Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Se, Si and beauty

  1. #1

    Default Se, Si and beauty

    Which function is responsible for the perception of beauty, Se or Si? Or something else?

  2. #2
    Suburbanite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    63
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If there's beauty in tragedy, Se and Si cannot be solely responsible.

  3. #3
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 6 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,594
    Mentioned
    631 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    beauty is a judgment, so a rational function needs to come into play at some point.

  4. #4
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In the most basic use of the term beauty, Se for objective beauty (I can look at a person and tell that they are good looking without feeling feeling attracted to that person, for example) and Si for attraction/how seeing something beautiful makes you feel.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  5. #5

    Default

    Ok so how about = judgment of beauty, = the emotional reaction to it (crying, smiling, etc.) , = how it affects your internal physiology (racing heartbeat, nausea,etc), = pure perception of its external qualities ( shape, color, hardness etc.)

    And I guess =subjective judgment of beauty, relating to feelings of love and attraction, = objective ? As in, a detached judgement of the proportions, patterns, natural congruities that make something beautiful. The two would probably go hand in hand, one leading to the other. So if you love something you'll likely see "patterns" ie. that enhance its beauty to you, and ignore those that don't. If you see a very congruent, natural pattern, that would eventually lead to subjective feelings of love , as in the "beauty of mathematics".

    I'm not sure how Te can be related to beauty, seems like it would be indirect, like if some work was done very efficiently, there would be some link to Fi, which would result in the judgement that the work was beautiful.
    Last edited by ConcreteButterfly; 10-17-2014 at 12:19 AM.

  6. #6
    bolong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    626
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConcreteButterfly View Post
    Ok so how about = judgment of beauty, = the emotional reaction to it (crying, smiling, etc.) , = how it affects your internal physiology (racing heartbeat, nausea,etc), = pure perception of its external qualities ( shape, color, hardness etc.)
    Agree. I also feel that Ti and Te are not involved directly. Neither are Ni and Ne, really.

  7. #7
    SlavaPHP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    TIM
    ENTP / INTj
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    every function can yield beauty... some times i look at mechanisms and software code, and it looks beautiful
    -Slava

    ENTP/INTP

  8. #8
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    sure as fuck not that caveman function.

  9. #9
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lecter View Post
    sure as fuck not that caveman function.
    <3 i missed you guys so much!

  10. #10
    Anglas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lithuania
    TIM
    LIE-Ni 7w8 So/Sp
    Posts
    1,354
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    <3 i missed you guys so much!
    where is your pride, ILI?

  11. #11
    Chains's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,290
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Beauty through different means perhaps? Se may be like, this girl is HOT, while Si may be like I love her complexion.

  12. #12
    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 Jimmers View Post
    Beauty through different means perhaps? Se may be like, this girl is HOT, while Si may be like I love her complexion.
    Not related to Se vs. Si, but your post reminded me of this: https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.n...6567b0e8c6bfeb

    (I'm apparently Si and would feel really uncomfortable speaking in such a flowery way.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  13. #13
    Chains's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,290
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Not related to Se vs. Si, but your post reminded me of this: https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.n...6567b0e8c6bfeb

    (I'm apparently Si and would feel really uncomfortable speaking in such a flowery way.)
    I would think that Si coupled with Fe would be more apt to speak in a flowery way as opposed to being coupled with Te. So you're right, what I said didn't get at the essential difference between the two. What I'm trying to convey is the notion that Se is more concerned with the beauty of the whole object, while Si is more concerned with subtle details or parts of the object that are appealing or beautiful.

    As an Si user, what to you find beautiful or attractive?

  14. #14
    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 Jimmers View Post
    I would think that Si coupled with Fe would be more apt to speak in a flowery way as opposed to being coupled with Te. So you're right, what I said didn't get at the essential difference between the two. What I'm trying to convey is the notion that Se is more concerned with the beauty of the whole object, while Si is more concerned with subtle details or parts of the object that are appealing or beautiful.

    As an Si user, what to you find beautiful or attractive?
    Wow, it's so hard to put into words. I'm not sure I can.

    Aesthetically I find earth tones with accents of deep, rich colors most attractive for man made things. I find almost everything in nature beautiful, but moving water and things that make me feel small are my favorites.

    In people I think natural beauty appeals to me much more than "done up" beauty. There has to be an almost palpable vibe to the person, too. Imperfections add character. Being true to yourself is essential. (By contrast, people like Lady Gaga and Nicki Manage kind of creep me out because it feels like I'm not looking at an actual person.) When the color or style of a person's clothes/hair/makeup really suit the person I find it beautiful even if it's not my own favorite style.

    There are beautiful moments or situations, too. Those I won't even try to explain. I will say though that sometimes perfectly awful things can be beautiful, though probably not as often as wonderful or neutral things. Something about a moment just strikes me a certain way and gives me a sense of awe.

    Basically, there's no one physical thing that I consider beautiful. It's a reaction, an event, an interaction between things. I can look at something/someone and consider it/them objectively attractive, but I wouldn't call that beauty.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  15. #15
    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 Joy View Post
    Wow, it's so hard to put into words. I'm not sure I can.

    Aesthetically I find earth tones with accents of deep, rich colors most attractive for man made things. I find almost everything in nature beautiful, but moving water and things that make me feel small are my favorites.

    In people I think natural beauty appeals to me much more than "done up" beauty. There has to be an almost palpable vibe to the person, too. Imperfections add character. Being true to yourself is essential. (By contrast, people like Lady Gaga and Nicki Manage kind of creep me out because it feels like I'm not looking at an actual person.) When the color or style of a person's clothes/hair/makeup really suit the person I find it beautiful even if it's not my own favorite style.

    There are beautiful moments or situations, too. Those I won't even try to explain. I will say though that sometimes perfectly awful things can be beautiful, though probably not as often as wonderful or neutral things. Something about a moment just strikes me a certain way and gives me a sense of awe.

    Basically, there's no one physical thing that I consider beautiful. It's a reaction, an event, an interaction between things. I can look at something/someone and consider it/them objectively attractive, but I wouldn't call that beauty.
    I suppose this is all very dynamics of fields!
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

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

  16. #16
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Se judges not only physical beauty as such (features and how well they harmonize), but also a form of energy that a person projects (plus other factors such as dexterity in movement, confidence etc.). In my experience Si users are prone to find beautiful what they can associate with a memory or even relate back to themselves (and thus what is subjectively suggestive to them). I have this impression that Se base responds in an immediate way to very impactful stimuli - it's as if they don't really have much of a personal filter that would narrow things down to a personal pattern ("my type"), they will be drawn to what is the hottest thing around in a very direct way.

Posting Permissions

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