common stereotypes about Si (introverted sensing)

[marooned]

hello, since a lot of people on the forum see me as SEI i feel qualified to make this post in some ways. the following are things about Si that are not really true of me and that i think probably miss the mark about what Si is.

- Si is not matching your clothes... one can develop a personalized aesthetic sense of course, and there is some loose connection to Si in this, but it's often far too loose and far too indirect to be important. for instance my ESE mom notices the intensity of colors and how they look next to each other to the extent that she will comment on it a lot... her aesthetic sense i think is very much about her Si... but i personally just find this kind of thing somewhat torturous. i have an aesthetic sense but it isn't something i can even reduce to pinning down what it is, and it tends to be more based on what something means to me personally. my clothing styles (to the extent they can, as i am usually short of money to buy clothing and it's not been a priority for a long time) tend to reflect an ideal of my self-image in ways that are difficult to explain and that change as my self-image changes. i don't feel this is all that unique, but humanly common. there are some people who care a great deal about color-matching and fabric quality and all sorts of details like that but most of that stuff is not something i devote much notice to naturally (unless i actually *want* to torture myself). it's not important in the grand scheme of the universe (it is not meaningful to me personally). if i was ever professionally in a setting where what i wear greatly matters i would probably seek outside advice just like anyone else (especially wanting it reduced to clear standards or rules if others are going to have some issue with my clothing) because i am not able to really look at appearance well from the outside. i can't put myself together externally in my mind - how i look on the outside is confusing, as is how others look. i also find that most people seem to care way more about aesthetics in general than i do day-to-day (and most of these people are rational types). also, i find expecting any IP type to be some expert at this is silly... Se is an unconscious IE for all IPs. (eta: expertise in aesthetics is something one would need to develop and work on and it would probably always be personal/unique in that case.)

- Si is not about internal bodily sensations. my theory is that actually sensation of this sort doesn't differ that much between types. what does differ is the way in which that awareness is overridden by other mental processes. Si types, however, can also have it overridden by their other mental processes. it depends on the individual to a great extent. using the question of if one for instance puts off addressing physical needs to the point that these needs scream to the extent you can no longer not notice them, is a bad question for N vs. S. it will probably mislead a lot of sensors to thinking they are intuitive. very few people are "physical" enough to address their every momentary physical need as it arises, to maintain such constant awareness of these needs, etc. eta: i'd also add that a lot of the people who are physical in this way have probably actually worked on developing that presence of mind further as a deliberate effort over many years. ime, i've noticed a lot of XSEs can fit the bill, but you will also notice they are actively working on it too... which is to say, i'm noticing the ones who find this highly important the most.


mainly i think these two things are red herrings in socionics. i realize saying what Si isn't doesn't help one discover what it *is* exactly, but i haven't quite figured out what it is yet.

[Shiver]

Si PoLRs are allergic to food.

[Aylen]

Having Si as my role and being a core 4 I believe makes me more sensitive to certain aesthetics and balance. One thing that will bug me is looking at something that is crooked (picture on the wall) and I can spend some time trying to arrange things a certain way that feels "right" to me. Sometimes "right" includes arranging something in a way that makes it look "accidentally" messy good, like it happened without effort. I was recently talking to a forum member about redecorating my room. I had the hardest time imagining a certain shade of eggplant, matching an item I really wanted which was more burgundy and deep dark gold. Every time I closed my eyes and saw it in my mind it just didn't look right but something was compelling me to buy it anyway.

When the item arrived, and I put it all together, everything just matched so perfectly and I was happy with the outcome. I think what was bothering me is that colors on the internet are not always going to look the same when you get the item but I took a chance primarily based on my intuition and somehow it worked. The item was big and expensive enough that I would have had to make other big color changes if it didn't work. I had a backup plan btw and that will also work so it all turned out fine. I am not sure how much Si played a role in all that but it can get overwhelming if I focus on it too long and I have to shut it down. Ni is effortless to me. I imagine Si is effortless to an Si lead and is sort of automatic. It is like an intuition too but through the inner senses first.

My cousin is SEI by socionics standards. She is also an artist and loves to cook for large groups of people. I am not sure if that is directly related to Si. She has very specific needs when it comes to her comfort. She sleeps with a mask and earplugs every night and cannot sleep well without them. She sleeps on her back for hours and hardly moves position. We used to tease her that she slept like the dead. She has very strange habits that I don't get. She has a darkness to her but it is like a shadow that walks behind her even when she is in the lightest mood. At times I looked at her and felt as if I were watching someone in a perpetual state of mourning no matter how good her life was or how big her smile was. I later found out it was apathy due to her feeling stuck. She is much better since she got married though. I think having a stepchild helped her feel connected. She never wanted children so it was surprising to the family when she met him and was all in doing things for and with the kid a mother would do.

My youngest sister is ESE and she will cook or bake now and then but she is more of an adventurer than a homebody (like my cousin). I was reading Jung's description of Si and I felt like it captures the essence of my cousin very well. In a way she is still a mystery to me even after we lived together as children and for a while as adults. I seriously wonder what is going on in her head sometimes. I think she is very intelligent but was labeled developmentally "slow" and people would often ask me what was wrong with her. Nothing is wrong with her. That is just how she is and she is so creative/talented. I think it shocks people when they realize she is a true artist. She always looked the part. I think she is probably a core 4 too although I considered sx 2. She has a seductive energy to her and an ethereal beauty, at times, if you look at her a certain way. In many ways she was selfish and spoiled because everyone always gave her a break. She often played dumb in order to avoid unpleasant conversations. Even now she will often take a long time to answer you even if she is looking you right in the eyes. It can be unnerving to those who don't know her. She can also use her Fe in a very extroverted way which contrasts her usual quiet demeanor. I get a sense that she is haunted on a very deep level but cannot find the words to express it so it comes out in her art, the jewelry she makes, and the art she has chosen to tattoo on her body. When she lived with me she was a dancer...

Now contrast all that with the idea she now a regional manager for a furniture store and was promoted to that position. I have never seen her at work but I wonder how her employer sees her. How did she get the position...She is one of the most Te polr people I know.

The Introverted Sensation Type

The predominance of introverted sensation produces a definite type, which is characterized by certain peculiarities. It is an irrational type, because it is oriented amid the flux of events not by rational judgment but simply by what happens. Whereas the extraverted sensation type is guided by the intensity of objective influences, the introverted type is guided by the intensity of the subjective sensation excited by the objective stimulus. Obviously, therefore, no proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but one that is apparently quite unpredictable and arbitrary. What will make an impression and what will not can never be seen in advance, and from outside. Did there exist an aptitude for expression in any way proportional to the intensity of his sensations, the irrationality of this type would be extraordinarily striking. This is the case, for instance, when an individual is a creative artist. But since this is the exception, the introvert's characteristic difficulty in expressing himself also conceals his irrationality. On the contrary, he may be conspicuous for his calmness and passivity, or for his rational self-control. This peculiarity, which often leads a superficial judgment astray, is really due to his unrelatedness to objects. Normally the object is not consciously devalued in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it and immediately replaced by a subjective reaction no longer related to the reality of the object. This naturally has the same effect as devaluation. Such a type can easily make one question why one should exist at all, or why objects in general should have any justification for their existence since everything essential still goes on happening without them. This doubt may be justified in extreme cases, but not in the normal, since the objective stimulus is absolutely necessary to sensation and merely produces something different from what the external situation might lead one to expect.

Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.

If no capacity for artistic expression is present, all impressions sink into the depths and hold consciousness under a spell, so that it becomes impossible to master their fascination by giving them conscious expression. In general, this type can organize his impressions only in archaic ways, because thinking and feeling are relatively unconscious and, if conscious at all, have at their disposal only the most necessary, banal, everyday means of expression. As conscious functions, they are wholly incapable of adequately reproducing his subjective perceptions. This type, therefore, is uncommonly inaccessible to objective understanding, and he usually fares no better in understanding himself.

Above all, his development alienates him from the reality of the object, leaving him at the mercy of his subjective perceptions, which orient his consciousness to an archaic reality, although his lack of comparative judgment keeps him wholly unconscious of this fact. Actually he lives in a mythological world, where men, animals, locomotives, houses, rivers, and mountains appear either as benevolent deities or as malevolent demons. That they appear thus to him never enters his head, though that is just the effect they have on his judgments and actions. He judges and acts as though he had such powers to deal with; but this begins to strike him only when he discovers that his sensations are totally different from reality. If he has any aptitude for objective reason, he will sense this difference as morbid; but if he remains faithful to his irrationality, and is ready to grant his sensations reality value, the objective world will appear a mere make-believe and a comedy. Only in extreme cases, however, is this dilemma reached. As a rule he re-signs himself to his isolation and the banality of the world, which he has unconsciously made archaic.

His unconscious is distinguished chiefly by the repression of intuition, which consequently acquires an extraverted and archaic character. Whereas true extraverted intuition is possessed of a singular resourcefulness, a "good nose" for objectively real possibilities, this archaicized intuition has an amazing flair for all the ambiguous, shadowy, sordid, dangerous possibilities lurking in the background. The real and conscious intentions of the object mean nothing to it; instead, it sniffs out every conceivable archaic motive underlying such an intention. It therefore has a dangerous and destructive quality that contrasts glaringly with the well-meaning innocuousness of the conscious attitude. So long as the individual does not hold too aloof from the object, his unconscious intuition has a salutary compensating effect on the rather fantastic and overcredulous attitude of consciousness. But as soon as the unconscious becomes antagonistic, the archaic intuitions come to the surface and exert their pernicious influence, forcing themselves on the individual and producing compulsive ideas of the most perverse kind. The result is usually a compulsion neurosis, in which the hysterical features are masked by symptoms of exhaustion.

[marooned]

Having Si as my role and being a core 4 I believe makes me more sensitive to certain [COLOR=#333333]aesthetics and balance. One thing that will bug me is looking at something that is crooked (picture on the wall) and I can spend some time trying to arrange things a certain way that feels "right" to me. Sometimes "right" includes arranging something in a way that makes it look "accidentally" messy good, like it happened without effort. I was recently talking to a forum member about redecorating my room. I had the hardest time imagining a certain shade of eggplant, matching an item I really wanted which was more burgundy and deep dark gold. Every time I closed my eyes and saw it in my mind it just didn't look right but something was compelling me to buy it anyway.

i've had these troubles too. this is one reason it is "torturous." i will especially get in this mode sometimes when i'm sick. i'll start noticing colors everywhere and comparing them and it seems to make me even more sick but i compulsively can't stop. and i think that the way in which these things invite in some OCD mindset that i don't want to get into is one of the things i mean by "torturous." if i start noticing these details, i start seeing more and more of them... soon there is no end to them and all the actions they would bring with them. my life at work brings them forward more - things i never wanted to know so much about - and everyone at work becomes quite neurotic about the little details in general, it seems. the details get in your head and start changing your thinking too because you have to think differently to notice them. in my case, it was long experienced as a strain but it's evolved into functional torture instead.

what i've been suspecting is that the main thing that characterizes Si lead is actually its low energy. it is short often on neurotransmitters... it is the most energy conservative type. because it has less "juice" or "fuel" to work with to begin with, it has limited mental resources to allocate. it also has certain pathways in the mind that are readily open to it. the rest depends on the individual. so you will find the Si dominant crafts people out there who inhabit the aforementioned realm and live quite happily there (usually at the expense of the development of other areas in their minds). and you'll find the ones who are very aesthetic in culinary arts, or graphic arts, or interior design, or ballet, etc. for whatever reason a lot of their mental resources ended up allocated to whatever brain region(s) that apply to that, and multiple connections (pathways) were thus formed between that and other regions. this makes it quite versatile and will result in that idea of a 4d IE (advanced aesthetics). i think a suite of certain regions/paths are more readily open to each temperament in general. aesthetic sense is maybe on an easily accessible pathway for all four IPs. i think that often times though Si dominants happen to get to it first in terms of really developing it (not always, just often... for instance i think you can find a lot of Si doms in science fields, but they will have probably allocated more mental resources to developing their logical capacity and it may be at the expense of aesthetics).

so anyway, the challenge for Si lead (and this is fitting with Ne DS) often seems to be finding ways to get more "juice" and to thus expand more of its mind.** some Si leads focus heavily on constantly trying to expand their mental world while others will kind of park in certain areas and stay there. a lot of the most physically crafty older Si leads i've noticed (they actually are often SLI) seem to get kind of stuck in their ways. they devote a huge amount of mental resources to their craft which they are often very skilled at, but they will often have very few topics of conversation and might say the same things every time on them (like a broken record). it's like their DS fct has been almost entirely closed off. (i think the DS fct often has a push-pull way about it in general because when it is open there is too much information coming in and it's hard to process/interpret it all - so there is a resistance with the DS fct as a result.)

i would note though that actually you can find Ni dominants with this problem where they end up on an emotional track about something that deeply bothers them in their life (it's often a little more existential seeming in nature though - the disturbance) and they can just repeat it over and over. although it won't be the *only thing* they are doing usually?

i really think when these kinds of patterns start forming it can mean there's not enough mental "juice" in the system. like perhaps one is very low on dopamine. this causes one to withdraw into reflection and rumination cycles. i was kind of influenced by dario nardi in this thinking because i really relate to the (dominant) right executive center as he described it (it's the executive he noticed meant P > J for myers-briggs types). it is very good at musing and reflecting (at introspection). but when your brain is short of juice it can become all-consuming. it tries to send signals out to the other brain regions asking for help, but there is not enough mental fuel for the signals to be strong enough to connect through. so you can literally get stuck in your mind (in your reflections) with no way out.

it's possible that Si lead is even more likely to get stuck in its reflections than Ni lead... as its journey through its own brain may tend to go more slowly due to often being short on "juice."

i was also thinking that a heavily developed and interconnected right executive is where i was getting my "cerebral Si" idea from. these Si dominants will be very aware of all of their mental process often. they watch their minds, their thoughts, their emotions. they reflect over the past and how they have changed. they use this information to navigate the future. it can *look* a lot like Ni but what it's often missing is large interconnection with symbol meaning. there will be some connection, but it will be less advanced - especially in the first half of life.


(also my main source of info on these thoughts is my own mind which i watch a lot, and my journey with depression - i know what it is like to be short on neurotransmitters and due to getting off my SSRI recently i feel like i've finally put the subjective picture together.)


eta: also, sorry about this too, but i'm trying this picture on... i can see how it can ring true but there are multiple pictures that could ring true and it can be only one of them for the most part. this is the one i've been looking at but i could dismiss it in the future. my perceptions are likely to change a lot with my serotonin overlord gone.

but what this current picture implies is that an information element is just a pattern of certain developed brain regions interacting together and the products of those connection networks. it means there is an arbitrariness to this. it means in a way, that IEs are not real.


**it's the same challenge for Ni lead actually also, but along this idea of Ni lead being the more neurotransmitter heavy of the two, it results in different needs and thus more forging of connections to whatever helps you take actions may be the thing its trying the most to access (Se DS). i think that Si lead can also have weak connections formed to that but it is usually trying to expand its imagination more... it takes it a while to actually completely develop the IP network track so it's not even there yet?

[Sol]

> - Si is not matching your clothes...

It matches all where aesthetic exists.

> - Si is not about internal bodily sensations

Si havily relates to bodily sensations. It starts from Jung, not even Augustinavichute's expansion.

mainly i think these two things are red herrings in socionics.

There is the problem of a lot mistyped people. And also some people don't understand themselves good enough, what may lead them to typing themselves to one type, then another, etc.

[marooned]

Si havily relates to bodily sensations. It starts from Jung, not even Augustinavichute's expansion.

my theory about this is that it's because it ("Si") is running on fewer overlapping layers of consciousness. the signals regarding the body's sensations can get through a little more frequently and intensely than they can for Ni dom, for instance. i guess i imagine Ni as like being a helium balloon... you have a sort of multiphasic consciousness constantly in the process of interweaving information coming from multiple brain regions (specifically, ones that process stuff people often associate with "intuition")... this generates a lot of realizations due to seemingly unconnected things hitting together from these different regions. keeping up with all the layers of this causes you to kind of float up off the ground in a way... you mean to pull yourself back, but you lose the ground. your awareness of bodily sensations is often more distant to you. the way in which you forget them is almost like in all the things you are juggling, this is the ball that keeps getting lost. but it's kind of entertaining too, as in you don't really feel like you need to always keep track of it anyway. i think that Si dominant is more grounded. they are also juggling a lot of balls (but not as many) so the bodily sensation is less distant. depending on the individual, it can still be forgotten, but it's not ever as though it were entirely lost. it is always in the background. whereas i think for Ni dominance, it falls out of even the background awareness often.

that's what i was thinking of as i've encountered both of these conscious states in my own mind but the multiphasic one seems to be the non-dominant of the two. i can't tell if it's what i used to be before this long depression ordeal and i simply forgot and now it's coming back; or if it is more of a brand new animal (it is "new" in either case given where my consciousness has been for so long).

(some Si types will of course be really into their sensations and learn to focus on them more and more... but this is up to the person. i think it's easier for them to develop this awareness than it is for N types generally.)

[Myst]

my theory about this is that it's because it ("Si") is running on fewer overlapping layers of consciousness. the signals regarding the body's sensations can get through a little more frequently and intensely than they can for Ni dom, for instance. i guess i imagine Ni as like being a helium balloon... you have a sort of multiphasic consciousness constantly in the process of interweaving information coming from multiple brain regions (specifically, ones that process stuff people often associate with "intuition")... this generates a lot of realizations due to seemingly unconnected things hitting together from these different regions. keeping up with all the layers of this causes you to kind of float up off the ground in a way... you mean to pull yourself back, but you lose the ground. your awareness of bodily sensations is often more distant to you. the way in which you forget them is almost like in all the things you are juggling, this is the ball that keeps getting lost. but it's kind of entertaining too, as in you don't really feel like you need to always keep track of it anyway. i think that Si dominant is more grounded. they are also juggling a lot of balls (but not as many) so the bodily sensation is less distant. depending on the individual, it can still be forgotten, but it's not ever as though it were entirely lost. it is always in the background. whereas i think for Ni dominance, it falls out of even the background awareness often.

that's what i was thinking of as i've encountered both of these conscious states in my own mind but the multiphasic one seems to be the non-dominant of the two. i can't tell if it's what i used to be before this long depression ordeal and i simply forgot and now it's coming back; or if it is more of a brand new animal (it is "new" in either case given where my consciousness has been for so long).

(some Si types will of course be really into their sensations and learn to focus on them more and more... but this is up to the person. i think it's easier for them to develop this awareness than it is for N types generally.)

Wow this post was interesting. This describes how you went from normal Ni ego type to depressed less functional more out of touch with S (both Se/Si) Ni ego.

Since both the modes you described are Ni ego, just one is less out of touch with S. More balanced and more functional I guess.

And lol Si egos do not need to develop sensory awareness. They already have it.

(...)
but what this current picture implies is that an information element is just a pattern of certain developed brain regions interacting together and the products of those connection networks. it means there is an arbitrariness to this. it means in a way, that IEs are not real.

(...)

Nice Ni musings. IEs are as real as the words and concepts we use are... they exist in the head somewhere

...will be very aware of all of their mental process often. they watch their minds, their thoughts, their emotions. they reflect over the past and how they have changed. they use this information to navigate the future. it can *look* a lot like Ni but what it's often missing is large interconnection with symbol meaning. there will be some connection, but it will be less advanced

This is Ni. Not Si. Not sure what makes you think that this version of Ni is lacking some of the symbolic interconnections. Maybe if you mean ILI compared to IEI, since ILI will always be more down-to-earth creating much fewer airy-fairy connections (since Feeling plays a role in that sort of thing). Hope this clarifies more.


***

OK, so I've genuinely put in the time to read your posts here and try on both perspectives - Ni vs Si - for you, but I still stand by ILI-Ni for your type as a result. I do like reading your posts, nice Ni fodder, even if I don't agree with some of the reasoning.

[Pookie]

"internal bodily sensations"

I think this part requires the right framework to make sense of. Si is good at managing the impact and affect their actions will have on another person's psyche. Where an Ni (and especially an Ni Te) will "somehow" end up saying something that makes a conversation awkward or accidentally turn someone off to communication by not showing their work, Si knows how to translate thoughts to words to desired results very well. Internal bodily sensations is the category, and so I just assume the stated talent is learned very much like empathy is, Awareness of self leads to an understanding of others. They get it, because that is their world.

All of the most charming people I've ever met have been Si, and also most of the dumb ones as well.

[marooned]

"internal bodily sensations"

I think this part requires the right framework to make sense of. Si is good at managing the impact and affect their actions will have on another person's psyche.

if you mean that Si is able to well recognize its own psychological pain and its causes, and can thus easily imagine how something (anything) might impact someone else psychologically in terms of if it might hurt them, or anger them, or create a seed in them that feeds some dangerous tendency they have (just stuff along these lines), i'm not sure. it seems very ethical really in this case. i guess i am wondering why this is specifically attributable to Si over other IEs.

Where an Ni (and especially an Ni Te) will "somehow" end up saying something that makes a conversation awkward or accidentally turn someone off to communication by not showing their work, Si knows how to translate thoughts to words to desired results very well.

i'm not sure if this is true. i remember from Ni descriptions that Ni types are sometimes described as able to subtly manipulate things to get the desired results (as in, approaching someone at the right time, using words that person will respond best to, creating underlying implications that lead the person to responding in the desired way, etc). although in doing this they are obscuring their motives, they are also "translating thoughts to words to desired results very well," just not in a very direct way. Si ego, as described by Jung, can end up being the eternal victim of the world due to an *inability* to get its impressions into words in a way that will get the needed "real world results." i suppose Jung encountered many an unhealthy and severely psychologically ill or abnormal Si ego. i can see this in enneagram 9 descriptions as well though and many Si doms are E9. the issue is that (when "entranced") they may barely recognize their needs at all, so they may be trampled over by the needs and agendas of others. so this very communication problem you are noting seems like it could be applied to Ni or Si lead, when it is generalized to this level.

Internal bodily sensations is the category, and so I just assume the stated talent is learned very much like empathy is, Awareness of self leads to an understanding of others. They get it, because that is their world.

usually it's meant rather literally in type descriptions it seems and a lot of people certainly take it literally.

All of the most charming people I've ever met have been Si, and also most of the dumb ones as well.

i could possibly see alpha SFs as most "charming" in that pleasant way (ew, like david letterman) though it would be more a potential i guess - they aren't all charming. i personally don't see delta STs as charming usually at all. sometimes i've noticed SLIs trying to be, in their parental way of one note "cheer," but i don't really feel particularly "charmed" by that. mainly it's them trying to compensate for their Fe PoLR, is how i've often seen it.

[Pookie]

if you mean that Si is able to well recognize its own psychological pain and its causes, and can thus easily imagine how something (anything) might impact someone else psychologically in terms of if it might hurt them, or anger them, or create a seed in them that feeds some dangerous tendency they have (just stuff along these lines), i'm not sure. it seems very ethical really in this case. i guess i am wondering why this is specifically attributable to Si over other IEs.

i'm not sure if this is true. i remember from Ni descriptions that Ni types are sometimes described as able to subtly manipulate things to get the desired results (as in, approaching someone at the right time, using words that person will respond best to, creating underlying implications that lead the person to responding in the desired way, etc).

1rst paragraph - I don't mean that. Im not talking about pain at all. Im referring to a down to earthiness, being present, and thus having a higher understanding of how day-to-day stimuli affect people.

2nd paragraph - Same skill, different avenue's and mediums. Ni manipulates by reading motivations, pulling strings and knowing how people will react to events and situations. But simply speaking to you and intending to give a calming effect, and then doing so is not something Ni is any good at. And that's what Si can do. I want to effect someone like *this*.

[wacey]

I see Si as the library of your own flesh. Filled with thousands of books you pick and choose and they all reference something about the skin and bones and sinew and blood. Some books also reference the external environment because as we all know about individual psycology, is that the sense of self also extends beyond the flesh. Si people are reading these books, remembering them as they pick them up (sensing) and making value judgements based on personalized preference (nonegocentric - preference more closely following conditional imprinting) .

This book was good (felt good), this one bad (felt bad) and every nuance in between ( a million shades in between). Because the Si is in the ego block there is also healthy subjectivity about it and so easy action stemming from, and for, the internal sensating. They are not any more skilled then any other human being at it, but if you are to apply socionics then the tenent that aspects of reality are more closely monitered over others (functionality), then a life long ox cart path track built by any functionalized information element will lead to patterns of behavioural and cognitive abilities archtypical for that sociotype.

[Myst]

hello, since a lot of people on the forum see me as SEI i feel qualified to make this post in some ways. the following are things about Si that are not really true of me and that i think probably miss the mark about what Si is.

Er, what Si is, is Sensing. An External IE. Physical aspects of the environment. (And the "fields" side of this so it's Si and not Se.)

No need to overcomplicate this IMO.

- Si is not matching your clothes... one can develop a personalized aesthetic sense of course, and there is some loose connection to Si in this, but it's often far too loose and far too indirect to be important. for instance my ESE mom notices the intensity of colors and how they look next to each other to the extent that she will comment on it a lot... her aesthetic sense i think is very much about her Si... but i personally just find this kind of thing somewhat torturous.

It's torturous for you because of your low Sensing.

i have an aesthetic sense but it isn't something i can even reduce to pinning down what it is, and it tends to be more based on what something means to me personally. my clothing styles (to the extent they can, as i am usually short of money to buy clothing and it's not been a priority for a long time) tend to reflect an ideal of my self-image in ways that are difficult to explain and that change as my self-image changes. i don't feel this is all that unique, but humanly common.

Tbh I find this cool. I can't do this well but I can do the thing your mom does very easily.

there are some people who care a great deal about color-matching and fabric quality and all sorts of details like that but most of that stuff is not something i devote much notice to naturally (unless i actually *want* to torture myself). it's not important in the grand scheme of the universe (it is not meaningful to me personally).

It's not meaningful to your Si role

if i was ever professionally in a setting where what i wear greatly matters i would probably seek outside advice just like anyone else (especially wanting it reduced to clear standards or rules if others are going to have some issue with my clothing) because i am not able to really look at appearance well from the outside. i can't put myself together externally in my mind - how i look on the outside is confusing, as is how others look.

Weak Sensing and maybe weak Fe

i also find that most people seem to care way more about aesthetics in general than i do day-to-day (and most of these people are rational types). also, i find expecting any IP type to be some expert at this is silly... Se is an unconscious IE for all IPs. (eta: expertise in aesthetics is something one would need to develop and work on and it would probably always be personal/unique in that case.)

Since when is aesthetics only Se? It has both an Se and an Si side.

- Si is not about internal bodily sensations. my theory is that actually sensation of this sort doesn't differ that much between types. what does differ is the way in which that awareness is overridden by other mental processes. Si types, however, can also have it overridden by their other mental processes. it depends on the individual to a great extent. using the question of if one for instance puts off addressing physical needs to the point that these needs scream to the extent you can no longer not notice them, is a bad question for N vs. S. it will probably mislead a lot of sensors to thinking they are intuitive. very few people are "physical" enough to address their every momentary physical need as it arises, to maintain such constant awareness of these needs, etc. eta: i'd also add that a lot of the people who are physical in this way have probably actually worked on developing that presence of mind further as a deliberate effort over many years. ime, i've noticed a lot of XSEs can fit the bill, but you will also notice they are actively working on it too... which is to say, i'm noticing the ones who find this highly important the most.

I'm one of those "very few people" then... tho' it does not require constant conscious awareness of Si for me since it works in the background more. I did not have to develop presence of mind for this, this is just how I've always been. I never found anything special in this, my mom is the same way (ESI-Se). Etc.

Where you say Si can be overridden by other mental processes - yeah Si role is gonna be overridden by Ni and that's what you have going on.

mainly i think these two things are red herrings in socionics. i realize saying what Si isn't doesn't help one discover what it *is* exactly, but i haven't quite figured out what it is yet.

I have no idea why you think Si defined as Sensing is some red herring.

[lemontrees]

I don't know... your posts in this thread sound so impressively intuitive. It's all... ideas about Si.

Si for me: today my client was asking me to make a web layout where thumbnail images would be top aligned. But she also referenced a site where thumbnails had varied heights and widths (which would look weird if it was all top-aligned) and she was worried that the white space under the top-aligned images would be oddly distributed. So what I think what she might like is varied proportion thumbnails that are center-aligned, vertically. My solution doesn't meet all her requirements, but I'm confident that it's actually integrating the things she likes out of the conflicting layouts she suggested.

The other week I was cooking with a friend. I went into autopilot. While I was cutting carrots I knew that the pork was already cooking in the pot and I went to stir at the right time. Then I washed the board while checking up on carrots. It was like he wasn't even there, I had to find things for him to do.

He wanted to make spiced rice with raisins and asked whether to put in the raisins during or after. I've never made anything with raisins but I knew if they were put in during they would be plump and more of the flavor would seep into the rice, whereas if you put it in after they are not integrated but drier, and while both work I just said "during." He asked me whether to put in the rice right away or later, and I knew that putting it in right away would be fine since the rice cooker would keep it warm, but it might become drier, so I made the decision "in thirty min". All of this was 5-second decisions.

^See how boring that all was? Si.

[wacey]

I don't know... your posts in this thread sound so impressively intuitive. It's all... ideas about Si.

Si for me: today my client was asking me to make a web layout where thumbnail images would be top aligned. But she also referenced a site where thumbnails had varied heights and widths (which would look weird if it was all top-aligned) and she was worried that the white space under the top-aligned images would be oddly distributed. So what I think what she might like is varied proportion thumbnails that are center-aligned, vertically. My solution doesn't meet all her requirements, but I'm confident that it's actually integrating the things she likes out of the conflicting layouts she suggested.

The other week I was cooking with a friend. I went into autopilot. While I was cutting carrots I knew that the pork was already cooking in the pot and I went to stir at the right time. Then I washed the board while checking up on carrots. It was like he wasn't even there, I had to find things for him to do.

He wanted to make spiced rice with raisins and asked whether to put in the raisins during or after. I've never made anything with raisins but I knew if they were put in during they would be plump and more of the flavor would seep into the rice, whereas if you put it in after they are not integrated but drier, and while both work I just said "during." He asked me whether to put in the rice right away or later, and I knew that putting it in right away would be fine since the rice cooker would keep it warm, but it might become drier, so I made the decision "in thirty min". All of this was 5-second decisions.

^See how boring that all was? Si.

I see where this post is going. I do everything you describe..does that also make me an Si ego? Ie; cooking, paying attention to details, doing things without "thinking" - autopilot - myst's "sensory awareness".

[Myst]

I see where this post is going. I do everything you describe..does that also make me an Si ego?

Is this your main focus?

[wacey]

Is this your main focus?

hmm, no probably not. Wait I'll say it for you: "then you are probably not Si base".

; )

[lemontrees]

I see where this post is going. I do everything you describe..does that also make me an Si ego? Ie; cooking, paying attention to details, doing things without "thinking" - autopilot - myst's "sensory awareness".

It's not logically being able to figure it out, but rather just being "seeped" in it. Also you just described the idea behind everything I did, whereas I was just describing the things.

[wacey]

It's not logically being able to figure it out, but rather just being "seeped" in it. Also you just described the idea behind everything I did, whereas I was just describing the things.

Why the sad face?

[Suz]

It's not logically being able to figure it out, but rather just being "seeped" in it. Also you just described the idea behind everything I did, whereas I was just describing the things.

Oh you mean Si is the meditative aspect of what you had described? Like the "autopilot" mode?
Because the knowing raisins would be more plump and how long to cook them for, that does sound more Te-ish to me.

[lemontrees]

Oh you mean Si is the meditative aspect of what you had described? Like the "autopilot" mode?
Because the knowing raisins would be more plump and how long to cook them for, that does sound more Te-ish to me.

I guess it struck me as sensing b/c I'm not really good at doing things in general. I.e.: am bad at lots of stereotypical office tasks--saying I've sent an email with an attachment but not attaching; not remembering the names of rooms; not knowing where something is after going three times, and giving the complete wrong location when another person asks.

But cleaning a room, for instance, is easy-- I can just "power through." Strong sensing making up for not having an efficient "strategy". I might still be faster than someone w/ a strategy just b/c I'm fast.

Raisin plumping up- that's more of a physical trait.

I think a lot of behavior can be handled through diff IM, so maybe these examples aren't useful. For instance, I can see a spacey N person doing what I mentioned above. When I think of people w/ strong Te, it's like... they can understand w/o it being spelled out what the underlying goal of an activity is, or what matters (?) When I do an assignment I have to read the instruction like seven times, b/c if I don't see a step I can just forget it, and sometimes that step was important. But Te people sort of can extrapolate or the process makes a bigger map in their heads as they read, so they don't forget the important thing.

[Suz]

I don't know... your posts in this thread sound so impressively intuitive. It's all... ideas about Si.

Si for me: today my client was asking me to make a web layout where thumbnail images would be top aligned. But she also referenced a site where thumbnails had varied heights and widths (which would look weird if it was all top-aligned) and she was worried that the white space under the top-aligned images would be oddly distributed. So what I think what she might like is varied proportion thumbnails that are center-aligned, vertically. My solution doesn't meet all her requirements, but I'm confident that it's actually integrating the things she likes out of the conflicting layouts she suggested.

The other week I was cooking with a friend. I went into autopilot. While I was cutting carrots I knew that the pork was already cooking in the pot and I went to stir at the right time. Then I washed the board while checking up on carrots. It was like he wasn't even there, I had to find things for him to do.

He wanted to make spiced rice with raisins and asked whether to put in the raisins during or after. I've never made anything with raisins but I knew if they were put in during they would be plump and more of the flavor would seep into the rice, whereas if you put it in after they are not integrated but drier, and while both work I just said "during." He asked me whether to put in the rice right away or later, and I knew that putting it in right away would be fine since the rice cooker would keep it warm, but it might become drier, so I made the decision "in thirty min". All of this was 5-second decisions.

^See how boring that all was? Si.

IDK...a lot of the cooking stuff here that you described sounds like Te to me....but i'm not a socionics expert or anything. My understanding could be off.

[darya]

Stupid stereotypes about Si aside (stereotypes exist for a reason btw ,completely disregarding them is unwise), this thread is an overload of Ni. It's really not that complicated - if your primary and prefered mode of thinking is to complicate everything into complex theories, noticing patterns, are caught in your imagination, thinking up scenarios, you are intuitive. SEI's are down to earth, I can't imagine any of the ones I know write a thread like this....ever. That's just not how their brain works. Also Inumbra, your avatar is exactly opposite of SEI.

Definitions are pretty clear, can someone explain how inumbra is Si > Ni by any definition? And please something substantial with sources.

My opinion is your Ni is so strong, you over-think, over-analyze and doubt everything to an absurd degree, It's fascinating really (no sarcasm ) - not to mention your imagination. How is the following description not exactly you (I know you're familiar with these descriptions, I'm just trying to understand how can you see yourself in anything close to sei description)?

Introverted intuition in ILIs is predominantly characterized by well developed imaginative abilities and mental wanderings. ILI often spend a great deal of time simply thinking and may spend excessive amounts of time in their mind. Most ILIs somehow manage to spend most of their time in their minds regardless of the responsibilities with which they are burdened. This mental focus can be manifest by reflecting on scenarios, on pondering bodies of information, and assorted concepts of interest. They may be prone to excessive day dreaming, in creation of intricate inner worlds or universes, or in mentally replaying elements of their own personal experience. ILIs may even have novelistic tendencies where they create intricate plots, characters, and places, though many ILIs may be generally unmotivated to display such creativity. However, ILIs are not always inclined to share their imaginative tendencies or thoughts with others.

ILIs predict inevitable disaster not altogether infrequently. This type of fatalism is spurned by their ability to see the negative in anything, which has its roots in the ILI's general dislike of expressing or reinforcing positive emotions. To an ILI, it may be easier to predict pessimistic results in order to avoid an unpleasant emotional reaction. Likewise, the ILI's sense of general self doubt leads him to be very conservative in his general outlook; why unnecessarily subject oneself to the uncertainty of possible disappointment?ILIs typically exhibit a general detachment from day-to-day affairs. While an ILI might devote a great deal of time to his inner thoughts, very little attention is likely to be paid to such tasks as household maintenance or cleanliness, which the ILI sees as trivial matters not deserving of his time or effort.ILIs can, in certain situations, act very tentatively. In many situations they are inclined to hesitate prior to taking any action or making important decisions. They may commonly be pervasively plagued by gnawing doubts on any topic that they contemplate. They may also prefer to observe and gather an understanding of a situation rather than actively participate. The ILI's restraint complements the hyperactivity of his dual, the SEE.

SEI for comparison:

In contrast to introverted intuition (Ni), Si is about direct interaction and unity (or discord) with one's surroundings, rather than abstract process and causal links.

SEIs are naturally attuned to the nature of the physical stimuli around them. They are often aptly aware of whether they are comfortable or relaxed in a given environment and they often take spontaneous action to make their living environment more comfortable. They often make effective hosts, as they may spontaneously exhibit great attention to ensure that friends and family around them are comfortable and that their physical needs are well satisfied. They often have a natural level of attentiveness to the signals of the human body, and may make instinctive responses to adapt their environment to their comfort.

SEIs often exhibit a down-to-earth quality and often focus their attention on events, affects, or relationships relevant to their physical environment or personal experience; for this reason, their style of conversation may at times come across as somewhat mundane or unimportant. SEIs may focus much of their energy towards processes oriented with bettering sensory experiences, including visual art, fashion, food preparation, dance, or other physical aspects. Their affective responses to situations are often intertwined with their level of physical comforts.

Do you really do creative Fe the way SEI does?

For the SEI, this takes an on-the-spot aspect and is reflected in taking concrete actions, being agreeable and responsive to the needs of others, cracking jokes trying to make people laugh and enjoy themselves, or simply moving away from people he perceives as affecting him negatively. SEIs are often highly attuned to the emotional environment immediately surrounding them. They are skilled at loosening up the atmosphere and often seek to actively contribute to the overall sense of group harmony and familiarity. SEIs often feel uncomfortable in circumstances in which the group atmosphere is overly hostile or virulent; in such situations, they may seek to play the role of peacemaker in order to restore the mood to a sense of joviality or calmness.

SEI do their version of Fe very immediately, it's evident even when shy (not so much with certain IEI's ime).

Your ethical judgments and stances are way too harsh for SEI as well.

[Ananke]

I tried creating a discussion on Si in some old thread:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ngthen-your-Si

Si is
- irrational (thus perceiving reality through the unconscious)
- sensory (thus perceiving reality through unconsciously stored (sensory) impressions and emotions had before)
- introverted (thus filtering the perception through the ego (comparing with own (ego) states))
- dynamic (thus looking at changes between states (rather than states/situations as is))

This means Si is first and foremost great at:
- "just knowing" where a person (or societies) come from in life (family background, life path so far, how the social reality they grew up in influenced them, how the experiences had changed them)
- somewhat predicting the life path people (or societies) will take from now on based on the knowledge of their past and present (development from now on, life path from crib to death) (things like "this person will become a slut later in life because she doesn't get any attention as a child" (Si with Fe))

Two examples of Si, both showing Si impressions of how the school system today lacks (natural) humanity and forms children into faceless creatures and results in pointless (inhuman) activity (the first example is Si with Te, the second is Si with Fe)






A bit more....
Si, just like Ni, gets stuck in the "paths" these functions perceive, in Ni's case, the mental development of people (societies), in Si's case the life path development of people (societies). Ne can surprisingly pull Si out of it's "tracks" in a similar way to how Se pulls Ni out of it's tracks.

Ne does this by just being unaware of Si and thus suggesting possible ways to ALTER the life path that Si gets stuck in, due to the strong awareness of this life path. Thus why Si can look "passive" and just "adapt" to a life path, whereas Ne can come in and surprise Si with "crazy" new opportunities for changing the tracks (changing life).

On a high level, Si can sense ancestry in people's faces (or cultures), I believe, so it goes beyond what is obviously visibly there, I've seen it done. This is similar to how Ni perceives how a society is influenced by the past mental/social structures. Si can use this to understand people or societies in a historical context. It's probably not even experienced that consciously, but it's there, giving more information.

Si is indirectly linked to "internal bodily sensations" in that the strong feeling of "from crib to death bed" can give a need to find comfort in keeping the body stable in that life track.
Si is indirectly linked to "aestetics" for similar reasons, since health levels and thus aestetics give a clue as to where people are in a life path. Artificials like too much make-up may thus be off-putting to a Si-ego as it hides the (natural) beauty of people and their (beautiful and unique) life path, I think. But it's just an indirect link imo, that isn't very useful for typing, since not all people will focus on this the same way.
Si is also indirectly linked to food, as food is part of life development (crib to death) etc. etc. etc
Si, like Ni mostly deals with the past, but can pull lines from the past into the future to predict it - or rather warn about it, like the 3 videos I post here show - and Si/Ni does this really well, as long as no huge changes occur.

An example of Si used to pull info from the past into the future, are the documentaries of Adam Curtis, who I believe is SEI. Watch and see how he pulls tangible lines from the past into the now and further into the future. All good examples of what Si is really about. Unlike Ni, Si is rather linear and the "dots" are connected through lifepaths (of people or societies or in Adam Curtis' case ideas/cultures/beliefs) (whereas Ni is jumping all over the place in unconnected strings of information.)



So I agree with inumbra, Si is generally quite poorly described and the descriptions too often deal with common, yet indirect, resulting traits of the function, rather than describing how the function really works.

[Suz]

I tried creating a discussion on Si in some old thread:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ngthen-your-Si

Si is
- irrational (thus perceiving reality through the unconscious)
- sensory (thus perceiving reality through unconsciously stored (sensory) impressions and emotions had before)
- introverted (thus filtering the perception through the ego (comparing with own (ego) states))
- dynamic (thus looking at changes between states (rather than states/situations as is))

This means Si is first and foremost great at:
- "just knowing" where a person (or societies) come from in life (family background, life path so far, how the social reality they grew up in influenced them, how the experiences had changed them)
- somewhat predicting the life path people (or societies) will take from now on based on the knowledge of their past and present (development from now on, life path from crib to death) (things like "this person will become a slut later in life because she doesn't get any attention as a child" (Si with Fe))

Two examples of Si, both showing Si impressions of how the school system today lacks (natural) humanity and forms children into faceless creatures and results in pointless (inhuman) activity (the first example is Si with Te, the second is Si with Fe)






A bit more....
Si, just like Ni, gets stuck in the "paths" these functions perceive, in Ni's case, the mental development of people (societies), in Si's case the life path development of people (societies). Ne can surprisingly pull Si out of it's "tracks" in a similar way to how Se pulls Ni out of it's tracks.

Ne does this by just being unaware of Si and thus suggesting possible ways to ALTER the life path that Si gets stuck in, due to the strong awareness of this life path. Thus why Si can look "passive" and just "adapt" to a life path, whereas Ne can come in and surprise Si with "crazy" new opportunities for changing the tracks (changing life).

On a high level, Si can sense ancestry in people's faces (or cultures), I believe, so it goes beyond what is obviously visibly there, I've seen it done. This is similar to how Ni perceives how a society is influenced by the past mental/social structures. Si can use this to understand people or societies in a historical context. It's probably not even experienced that consciously, but it's there, giving more information.

Si is indirectly linked to "internal bodily sensations" in that the strong feeling of "from crib to death bed" can give a need to find comfort in keeping the body stable in that life track.
Si is indirectly linked to "aestetics" for similar reasons, since health levels and thus aestetics give a clue as to where people are in a life path. Artificials like too much make-up may thus be off-putting to a Si-ego as it hides the (natural) beauty of people and their (beautiful and unique) life path, I think. But it's just an indirect link imo, that isn't very useful for typing, since not all people will focus on this the same way.
Si is also indirectly linked to food, as food is part of life development (crib to death) etc. etc. etc
Si, like Ni mostly deals with the past, but can pull lines from the past into the future to predict it - or rather warn about it, like the 3 videos I post here show - and Si/Ni does this really well, as long as no huge changes occur.

An example of Si used to pull info from the past into the future, are the documentaries of Adam Curtis, who I believe is SEI. Watch and see how he pulls tangible lines from the past into the now and further into the future. All good examples of what Si is really about. Unlike Ni, Si is rather linear and the "dots" are connected through lifepaths (of people or societies or in Adam Curtis' case ideas/cultures/beliefs) (whereas Ni is jumping all over the place in unconnected strings of information.)



So I agree with inumbra, Si is generally quite poorly described and the descriptions too often deal with common, yet indirect, resulting traits of the function, rather than describing how the function really works.

This is interesting, and makes more sense.
This could almost make someone seem intuitive, whereas they are reading a person's face/body/mannerisms and in a way, "sensing" what their physical state has been through and where it's headed.

[Myst]

It's not logically being able to figure it out, but rather just being "seeped" in it. Also you just described the idea behind everything I did, whereas I was just describing the things.

This is good wording - being immersed in the sensory and just "feeling out" (introverted function) how one thing affects the other one in a sensory way.

Btw how do you relate to Ananke's Si description?

IDK...a lot of the cooking stuff here that you described sounds like Te to me....but i'm not a socionics expert or anything. My understanding could be off.

Sure it can be put as Te rules too to be memorized etc.

I tried creating a discussion on Si in some old thread:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ngthen-your-Si

Si is
- irrational (thus perceiving reality through the unconscious)
- sensory (thus perceiving reality through unconsciously stored (sensory) impressions and emotions had before)
- introverted (thus filtering the perception through the ego (comparing with own (ego) states))
- dynamic (thus looking at changes between states (rather than states/situations as is))

OK so far, though one note: the comparing must not be deliberate apperception, just spontaneous perception or else it would be Rational.

This means Si is first and foremost great at:
- "just knowing" where a person (or societies) come from in life (family background, life path so far, how the social reality they grew up in influenced them, how the experiences had changed them)
- somewhat predicting the life path people (or societies) will take from now on based on the knowledge of their past and present (development from now on, life path from crib to death) (things like "this person will become a slut later in life because she doesn't get any attention as a child" (Si with Fe))

I don't know how you create this jump from that to here. Socionics has Si as present oriented. According to Jung it's Intuition that knows (on a timeline) where something comes from and where something goes. That of course makes logical sense since that is removed from the present sensation.

Maybe that's not what you mean but it can be easy to misinterpret the way you put it. I'd only link Si to time if it was a 4D function just like any other 4D function and then all that means is that you processed a lot of the information so you can say a lot about that area.

A bit more....
Si, just like Ni, gets stuck in the "paths" these functions perceive, in Ni's case, the mental development of people (societies), in Si's case the life path development of people (societies). Ne can surprisingly pull Si out of it's "tracks" in a similar way to how Se pulls Ni out of it's tracks.

I don't really see how Si would have to do with development in that way.

Ne does this by just being unaware of Si and thus suggesting possible ways to ALTER the life path that Si gets stuck in, due to the strong awareness of this life path. Thus why Si can look "passive" and just "adapt" to a life path, whereas Ne can come in and surprise Si with "crazy" new opportunities for changing the tracks (changing life).

I still don't find "life path" the best word for it but I agree on how Si is passively adaptable.

On a high level, Si can sense ancestry in people's faces (or cultures), I believe, so it goes beyond what is obviously visibly there, I've seen it done. This is similar to how Ni perceives how a society is influenced by the past mental/social structures. Si can use this to understand people or societies in a historical context. It's probably not even experienced that consciously, but it's there, giving more information.

Again, I don't know what's this with historical contexts. The only way I can see this working is as above, about how any 4D IE can be "historical".

Si is indirectly linked to "internal bodily sensations" in that the strong feeling of "from crib to death bed" can give a need to find comfort in keeping the body stable in that life track.

It's not just indirectly linked. This is again overcomplication of plain Sensing.

Si is indirectly linked to "aestetics" for similar reasons, since health levels and thus aestetics give a clue as to where people are in a life path. Artificials like too much make-up may thus be off-putting to a Si-ego as it hides the (natural) beauty of people and their (beautiful and unique) life path, I think. But it's just an indirect link imo, that isn't very useful for typing, since not all people will focus on this the same way.
Si is also indirectly linked to food, as food is part of life development (crib to death) etc. etc. etc

Again... Si is a Sensing function, so not just indirectly linked to these things.

An example of Si used to pull info from the past into the future, are the documentaries of Adam Curtis, who I believe is SEI. Watch and see how he pulls tangible lines from the past into the now and further into the future. All good examples of what Si is really about. Unlike Ni, Si is rather linear and the "dots" are connected through lifepaths (of people or societies or in Adam Curtis' case ideas/cultures/beliefs) (whereas Ni is jumping all over the place in unconnected strings of information.)

Linearity isn't Irrational.

[Ananke]

OK so far, though one note: the comparing must not be deliberate apperception, just spontaneous perception or else it would be Rational.

Agree

I don't know how you create this jump from that to here. Socionics has Si as present oriented. According to Jung it's Intuition that knows (on a timeline) where something comes from and where something goes. That of course makes logical sense since that is removed from the present sensation.

Jung's descriptions of Si aren't all that good, but they are ok. What I wrote is anyway in line with Jung's description of IP

Maybe that's not what you mean but it can be easy to misinterpret the way you put it. I'd only link Si to time if it was a 4D function just like any other 4D function and then all that means is that you processed a lot of the information so you can say a lot about that area.

Watch the Adam Curtis documentary I linked to for an example of the timeline component of Si. It's tangible and continous, unlike Ni, but IP functions are always about timelines in some sense.

I don't really see how Si would have to do with development in that way.

Then go and observe Si-egos talking, or watch the examples I linked to, as they exemplify what I explained. Si-egos talk of such things, but I don't think they are always consciously FOCUSING on a timeline or development, it's more like an unconscious (irrational) perception that can seem a bit banal to Ni-valuers, I think, though it has it's own genius. Watch the Adam Curtis documentary for an example of this. Also, Si is involved, so it will probably just feel like "info that is there" for the Si-ego himself.

Again, I don't know what's this with historical contexts. The only way I can see this working is as above, about how any 4D IE can be "historical".

Watch the documentary for an example of Si seeing timelines and thus "history" and connections in history. It's unique and quite different from Ni. Ni-egos watching will see what I mean easily (that it isn't Ni, yet it shows timelines of ideas and cultures).

It's not just indirectly linked. This is again overcomplication of plain Sensing.

Well, it's hard to explain the functions, and IP functions are the most abstract as they are irrational and introverted, meaning they are filtered through the unconscious and through the ego. To put in words what they do makes them seem hyper complicated, but both Ni and Si are really quite simple for the ones using them.

Again... Si is a Sensing function, so not just indirectly linked to these things.

Unless I misunderstood you, this is wrong, imo.

Linearity isn't Irrational.

Si is linear in time and space. Si follows dynamics (a kind of dynamic, subjective cause effect) as experienced subjectively - on a linear life path from somewhere to another place/time.
Ni is non-linear in time and space. Ni links (compares) dynamics that are similar (subjectively) and extracts new info from the "similarities".

[Myst]

Jung's descriptions of Si aren't all that good, but they are ok. What I wrote is anyway in line with Jung's description of IP

I was talking about Jung's Intuition. IP... you mean Intuition or Sensing?

Watch the Adam Curtis documentary I linked to for an example of the timeline component of Si. It's tangible and continous, unlike Ni, but IP functions are always about timelines in some sense.

"In some sense" is a bit vague.

Then go and observe Si-egos talking, or watch the examples I linked to, as they exemplify what I explained. Si-egos talk of such things, but I don't think they are always consciously FOCUSING on a timeline or development, it's more like an unconscious (irrational) perception that can seem a bit banal to Ni-valuers, I think, though it has it's own genius. Watch the Adam Curtis documentary for an example of this. Also, Si is involved, so it will probably just feel like "info that is there" for the Si-ego himself.

I observed Si egos before and they don't talk like that. I find they talk in a more simple way than that.

I agree it's an Involved IE, if your description of Si reflected this it would be a lot better.

Well, it's hard to explain the functions, and IP functions are the most abstract as they are irrational and introverted, meaning they are filtered through the unconscious and through the ego. To put in words what they do makes them seem hyper complicated, but both Ni and Si are really quite simple for the ones using them.

I just see too many things mentioned that are not related to Si as the IE. That's what I call overcomplicating.


Oh also you mentioned stability... how do you reconcile this with the adaptability of Ip temperament?

Unless I misunderstood you, this is wrong, imo.

Explain what you see as wrong about it. If you mean it sounded like I want to equate food with Si, no, that's not what I meant. What I meant is that Si as a Sensing IE experiences the food quite directly. Not indirectly because of whatever timeline needing it. That is, I would not try to explain its sensations by that timeline concept at all. That is what I call overcomplicating when defining Si.

Si is linear in time and space. Si follows dynamics (a kind of dynamic, subjective cause effect) as experienced subjectively - on a linear life path from somewhere to another place/time.
Ni is non-linear in time and space. Ni links (compares) dynamics that are similar (subjectively) and extracts new info from the "similarities".

Linearity would mean it's not adaptable Irrationality.

[marooned]

So I agree with inumbra, Si is generally quite poorly described and the descriptions too often deal with common, yet indirect, resulting traits of the function, rather than describing how the function really works.

yes.

i didn't watch much of the adam curtis video. i can't focus on it. my mind is in an awful haze. below involves putting this together based on your post, and i guess i'm looking to see if you think my translation matches what you meant to begin with.

i have to agree the video (from the little i saw) seems to be covering the aspect of reality (and in a way that matches *with* the socionics type descriptions, even... not sure yet why i am disturbed by that), as it seems to be looking at the feel of existence in terms of present experience, how it passes in the long moment-to-moment, day-to-day life (the Si stream, re: @Expat). or along the prescribed path of a lifestyle and its significant um points--things like rites of passage, getting married, raising kids, whatever. the board game 'life' is an example really.

naturally this "life" isn't fixed as over the course of it the society will change (before modernity, perhaps more gradually), and the people must adapt and adjust their practices accordingly. but still it is kind of one path, with adjusting all the typically prescribed things along with it. the focus is on the nuts-and-bolts of the days--maintenance really, which is why Si gets associated with routines (which basically serve as maintenance tools/programs you can run out of habit). the themes of "preserving a way of life" or "honoring traditions" etc. would then be quite in line with this (and really they are in myers-briggs Si afaik).

of course there are concerns/thoughts of the future, along the prescribed path(s); looking out for the future of the culture/people/way-of-life or recognizing things coming down the pipeline which may alter it; being able to predict where the day-to-day will go in the future. the wisdom of predictions tends to be inside the one way of life (what we have always done and how it changed when the woolly mammoth population began dwindling year by year). Si ego would then be the maintainers of the day-to-day-way-of-life or the manager of changes to it, or the ones who warn of coming changes within it, from within or from without. they "care" for it/tend it (are always keeping touch with it). this could also mean they act as masters of it (in charge of it).

eta: to elaborate about predictions, it's mainly that one is always on at least one road, and most humans can see the predictable basic destination points. and i kind of like the "tangible timeline" idea.

 

the ending of the film 'the last lions' : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xus_Ky4aTPU (go to 1:16:00 ish). i can feel the sadness of extinction in ‘the last lions’: it is about an episode in the life of one lion, her losses and what she had to overcome (her *plight*) against the backdrop of the end of her entire species (the plight of african lions). the creators of the film have spent most of their lives observing african big cats. they’ve watched how lion “society” has deteriorated over the years in response to human activity, right down to unraveling of the pride structure (which they’ve described in at least one of their other films). 'the last lions' btw contains more anthropomorphism than most of their other films as it's an appeal to the viewer. it plays out a bit like a fictional drama with almost this mythological quality to it.

does that match, @Ananke?


i don't think that what @Ananke is saying and what @Myst saying is quite as different as it seemed at the end of discussion (well, in this one way only actually). and i guess the issue i have is that this same day-to-day nuts and bolts person will be the same person whose face you see in the Si type descriptions. it’s just looking at that face from a different vantage. because with this focus, they'll have large concentrated energies put into some kind of actual tangible management of their existence. they are the keepers of the way-of-life, so most of them would *have to*. for some, perhaps it would be maintaining order in the living environment; for others it might be innovating new crafty things to help the general lifestyle (like combining different foods in ways that will satisfy the needs of 'the people'); for others it might be keeping people comfortable and happy... the 'couch potato' could be a modern iteration lol. (but that is also a joke!)


i don't feel a connection or relation to this exactly. i almost feel like this might all be according to PoLR, but i am not your shadow. or something. or i am simply an unimpressive person.


oh, but either way, ~ = constant awareness of bodily sensations~ is still bad (imo).


eta: i'm confused again. this whole thread is full of my confusion.

[Myst]

I dunno you might be right, but I don't think sensing is that complicated. Well, I am not that complicated

I agree sensing doesnt have to be overcomplicated lol

[Chae]

Wasn't the original common SEI stereotype "couch potato"? As the exaggerated image of Si's comfort theme and lack of Te productivity.

[golden]

I started to say in the chatbox that this thread has me stumped, so I suppose I'll say it here. After all you loverly people are saying, I have no idea what Si is supposed to be. Supposedly I'm Si polr, but I understand aesthetics and design and how to cook things (all hard-won knowledge). The things Ananke describes are mystifying to me as Si, since those are things I associate with Ni (predicting / projecting / modeling future development); but I don't enjoy the idea of a "life path" as it sounds extremely stifling and unpleasant to me and it reminds me of New Age types saying things like "It's all about the journey" and me recoiling with disgust from such trite notions.

What Si-strong people appear to me to have (and which I lack) is a kind of springy resilience in the way they take in sensory information. It looks to me like they are engaging in some kind of adjusting process to that information that is quite detailed and "natural" -- as if it were sand forming around stones. I'm quite hung up on sensory information, very meticulous about it even, but it's precisely because I don't adjust myself well, I have very little freedom or naturalness or resilience in response to this information, that I want to control things in my environment. This continuous real-time modeling is what I think I do with Fe -- it's how I've tried to describe it to other people -- but it's about reading how people react to, I suppose, emotionally arousing information, to things like persuasion.

[Myst]

Wasn't the original common SEI stereotype "couch potato"? As the exaggerated image of Si's comfort theme and lack of Te productivity.

SLI has the same stereotype associated so I guess it's not about lack of Te.

I started to say in the chatbox that this thread has me stumped, so I suppose I'll say it here. After all you loverly people are saying, I have no idea what Si is supposed to be. Supposedly I'm Si polr, but I understand aesthetics and design and how to cook things (all hard-won knowledge). The things Ananke describes are mystifying to me as Si, since those are things I associate with Ni (predicting / projecting / modeling future development);

Cooking is a skill that you can learn, sure. I guess how you learn it is what's more type related. Design... apparently Intuitives have their own way to approach designing, looks like it works different from how Sensing types do it.

Yes I agree with you on how Ananke's description is strange in that way.

but I don't enjoy the idea of a "life path" as it sounds extremely stifling and unpleasant to me and it reminds me of New Age types saying things like "It's all about the journey" and me recoiling with disgust from such trite notions.

It's weird to me too and I never hear normal people talk about this in this way. So I doubt this belongs to Si specifically. It's just some philosophy thing.

What Si-strong people appear to me to have (and which I lack) is a kind of springy resilience in the way they take in sensory information. It looks to me like they are engaging in some kind of adjusting process to that information that is quite detailed and "natural" -- as if it were sand forming around stones. I'm quite hung up on sensory information, very meticulous about it even, but it's precisely because I don't adjust myself well, I have very little freedom or naturalness or resilience in response to this information, that I want to control things in my environment. This continuous real-time modeling is what I think I do with Fe -- it's how I've tried to describe it to other people -- but it's about reading how people react to, I suppose, emotionally arousing information, to things like persuasion.

I think you got this very well about how strong Si vs weak Si works.

[maniac]

When people say Si is internal sensing. Do they mean like a sense of harmony in their mind,for example "this person is making me uncomfortable/comfortable", or physical things like taste, touch..a headache
Starting also to believe this is BS, or Jung was missing information when he wrote about it.

Either way I advice everyone to learn about enneagram, it is much more interesting and spiritual and less mechanic. Easier to grasp too apparently, so many people that are confused around Jungs ideas, not as many confused about Enneagram.

[golden]

I'm not so sure the best word is "linear," so much as it might be called "continuous." The path doesn't have to be straight lines. In Ni, as Ananke points out, you have these discrete slices and match up the patterns.

It looks like in Si, it's more like you can't make these leaps but rather things are in proximity. The proximity isn't so much cause and effect between the "things," but that the things were left in proximity by some other causes.

Like when I walked up a mountain path this summer and part of it was submerged in big puddles. I had to find a path from rock to rock to wood to earth and so on, but the rocks and wood and earth patches didn't cause one another. Rather, they were all part of a complex process of decaying manmade trail and spring thaw and big storm.

Regardless, to get to the top of the mountain, I couldn't skip over big sections of the trail or anything. (No jet-pack!) There was a destination (top of mountain), and one trail, so you could think of it as linear, but the way the trail manifests for the walker on any given day is a dynamically unfolding set of conditions.

Is this what Si is like? *bats lashes*

[Ananke]

I'm not so sure the best word is "linear," so much as it might be called "continuous." The path doesn't have to be straight lines. In Ni, as Ananke points out, you have these discrete slices and match up the patterns.

Oh, great point. Continous is the word I should have used. Thank you!

It looks like in Si, it's more like you can't make these leaps but rather things are in proximity. The proximity isn't so much cause and effect between the "things," but that the things were left in proximity by some other causes.

Like when I walked up a mountain path this summer and part of it was submerged in big puddles. I had to find a path from rock to rock to wood to earth and so on, but the rocks and wood and earth patches didn't cause one another. Rather, they were all part of a complex process of decaying manmade trail and spring thaw and big storm.

Regardless, to get to the top of the mountain, I couldn't skip over big sections of the trail or anything. (No jet-pack!) There was a destination (top of mountain), and one trail, so you could think of it as linear, but the way the trail manifests for the walker on any given day is a dynamically unfolding set of conditions.

Is this what Si is like? *bats lashes*

hahaha, yeah, you're getting what I tried to say, though not sure others will get it, lmao.

When I talk with Ni-egos (particularly IEIs) they describe their thinking as "short streams of thoughts based around a concept that then jumps to a new short stream of thoughts based around the same concept but this time a totally different timeline/topic, etc, etc, etc". So Ni (at least in IEIs) = many different subjectively interpreted episodes that together can give more insight into a concept.

When I observe Si-egos (particularly alphas), they talk about much more continous timelines (one stream) based around the situation they talk of, but still subjectively perceived like in the pancake example I used in my previous post.

[golden]

When I talk with Ni-egos (particularly IEIs) they describe their thinking as "short streams of thoughts based around a concept that then jumps to a new short stream of thoughts based around the same concept but this time a totally different timeline/topic, etc, etc, etc". So Ni (at least in IEIs) = many different subjectively interpreted episodes that together can give more insight into a concept.

When I observe Si-egos (particularly alphas), they talk about much more continous timelines (one stream) based around the situation they talk of, but still subjectively perceived like in the pancake example I used in my previous post.

I don't really think I do what you're ascribing to Ni egos, and you do say IEIs, so I wonder if this is more a VS cog style thing? I don't exactly have short streams of thoughts.

It seems more like I run multiple probability channels and will shift among them depending on which ones are moving best. But they're all going the same direction and to the outside observer it might not be apparent that I'm channel switching. This is more like if there were 50 paths up the mountain and I could materialize on one or another instantly, depending on which one is functioning best. (The problems come when it's not clear which channel is actually moving best, or if none of them is actually moving well at all.)

[Myst]

I'm not so sure the best word is "linear," so much as it might be called "continuous." The path doesn't have to be straight lines. In Ni, as Ananke points out, you have these discrete slices and match up the patterns.

It looks like in Si, it's more like you can't make these leaps but rather things are in proximity. The proximity isn't so much cause and effect between the "things," but that the things were left in proximity by some other causes.

"Continuous" is ok. If we take @lemontrees 's raisin though, there is some cause and effect being perceived.

Like when I walked up a mountain path this summer and part of it was submerged in big puddles. I had to find a path from rock to rock to wood to earth and so on, but the rocks and wood and earth patches didn't cause one another. Rather, they were all part of a complex process of decaying manmade trail and spring thaw and big storm.

Regardless, to get to the top of the mountain, I couldn't skip over big sections of the trail or anything. (No jet-pack!) There was a destination (top of mountain), and one trail, so you could think of it as linear, but the way the trail manifests for the walker on any given day is a dynamically unfolding set of conditions.

Is this what Si is like? *bats lashes*

Si as defined in Socionics isn't really destination oriented like Ni is.

Oh. And if @inumbra is ILI, what about her is Te-creative? I'm not saying it can't be there, but from interacting with her in chat I'm not sure I know what it could be.

What about her is Fe creative?

I don't really think I do what you're ascribing to Ni egos, and you do say IEIs, so I wonder if this is more a VS cog style thing? I don't exactly have short streams of thoughts.

It seems more like I run multiple probability channels and will shift among them depending on which ones are moving best. But they're all going the same direction and to the outside observer it might not be apparent that I'm channel switching. This is more like if there were 50 paths up the mountain and I could materialize on one or another instantly, depending on which one is functioning best. (The problems come when it's not clear which channel is actually moving best, or if none of them is actually moving well at all.)

I agree what Ananke described is some IEI thing more.

[golden]

What about her is Fe creative?

I don't know. But she types herself Fe creative > Te creative afaik, and I know some IEIs who come off as low-Fe so I can give some leeway there.

Ofc this depends on how you define Fe and Te creative.

One thing she has talked about is her concern over how she is perceived by other people, whether her words are chosen well, whether she is communicating effectively. One could argue that this is someone with Fe polr being worried over their lack of Fe, but the ILIs I know often don't seem to care much about how others see them. They will surprise me with how few fucks they give about it. That could be polr as a blind spot. But maybe polr can manifest in more than one way.

Maybe one way to be less blind about polr is when people are expecting you to do something polr-ish you kind of just can't; that's probably how I became more aware of my own polr.

[marooned]

One thing she has talked about is her concern over how she is perceived by other people, whether her words are chosen well, whether she is communicating effectively. One could argue that this is someone with Fe polr being worried over their lack of Fe, but the ILIs I know often don't seem to care much about how others see them. They will surprise me with how few fucks they give about it. That could be polr as a blind spot. But maybe polr can manifest in more than one way.

Maybe one way to be less blind about polr is when people are expecting you to do something polr-ish you kind of just can't; that's probably how I became more aware of my own polr.

just for context this concern is 3 years old. it started with my job in reception and office support because of my huge failures (these were reported to me by my superiors, i didn't invent them). since i have began to actually appreciate why this is important because the tools i've developed (and am still developing) are the only thing that can save me (over-dramatic statement). most of my life in jobs has been focusing on my weaknesses and i just don't wanna talk about it and be subjected again to the forum's critical eye. yes i suck, i failed, shoot me. is how i feel.

i typed out some long thing about Fe vs. Te shortly after you posted this, but gah, i don't think i want to go into it. mainly PoLR is fitting enough (going by the stereotypes ). i can actually relate to PoLR as well. so it becomes a deficit comparison. i'm just not very... rational, apparently.

[golden]

just for context this concern is 3 years old. it started with my job in reception and office support because of my huge failures (these were reported to me by my superiors, i didn't invent them). since i have began to actually appreciate why this is important because the tools i've developed (and am still developing) are the only thing that can save me (over-dramatic statement). most of my life in jobs has been focusing on my weaknesses and i just don't wanna talk about it and be subjected again to the forum's critical eye. yes i suck, i failed, shoot me. is how i feel.

i typed out some long thing about Fe vs. Te shortly after you posted this, but gah, i don't think i want to go into it. mainly PoLR is fitting enough (going by the stereotypes ). i can actually relate to PoLR as well. so it becomes a deficit comparison. i'm just not very... rational, apparently.

Not to drag on with a subject that isn't pleasant for you, but I do think that even as a probable dom, I initially had (and still may have) a lot to learn about communication in the workplace and in other professional contexts. Often, business etiquette and communication are not taught well, or not taught at all. Somehow people are expected just to have picked it up by osmosis, and it doesn't always work that way. Especially if you aren't regularly exposed to people modeling this stuff.

And sometimes you may be surrounded by people who actually don't communicate well, but they're in higher positions, and in that case you not only have to communicate well on your own behalf, but make up for their deficits. A lot of what gets passed off as effective corporate-speak is nothing more than jargon and buzzwords that convey little but sound "right" until you begin pondering wtf is actually meant by any of it. Crack open the shell and you'll find no nut inside.

Then when people "fail" with some of these things in a business environment, it's too easy to make it out as some kind of personal deficit when we're actually talking about a skill set, one that maybe your employer failed to point out that you needed and failed to point to resources that impart it. Ridiculous.

And I'm not sure any of this, then, has much to do with and . It might. But I know I certainly hate answering phone calls in an office and stuff like that. I'm probably good at communicating about the things I'm passionate about, or that I have specialized in, and I've been called on to handle hairy interpersonal situations when someone was really upset, threatening to sue, in tears, etc. I think this just requires being sincere and patient and acknowledging what the upset person is saying without arguing them out of their perspective. Not sure it's related to an IE.

Last thought: Do you think it could make more sense if you had someone taking care of administrative details and gatekeeping for you while you do your job, rather than it being a big part of your job to do that stuff?