one time, than on another. For example, one could be at a particular indoor location where there is no sunlight (no windows in the room), and the room will actually have a different feel, and even a different look to it, at 9 in the morning vs. 6 at night.

    *shrugs* If it's too dark to see or to read, etc, I will either switch on the light, or go outside, etc. But "having a different character?" That means nothing to me at all.

    Also, looking at a particular object in the environment from one point of view could make the observer feel completely different than if they were viewing it from another. For example, one could be observing a suspension bridge across a river, while standing on one river bank. This particular side of the river could be the side where the person lives (even if their house is 100 miles further inland), where the person goes out, experiences life, and has more associations with the scenery that exists on this side. The other side of the river could be the side where the person goes on vacation, and doesn’t spend nearly as much time. So if the person is standing on the “familiar” side of the river bank looking at the bridge, they may even attach all of the familiarity and “local-ness” and whatever other associations the person has made with that side of the river to the tower of the bridge which is closest to this side. They may also somehow tie the architecture of the bridge, with the feeling they get from observing the “character” of the bridge, and blend it with all of the Si associations they have with the particular side of the river that the tower is closest to. If the person moves to the other side of the river and looks at the bridge against the new background, the person will feel like they are more connected to the Si-associations of the other side, and the perspective of looking at those associations changes.

    I don't relate to this in the slightest. Such thoughts hardly ever cross my mind. But, more elaboration below.

    Associations of things in the environment play a major part in Si experience. An environment will evolve and appear different with new experience, giving the perceiver a different feeling while looking at the exact same physical setting (or certain people within the physical setting) at two different points in time. Si-types hold on to past experience of environments and seem to frequently blend past and present, because for Si types, external experience is all continuous – it is seamless over time. What was can be almost as real as what is. Something Si people experience in the present can act as a “trigger” for re-experiencing the flow they had at a different time period. For example, Si-types can form associations around songs, in the sense that sometimes when they hear a song being played, they remember what they were doing and the context in which they first heard the song. Hearing the song in the present makes them re-live the experiential flow of their life at the time that they first heard the song – the time when the Si was attached to the song (including any other Si experiences that were added along the way – such as if the person had experiential associations of a song, and then went and saw the artist perform the song live – they may add the experience of the environment of the concert venue to the whole core their experience of the song). Smells or sights can act as triggers as well. For example, seeing a piece of furniture that was in the house of a deceased grandparent can suddenly bring the perceiver back to the time period where they saw the furniture in its proper place in the grandparent’s house. They will also likely recall exactly what the room looked like in striking detail, and all of the personal attachments and associations they had with that room, house, and grandparent within the context of the room and house – and of course smelling a piece of furniture (like the pillows on a couch) can be even more of a trigger of the past experience of being in the grandparent’s environment, and even the other things that were going on in the Si-person's life at the time.

    I relate to the above somewhat, but in different ways. More below.

    The only bit to which I relate, somewhat, is remembering experiences because they are connected to a song, for instance. However, not because of the first time I heard a song. I usually don't remember it. What does happen, for instance: let us say that a particular song was being played very often on my car's radio during some particular period. And let us say that during that period a particular person - with whom I had some kind of relationship - was often in my car, so often the song would be played in the radio as I was with the person. It can happen that, later, upon hearing the song again, I will remember that person. However, it has nothing - nothing at all - to do with the first time I heard it, nor with the place or the environment. It has to do with my connection to that person.

    And, let us say that I spent some time in a place with a particular person, where strong feelings were involved - and, further, that that place wasn't one I'd usually be very often. So, my main memories of the place are connected to that person. So, if, later, I return to that place, it may be difficult to disconnect it from my memories of that person. However, that happens only if very strong feelings were involved.

    I don't relate at all to the bits referring to smelling a piece of furniture. I can't recall one single example of a memory being awakened by a smell. I notice if something smells good or bad, and since my field is chemistry, I associate smells to substances (like, I immediately think of the fact that rotten eggs stink because of H2S. Etc). But not at all in the "memory awakening" sense it was described.

    However, I can remember that, when I moved to a particular smelly industrial area, the smell bothered me during the first days, because it was horrible.
    Last edited by Expat; 08-14-2008 at 06:47 PM. Reason: Improving a bit
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  26. #26
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Si = External Dynamic of Fields

    Object/Field = mode of processing
    Fields are based on a sense of relation. How do things relate and connect to each other. How does everything mesh together. It is essentially subjective because it is based on an internal process of understanding which is interpretive. Doesn't mean it is true or untrue, it simply relies on the mind to construct it from the inside. It takes in what is there and absorbs it; observing or constructing how it comes together and the essential ties that are inherent. Opposite to fields are objects, which are individually observable (not to be confused with static) and based on objective principles that work by projecting onto something. Think of it as placing an meaning on something. To put it in a concrete sense an object is a leaf. You see it. It is a leaf. Jsut project onto that object and say that it is a leaf. You take what you see from the outside and your head says: this is what it is. But when you look at the inside of it with a microscope there are all kinds of pieces that come together to make the object. That organic fabric, the system in which it comes together to form the leaf, is a field. But without a microscope you're required to understand how that leaf comes together. You see how it comes together in your mind and create assumptions about what makes the leaf that you can't see from the outside. Yes, it's a leaf, but you're making sense of the fabric of the leaf.

    Dynamic/Static = sense of motion
    Dynamic implies motion. This unfolds or evolves and requires you to constantly predict your changing needs. Alternatively Static thinking sees everything in the present and deals only with immediacy. It doesn't mean that static thinkers are blind to the future or that dynamic thinkers are blind to the present and are constantly rushing ahead, merely that static thinkers will make a goal and make immediate readjustments as they meet problems, and dynamic thinkers will make a goal and constantly roll and evolve to keep their motion steady.

    External/Internal = quality or information
    External simply means that you're taking your information from the outside rather than the inside. This isn't the same as extroversion, which implies a motion outwards. Rather it observes external qualities. Externally the leaf is green, it's spiky, it has a skeleton (in a sense), it blows in the breeze. Internally the leaf has organic matter, it has veins, it's drawing up nutrients and pumping them through the leaf. The breeze is an external motion on the object, the pumping of nutrients is motion on the object internally. Externally we observe the skeleton, the spine of the leave. Internally there is a similar structure which makes up the veins of the leaf. This is a very concrete way of thinking of it. Technically none of these internal things are necessarily internal perspectives, but it's just to set the framework for a manner of thinking. The idea of "internal" qualities is actually abstract by nature.

    SO!

    Si External: a manner of perceiving external qualities. Taking in an external and concretely observable environment.

    Si Dynamic: These qualities are ever changing, evolving, molding as if they have a life of their own. This is only logical because an introverted mode of perception will be constantly changing with the needs and perspective of the individual, which is why people often associate Si with comfort and health. Conversely a static perceiver will see things in snapshots. It's extroverted and projecting outwards, simply labeling the object, so as long as the object projected on does not change, the perspective shouldn't change either (I'm not getting into the semantics of this hitta, so don't even bother).

    Si Field: What is the underlying fabric? How does the system work and mesh together? In the sense of external perception, how do external qualities come together to make something good or bad? "These colours are suited. These colours are not. It's beautiful outside today. I should take pictures of that building, I like the lines. I don't know why, but this makes me feel good. Steak is the best food. When I'm tired I just need to sleep, otherwise I'll feel off."

    A good example of the core idea of Si is the idea of fashion. Fashion is constantly evolving with changing perceptions. Different seasons have different colour palettes and styles. To some people fashion has no rhythm, no sensibility, but to a fashion-oriented Si, it's a tangible external process. An Si person might not understand why someone doesn't see that their bathroom from the 70s is horrendously ugly. Another Si person might hate living in the city because the way it comes together feels crowded, dowdy, unattractive; and that becomes mentally taxing on them. Someone like an ENFj, on the other hand, might not understand what the big deal is. Who cares? Why is that important? How can you even tell between what is good aesthetics and bad aesthetics? And to that the Si person says "It just is," because it's natural to them. That's how they've pieced it together internally.

    Subsequently, ISXps will be very sensitive to the ideas of comfort and the "feel" of a certain space or experience because they are perceiving and constantly systematizing that perception, bombarded from a sense of Si. Si/Fe are called mediators and caregivers because they are sensing the environment through the filter of extroverted feeling. Uncomfortable emotional dynamics are striking to them and clashing with their sense of external harmony, so they feel obligated to fix it. Si/Te are called craftsmen and artisans because they are sensing the environment through the filter of external thinking. Their focus is on how their environment feels, but it is from an externally objective standpoint. It's based on the proficiency and effectiveness of Te. This is also why SLIs will sometimes appear to have a focus that is almost self-serving. They're taking in the environment, judging how it makes them feel and the sense of "togetherness" and harmony there, but they're doing it from the perspective of what is effective. If something is not useful for them or takes away from their sense of external being then it shouldn't be there. It's ineffective and must be crafted in a way that functions to their needs, or discarded entirely.

    Yeah...spiel over.
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  27. #27
    Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,457
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nice Vero

    @ Diana: I observed the same thing with my Ti ESTp grandfather and Se ESTp cousin, as with the Ni Ego's I mentioned in my previous post. I chose to use the Ni Egos to contrast with Si because that is where the difference would be most noticeable. Se ego's don't focus the way Si egos do on external matters, although since Se egos are focusing on what is present and immediate (being S-egos) they will seem less averse or closer to Si-egos than Ni egos, but Se egos will most likely find the Si immersion as tangential or irrelevant, as opposed to getting troubled by it the way Ni egos most likely would.


    I'm glad this thread was made; there have been some good posts about Si from people who really seem to get it.

  28. #28
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Wow!
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  29. #29
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve View Post
    How'd you come up with your description?
    Just thought about what it was to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Si is about readily observable, immediately apparent cause and effect relationships. Here are some examples of use of one's Si:
    • My boss told me that I should buckle in my ladder when I drive around with it in the back seat because that way if I slam on the breaks at a high speed it won't smack into anyone in the front seat.
    • Peter and I were watching a TV show and someone hooked an IV up to a corpse. He said, "What's going to pump that liquid through his body if his heart isn't beating?"
    • If someone's cold, they could put on a sweater or turn the thermostat up, and then they won't feel as cold.
    • If you wear a belt, your pants are less likely to sag or fall down.
    • Filling in the holes on the side of the ladder prevents it from whistling when it's on the top of your vehicle while driving down the highway.
    • Adding some colorful accents to an otherwise neutral room would make it more pleasing to look at.
    • You probably feel achy and lack concentration right now simply because you haven't slept as much as you should lately.
    See - those examples don't really seem like Si to me. For example when you mentioned that you worked at a bar - and you said that remembering the recipes for each drink and what drinks people wanted wasn't Si. These examples seem similar to me. There's nothing that implies a dynamic relationship. They're just static facts. If someone's cold, they should put a sweater on. Well, yeah. 1+1=2. That's like saying that knowing to smile at people when they say something nice is Fe. I don't think Si is about memorising fixes to situations so much as identifying the problem and determing a solution based on feel, based on the specifics of the particular situation. When you start getting into stuff like "I found that filling in the holes of a ladder stopped the whistling sound - let's try that now" - seems to me that's just the memorisation of usual facts, something that we all do. Si would be more like tasting a drink and just knowing what the ratios of ingredients are, and so being able to recreate it without having done so before. The innate knowledge of how to interact with objects/ in environments you've never experienced before.
    Quote Originally Posted by mn0good View Post
    Subsequently, ISXps will be very sensitive to the ideas of comfort and the "feel" of a certain space or experience because they are perceiving and constantly systematizing that perception, bombarded from a sense of Si. Si/Fe are called mediators and caregivers because they are sensing the environment through the filter of extroverted feeling. Uncomfortable emotional dynamics are striking to them and clashing with their sense of external harmony, so they feel obligated to fix it. Si/Te are called craftsmen and artisans because they are sensing the environment through the filter of external thinking. Their focus is on how their environment feels, but it is from an externally objective standpoint. It's based on the proficiency and effectiveness of Te. This is also why SLIs will sometimes appear to have a focus that is almost self-serving. They're taking in the environment, judging how it makes them feel and the sense of "togetherness" and harmony there, but they're doing it from the perspective of what is effective. If something is not useful for them or takes away from their sense of external being then it shouldn't be there. It's ineffective and must be crafted in a way that functions to their needs, or discarded entirely.

    Yeah...spiel over.
    I love ILEs. (c:

    So Steve's example was SiFe rather than straight Si? Is it impossible to separate the two base functions in a person?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  30. #30
    Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,457
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    So Steve's example was SiFe rather than straight Si? Is it impossible to separate the two base functions in a person?
    Sure, I'm describing Si from a NeSiTiFe perspective, and it really is impossible to completely separate functions out in a person and say "This is because of Si and this is because of Ne", since they work hand in hand. But I think a person would be able to see where the Si influence is in what I wrote. In terms of separating ego functions, you can and you can't. You can sort of see how each function would influence the end product, but it's nearly impossible to break down a person's thought discretely.

    And yeah, like Vero said, the Si will be filtered a tad differently through Te/Fi than through Ti/Fe.

  31. #31
    <something> Wynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a Hill
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So Steve's example was SiFe rather than straight Si? Is it impossible to separate the two base functions in a person?
    I've come to the realization recently that the two are integral. You don't have one without the other, which is why they are paired together in the first place. If you want two separate them then you have to settle for a vague and sort of stereotypical description, because ultimately every function will work in conjunction with others. So Si is about sense of external coming together, that feeling that your world is in harmony, that concept as a base function is the same in both ISXps, but your priorities change depending on what goes with it. That's only logical. So you and someone like forcemyhand will both seek that sense of harmony, but the way you filter that perception depends on your creative function (which is why it's called a creative function, it directs your creative energies).
    ILE
    7w8 so/sp

    Very busy with work. Only kind of around.

  32. #32
    force my hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,334
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Steve's description is very relevent to how I view the world. I am tempted to go into more detail, but I'm not sure how I would begin to describe it, though.

    This is especially accurate:

    Si people frequently go through a day where each day has a different character, and there’s this core feeling as to the flow of the particular day. In fact, their environment may even seem different to them on one day or even one time, than on another. For example, one could be at a particular indoor location where there is no sunlight (no windows in the room), and the room will actually have a different feel, and even a different look to it, at 9 in the morning vs. 6 at night.
    I also find that projects I undertake are subject to this. For example, an essay - if it doesn't 'mesh' internally on some undefined level of form, it will change its character and feel 'ruined' to me. Doesn't matter if it comes back with an A+ - it violated some aspect it's own character and from then on will be associated with something negative.
    SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype

  33. #33
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, I don't think it's right to associate Si with lethargic movements or inaction. Being comfortable doesn't necessarily mean sinking into the corner of a sofa. For example, it would be very uncomfortable to have to sit still when in a state of excitement or when I feel like I have a lot of energy. If I have to sit down most of the day, I'm always fidgeting and jumping around in my chair. Often, having spent most of the day studying at uni or something, I'll just feel like running on the way home. Because that's what my body needs after being inactive I guess. Anyway - yeah, I just don't think Si and lying around in bed all day necessarily go together.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  34. #34
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    Also, I don't think it's right to associate Si with lethargic movements or inaction. Being comfortable doesn't necessarily mean sinking into the corner of a sofa. For example, it would be very uncomfortable to have to sit still when in a state of excitement or when I feel like I have a lot of energy. If I have to sit down most of the day, I'm always fidgeting and jumping around in my chair. Often, having spent most of the day studying at uni or something, I'll just feel like running on the way home. Because that's what my body needs after being inactive I guess. Anyway - yeah, I just don't think Si and lying around in bed all day necessarily go together.
    true. I have an SEI friend who bikes 9 miles (one way) to work every day when the weather is nice. that's hardly lazy!
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  35. #35
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    See - those examples don't really seem like Si to me. For example when you mentioned that you worked at a bar - and you said that remembering the recipes for each drink and what drinks people wanted wasn't Si. These examples seem similar to me. There's nothing that implies a dynamic relationship. They're just static facts. If someone's cold, they should put a sweater on. Well, yeah. 1+1=2. That's like saying that knowing to smile at people when they say something nice is Fe. I don't think Si is about memorising fixes to situations so much as identifying the problem and determing a solution based on feel, based on the specifics of the particular situation. When you start getting into stuff like "I found that filling in the holes of a ladder stopped the whistling sound - let's try that now" - seems to me that's just the memorisation of usual facts, something that we all do. Si would be more like tasting a drink and just knowing what the ratios of ingredients are, and so being able to recreate it without having done so before. The innate knowledge of how to interact with objects/ in environments you've never experienced before.
    I love ILEs. (c:
    It's not a matter of whether or not one is able to produce the same results (such as filling in the holes on the ladder, which I've never heard of anyone else doing before, btw, and I'm sure he hadn't either) using other methods. I would have never thought to fill in the holes on the ladder, btw. I hadn't even noticed that my ladder whistled until he mentioned it.

    These were dynamic examples in that they were dealing with events (and fields in that they were dealing with the relationships between those events).

    The reason they sound over simplified to you is most likely because I was specifically trying to gives examples of Si alone (not Si + Fi or Si + Te), and perhaps because they were from a Te perspective (instead of Si). It's impossible to use only one function at a time, so explanations that paint a more complete picture of an example aren't going to be about only Si, for the most part.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  36. #36
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok, firstly - sorry Steve, but I’ve changed my mind regarding how I relate to your description – I did mean what I wrote when I wrote it lol … but after I replied, reread it again and thought about it some more, I had the feeling that your Si experiences didn’t quite match up to mine as well I initially thought they did. Part of the reason that I originally jumped at the description is that I find it hard (and other Si-dominants I’ve talked to do as well) to really describe what Si is to me. Why? Idk. Because it’s what I’ve always known I guess – it’s hard to measure how my subjective experiences compare with other people’s. But I would think that this would be a problem for most types with introverted-leading functions. Eh – maybe not. But anyway, I was aware at the time that Steve’s description seemed a little more … Idk … fluffy, intangible maybe, than I thought my Si was … , but it felt more concrete than the definition I had of it at the time, so I thought it fit. 0:

    But anyway, what I now feel the main difference is btwn our experiences is that mine feels a lot more concrete and analytical. Feelings, impressions – sure, but those feelings I’m able to analyse in detail. Conglomerations of feelings can be sorted and individually linked to different aspects of the experience.

    from Steve's description:
    A Si person achieves harmony with the external environment around them (primarily the physical environment – in which people can also be included, as well as the way those people in the environment make the perceiver feel). Everything the Si-perceiver experiences around them has a character and makes them feel a certain way. They are constantly taking in experience; watching things go by, gliding from one point in time through the next.

    Si people frequently go through a day where each day has a different character, and there’s this core feeling as to the flow of the particular day. In fact, their environment may even seem different to them on one day or even one time, than on another. For example, one could be at a particular indoor location where there is no sunlight (no windows in the room), and the room will actually have a different feel, and even a different look to it, at 9 in the morning vs. 6 at night.
    Different characters? Idk – I sort of related to that, but now it seems to be really simplifying matters. Presenting a rough sketch. In the present, I experience different feelings, but too many at once to be able to really assign a character to a day except maybe in hindsight. In the moment, there are just a multitude of feelings and impressions in layered form, sometimes they are fighting each other for dominance, other times they are fairly content to stay in their various positions. Sort of like a musical score, each line has its place, can assert itself in a solo when required while the others take on the accompaniment role. Assigning one character to all these different feelings is possible I guess, but about as desirable and useful as it would be for a Ti-ego to condense his detailed analyses into one-line descriptions. Like gathering up all the various impressions of the day and determining the average. What’s the point of that, when the beauty is in the complexity!

    Also, looking at a particular object in the environment from one point of view could make the observer feel completely different than if they were viewing it from another. For example, one could be observing a suspension bridge across a river, while standing on one river bank. This particular side of the river could be the side where the person lives (even if their house is 100 miles further inland), where the person goes out, experiences life, and has more associations with the scenery that exists on this side. The other side of the river could be the side where the person goes on vacation, and doesn’t spend nearly as much time. So if the person is standing on the “familiar” side of the river bank looking at the bridge, they may even attach all of the familiarity and “local-ness” and whatever other associations the person has made with that side of the river to the tower of the bridge which is closest to this side. They may also somehow tie the architecture of the bridge, with the feeling they get from observing the “character” of the bridge, and blend it with all of the Si associations they have with the particular side of the river that the tower is closest to. If the person moves to the other side of the river and looks at the bridge against the new background, the person will feel like they are more connected to the Si-associations of the other side, and the perspective of looking at those associations changes.
    Ok – this is the main part which I’ve come to realise I disagree with in terms of my own Si. I see now that my Si is very selective about what feelings, impressions, whatever are connected to places or objects. I remember Jxrtes described it once as “a thick syrup of details” … and that’s really the best way to describe my Si. But it is not so strong and undiscerning a current that it sweeps up every impression/feeling in its path. It's analytical - it decides which impressions are relevant to what specific parts of the experiences and these attach themselves as the experiences flow past. Connections are drawn in the moment and filed for future reference. Uh, so I think Si-seekers are more likely to just gather up everything with the flow, the irrelevant along with the relevant information. Or maybe they attempt to seek out the relevant information, but don't always succeed. IME with Si-seekers, they can have a bad sensory experience in relation to a particular object, and that can ruin that object for them permanently. Because the connections they've drawn are wrong or just too simple and crude ... when in reality, if examined more carefully there are multiple things that should have been taken into account that were discarded as irrelevant information. There are most likely connections between seemingly unrelated aspects of the experience which they’ve missed, which all combine to form the bad experience. Say for example I had a bad experience with spaghetti squash. So my Si analyzes the situation in detail as it flows past – it takes into account the state of my body, the emotional and physical atmosphere at the time … maybe the looks on people’s faces played a part in why the spaghetti squash tasted bad. What? No, seriously … but then OTOH, I think an Si-seeker would be more inclined to just conclude that spaghetti squash is yuck and that’s that – without taking into account the extenuating circumstances. Not to say that an Si-dominant mightn’t come to the same conclusion lol, but being able to analyse the experience in more detail, to take into account the related details of the scenario, he would be more able to rationalise himself out of a dislike for spaghetti squash by seeing that there were other factors involved in the particular situation which could be eliminated in the future - thereby leaving himself open to liking spaghetti squash in the right circumstances. :0

    A real-life example of how I think Si-seeking can differ from Si-dominance is of this time when my brother (IEE) and I visited a place in which we had both had the same bad experience. I could remember in detail what had happened, but it didn’t affect the way I saw it in the present. I said to my brother that it’d be nice to live in that area some day because it was beautiful … to which my brother reacted in amazement that I could bear to live in a place that had such bad memories connected with it. In my mind, to associate bad memories with places in a way that affects the present doesn’t make sense - so I simply don’t let my brain make the association. My Si is as rational as that. I mean obviously there is the memory in my head of what occurred, but ... Idk - I guess in my mind, it just doesn't make sense to connect a place and an experience, unless that experience for some reason is likely to happen again in that same place.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  37. #37
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Si-types hold on to past experience of environments and seem to frequently blend past and present, because for Si types, external experience is all continuous – it is seamless over time. What was can be almost as real as what is. Something Si people experience in the present can act as a “trigger” for re-experiencing the flow they had at a different time period. For example, Si-types can form associations around songs, in the sense that sometimes when they hear a song being played, they remember what they were doing and the context in which they first heard the song. Hearing the song in the present makes them re-live the experiential flow of their life at the time that they first heard the song – the time when the Si was attached to the song (including any other Si experiences that were added along the way – such as if the person had experiential associations of a song, and then went and saw the artist perform the song live – they may add the experience of the environment of the concert venue to the whole core their experience of the song).
    I don't relate to blending past and present really. The past are made of memories from which I've already extracted the relevant information, or what was relevant at the time. If I concentrate really hard, I can conjure up a disjointed flow of events from the past, but it certainly doesn't feel remotely as real as "what is". Basically, focusing on the past or the future involves intense concentration for me - I am basically always experiencing the present by default. I don't think what you're describing re the past being as real as the present is Si, Steve. Maybe more Ni. Things like associating experiences with a song - yeah, but it's not as intense as you seem to be describing by a long shot. They're more like gentle nudges into my consciousness - or usually actually I just get this deja vu feeling, and only if I concentrate on it, do I remember "oh, I know where I've smelled this before". (c: They don't assault my consciousness by any means. I'm perfectly able to ignore them if I don't care to indulge them - I wouldn't call them "triggers" where I'm suddenly reliving a past experience or something.
    As I mentioned earlier, Si can be very personal, while Se is not.
    I guess it’s personal by definition, but honestly, I don’t see mine as being personal in an “I’ve developed specific peculiarities of taste because of my personal experiences” way. I feel it’s more logical – based on an inate knowledge of how my body as an object relates to other objects. In a clinical fashion.


    Anyway, I'd appreciate it if Si-valuers could let me know if they relate or not to what I've written.
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  38. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Steve:
    What you are describing is what I refer to in Supersocion theory as temporal sensation, Ni blocked with Si energy. I've spoken to INTps who were Ni with Se exertion, and they described their memories as so rich that they could spend hours thinking about exciting vacations, reliving them moment-to-moment. It was like they were really there. They have characteristic expressions, trancelike because they are focusing very hard on the recollected world inside their heads, and so are not moving their eyes as they focus on these happenings.

    I've known quite personally an INFp with exertion Si. It was like you described: a sense of timelessness and reflection. She was charismatic, too, and so radiated this sensation all around herself like a spell.

  39. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Augusta defined Si as harmony between processes. If process A helps process B, then process A is offering +Si to process B because it is helping process B to keep going. There is an implicit relationship between Si and Ni, because all processes are Ni aspects. There is a similar relation of Si to Ni: changes in Si can sustain processes which would have failed without the change. Consider what happened in Afghanistan after 9/11. The Taliban and Ahmed Karzai's government had been in civil war for years previous to the U.S. invasion, and it had seemed it would remain that way because neither side had the strength to overcome the other. U.S. assistance changed all that, and Karzai's Northern Alliance was allowed to complete its previously frustrated military campaigns. This dynamic has been studied by experts as the deciding factor in every civil conflict in which one side decisively dominated the other: a third power always tips the scales, with the sole exceptions being situations in which the other power suffered the depletion of their own will. (as in the case of the American Civil War) The Taliban was defeated because the States wielded tremendous -Si against them and granted considerable +Si to the Northern Alliance. Upon the altar of this Si the Taliban's Se ebbed and dwindled; the Alliance's Se surged and expanded. The imbalance of will changed the course of history away from that which had been previously expected.

    I will close by pointing out there is a science of +Si, and it is called ecology.

  40. #40
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,931
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Which 'experts' claim such rubbish?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •