thoughts about the functions

[ConcreteButterfly]

Just throwing some stuff out there. Feel free to disagree or add to it.


Ne
opportunities, "What could be", "if this, then that", alternatives, options, Plan B, C, D, etc., substituting one physical experience for another based on its essential properties, reading between the lines, "white space" in art, focusing on the broader context that brings the immediate details together

Se
direct perception of the world through my senses; colors, tastes, sights, sounds, tactile impressions, the volitional strength of objects, physical forces impacting me, colliding with the world to get what I want, protect my territory, occupy space, control possessions, subordinate others to my will

Ni
tracing the path of energy to its eventual conclusion, foresight, prediction, seeing the end point of any activity, playing with the symbolism behind an action, feeling the passage of time, chosing the most oppotune time to act, detachment from one's immediate sensory environment

Si
how external sights, colors, motions, etc affect me internally, the changes in my nervous system, my physical tone, my mood. focusing on maximizing physical comfort and relaxation, harmonizing with the world around me. balance. "dancing". grace and fluidity. no sharp movements, no clumsiness. body works as a complete unit, external sensations are taken in as a whole.

Te
the way things work, observable cause and effect. profit. the relationship between time/energy invested and objective results. focusing on the pragmatic benefits of any action. optimizing a process to be more effective, timely, cheaper, etc. logistics. data and statistics. the absence of a subjective impression.

Ti
heirarchy and system analysis, how one thing logically leads to another, "common sense", range of action derived from rank, my "own" sense of understanding of the way things are, as opposed to from an external source eg. a teacher, or textbook. deductive logic. the position something occupies relative to others

Fi
my attitude towards another, I like it, I hate it, being drawn towards or repelled away from something based on my internal feelings, noticing the deeper emotional connections between people regardless of outward expression. ethical standards. compassion for another based on an ability to empathize.

Fe
how I express myself externally. crying, laughing, sharing the mood of others, shifting one's emotional expression to be in sync with others. civility, respect for others based on rank, eg. being courteous to your sister because she's your sister. being involved in events for the sake of social harmony, eg. family gatherings, birthday parties. raising and lowering one's voice for emotional impact, gesticulation.




creative function as "my job" in society (whether you actually perform it or not is another matter):

Fi- I'm aware of others' feelings. I'm responsible for making sure they're happy and emotionally balanced, by giving them the space to be emotionally candid.
Ti- I'm aware of others' confusion. I'm responsible for explaining to them how systems work and how one position relates to another.
Ni- I'm aware of others' lack of faith. I'm responsible for maintaining their faith and inspiring them to believe in the future.
Si- I'm aware of others' lack of comfort. I'm responsible for providing the conditions necessary to be comfortable (eg. good food, clothes, enough light, etc.)
Fe- I'm aware of others' social affect. I'm responsible creating social conditions for them to be more civilized (eg. by publicly pointing out when they're being rude).
Te- I'm aware of others' ignorance. I'm responsible for teaching them how things actually work, and giving them the necessary information and tools to correct their technique.
Se- I'm aware of others' inertia and physically inappropriate activity. I'm responsible directing their strength of will towards what is important.
Ne- I'm aware of others' lack of insight into the broader context. I'm responsible for revealing the whole picture to them.



how the valued functions may work together:


LSI - TiSeFeNi
Based on what I believe will happen next , I manipulate the will of others and precipitate an appropriate emotional response from them . This allows me to maintain my position in the system.

ESI - FiSeTeNi
Based on what I believe will happen next , I manipulate the will of others which has a corresponding impact on their knowledge of how things work . This allows me to maintain my ethical standards

IEE - NeFiSiTe
Based on what I know about how things work , I manipulate the ethical framework in which I make choices which maintains my sense of balance and comfort This lets me continue exploring options

ILE - NeTiSiFe
Based on the emotional reactions of others , I manipulate the logical constructs that underlie my choices which maintains my sense of balance and comfort . This lets me continue exploring options

LII - TiNeFeSi
Based on how comfortable and balanced I feel inside , I manipulate others' understanding of what is possible , which precipitates a corresponding emotional response from them . This allows me to maintain my position in the system.

EII - FiNeTeSi
Based on how comfortable and balanced I feel inside , I manipulate others' understanding of what is possible , which has a corresponding impact on their knowledge of how things work . This allows me to maintain my ethical standards

SEI - SiFeNeTi
Based on how clearly I understand the system , I manipulate others' outward emotional expressions , which changes their understanding of what is possible This lets me stay comfortable and balanced inside

SLI - SiTeNeFi
Based on my ethical standards , I manipulate others' knowledge of how things work , which impacts their understanding of what is possible This lets me stay comfortable and balanced inside

ESE - FeSiTiNe
Based on what I believe is possible , I manipulate the physical comfort of my surroundings , which secures my position in the system . This lets me continue to emotionally express myself

EIE - FeNiTiSe
Based on my strength of will , I manipulate my faith in how things change over time , which secures my position in the system This lets me continue to emotionally express myself

SLE - SeTiNiFe
Based on the emotional reactions of others , I manipulate the logical constructs that underlie my choices , which maintains my beliefs about the future , This allows me to continue dominating the environment

SEE - SeFiNiTe
Based on what I know about how things work , I manipulate the ethical framework in which I make choices , which secures my beliefs about what will happen next This allows me to continue dominating the environment

IEI - NiFeSeTi
Based on how clearly I understand the system , I manipulate the emotional reactions of others , which draws out their volitional forces , and lets me maintain my beliefs about how things change over time

ILI - NiTeSeFi
Based on my ethical standards , I manipulate others' knowledge of how things work , which draws out the volitional forces of others , and lets me maintain my beliefs about how things change over time

LIE - TeNiFiSe
Based on my strength of will , I manipulate my faith in how things change , which aligns with my ethical standards , and allows me to maintain my understanding of how things work

LSE - TeSiFiNe
Based on what I believe is possible , I manipulate the physical comfort of my surroundings , which aligns with my ethical standards , and allows me to maintain my understanding of how things work

[Olduvai]

I luv it, especially the following bits:

Fi- I'm aware of others' feelings. I'm responsible for making sure they're happy and emotionally balanced, by giving them the space to be emotionally candid.

^This is why I think Fi is "Implicit Object Statics"; I'm able to detect how people (objects) are feeling (static property), even if they're not expressing emotion (implicit)

Ti
heirarchy and system analysis, how one thing logically leads to another, "common sense", range of action derived from rank, my "own" sense of understanding of the way things are, as opposed to from an external source eg. a teacher, or textbook. deductive logic. the position something occupies relative to others

^I've heard many a Ti-ego talk about "common sense"

Si- I'm aware of others' lack of comfort. I'm responsible for providing the conditions necessary to be comfortable (eg. good food, clothes, enough light, etc.)

here's how I define Si:

"Si" = "Implicit Field Dynamics"

"'effect on conditions', 'how conditions will change', 'what developments will occur'"

so if this is how the functions are manifested while in the secondary position, how about when they're in the primary position? I'm curious.

[Esaman]

Kinda breaks any want to read further when these are informational elements not functions, at least if we are talking socionics not MBTI.

[consentingadult]

Ne
opportunities, "What could be", "if this, then that", alternatives, options, Plan B, C, D, etc., substituting one physical experience for another based on its essential properties, reading between the lines, "white space" in art, focusing on the broader context that brings the immediate details together

You're quite close, and with "opportunities" very much in line with the generally accepted ideas about Ne. But this aspect of "opportunities" is actually secondary, and often what is most visible to onlookers. However, Ne is really much more about understanding "essence" (you yourself are talking about essential properties, which is probably the same). Compare this how you have described Se: you start with what Se perceives, from that follows what can be done with it (the opportunities(!) of Se): that's the right order and Ne should be understood in a similar fashion. Such an approach is actually more in line with your own description of creative-Ne, where you describe how Ne tends to explain the "whole picture".

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html

I have given your hypothesis of how the valued functions work together some thought, but I don't really see how these function work together in that way. I think I'll stick to the idea of Base and Suggestive functions being personal functions, and the Creative and Mobilizing functions being contact functions.

[ConcreteButterfly]

You're quite close, and with "opportunities" very much in line with the generally accepted ideas about Ne. But this aspect of "opportunities" is actually secondary, and often what is most visible to onlookers. However, Ne is really much more about understanding "essence" (you yourself are talking about essential properties, which is probably the same). Compare this how you have described Se: you start with what Se perceives, from that follows what can be done with it (the opportunities(!) of Se): that's the right order and Ne should be understood in a similar fashion. Such an approach is actually more in line with your own description of creative-Ne, where you describe how Ne tends to explain the "whole picture".

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html

I have given your hypothesis of how the valued functions work together some thought, but I don't really see how these function work together in that way. I think I'll stick to the idea of Base and Suggestive functions being personal functions, and the Creative and Mobilizing functions being contact functions.

Good points! and yes, I wasn't really sure about the valued functions part. I have an idea that they do sort of work together in a chain link, kind of like the Krebs cycle in biology , but the exact details aren't clear to me. Could you elaborate on what you mean by the base and suggestive being personal vs the others being contact?

[Aylen]

You're quite close, and with "opportunities" very much in line with the generally accepted ideas about Ne. But this aspect of "opportunities" is actually secondary, and often what is most visible to onlookers. However, Ne is really much more about understanding "essence" (you yourself are talking about essential properties, which is probably the same). Compare this how you have described Se: you start with what Se perceives, from that follows what can be done with it (the opportunities(!) of Se): that's the right order and Ne should be understood in a similar fashion. Such an approach is actually more in line with your own description of creative-Ne, where you describe how Ne tends to explain the "whole picture".

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...hat-is-ne.html

I have given your hypothesis of how the valued functions work together some thought, but I don't really see how these function work together in that way. I think I'll stick to the idea of Base and Suggestive functions being personal functions, and the Creative and Mobilizing functions being contact functions.

The description of Ni, in that blog, is by far the best I have read and I can say without doubt Ni is my base function and is the underlying force in everything I do. Thanks for the link

[ConcreteButterfly]

so if this is how the functions are manifested while in the secondary position, how about when they're in the primary position? I'm curious.

Ok, in the first they probably would not be something you produce so much as something you accept as inherent to reality. You become something of a hypersensitive, constant switched on "receptacle" to this kind information. So if Creative Si creates comfort, base Si absorbs the comfort or discomfort already latent in the environment. At times it may adjust it through the creative, but as a natural state, it presupposes that there IS a comfortable "zone" that they can tune into and strive to be sensitive enough to do it.
In the base position you're just as much, if not more, aware of how this element is experienced by others, but you don't feel responsible for changing it. Any position of power you have over others re: your base is more due to others recognizing your competency and thrusting you into an influential position. By contrast, power gained through the creative is quite deliberate, and you can if desired mislead others of your competency here and make them think you are weak in it. Creative Te, for instance, imparts knowledge, but it can also make people believe they are idiots and have no knowledge, and thus nothing to teach, if it suits their base.
Interestingly the base tends to have more actual impact on society than the creative, even though we use the latter specifically for that purpose. Your base is so well developed it shines out like a beacon to others, and people end up mimicking your example. Unwittingly you create a circle of 'rivals' around yourself, people who start using your base function openly in direct competition with you, usually you dont even notice this but spontaneously adjust to it, being as fluent in this function as you are. You are like a concentrated "pool" of this energy, imagine red dye in clear water, that draws out the same in others. Creative function by contrast is very different. It can also influence, but only situationally, and always in way that supports your base.

[suedehead]

Which perception function is this?

When I look at an object, I'm either indifferent towards it, or perceive it as it is..my mind doesn't really go anywhere else with it. When I do get some sort of mental imagery, it usually involves either a memory, or something concrete that I'd like to do in the future. When I watch a movie, I'll sometimes notice similarities with something I've seen before, but the comparisons never seem all that farfetched to me (long takes and existential angst = Tarkovsky, etc.).

Typical observations would be something like:

"I wouldn't wear that."
"He looks like a douchebag."
"That picture's overexposed."
"I (don't) like this area."
"I wonder if the cashier will think I'm stealing if I bring this Poland spring bottle in with me."
"I like the way that ___ looks, I'll bring my camera with me next time."
(Watching Nymphomaniac) "The dialogue is awkward and melodramatic. He's trying to do some existential/philosophical thing, but he's pretty bad at it."
etc.

[consentingadult]

Good points! and yes, I wasn't really sure about the valued functions part. I have an idea that they do sort of work together in a chain link, kind of like the Krebs cycle in biology , but the exact details aren't clear to me. Could you elaborate on what you mean by the base and suggestive being personal vs the others being contact?

Yes I can: a personal function is what an individual uses to serve personal needs (i.e it is not so much used to fulfill the needs of other people), whereas a contact function is specifically aimed at the needs of another person. E.g. as I explain in my blog, the Creative Function serves as an antenna that picks up the distress or need for attention of your dual's Mobilizing Function (or that of your mirage). What you will often observe in any type, if the relativistic attitude towards the Creative Function, they can actually fool around with it to the point where they subvert its intended purpose (e.g. when confronted with moralism, an IEE can counteract another person by forcing the relativistic nature of ethics down their throats)..

Anyway, here my thoughts on the purpose of some functions and on how they interact with one another:

Creative and Mobilizing (between duals and mirages): http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-creative.html

Suggestive and Mobilizing (in one type): http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...stive-and.html

Some side notes:
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-function.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-function.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-function.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...n-by-ilis.html

[consentingadult]

The description of Ni, in that blog, is by far the best I have read and I can say without doubt Ni is my base function and is the underlying force in everything I do. Thanks for the link

You're welcome, and thanks for the compliment!

[consentingadult]

He's trying to do some existential/philosophical thing, but he's pretty bad at it."

I had the same feelings about Melancholia, another overrated movie about a bunch of winers.

The rest of your post sounds like an involvement with Si and Fi, and with respect to these information elements, you seem to be focused on keeping out negative effects/affects.

[Contra]

I agree with the ILI/IEI description, overall, but I think Ni could be broadened to mean internal harmony, as Reinin describes it.

[Narc]

Which perception function is this?

When I look at an object, I'm either indifferent towards it, or perceive it as it is..my mind doesn't really go anywhere else with it. When I do get some sort of mental imagery, it usually involves either a memory, or something concrete that I'd like to do in the future.

Sounds like a mix of Se and Ni.

When I watch a movie, I'll sometimes notice similarities with something I've seen before, but the comparisons never seem all that farfetched to me (long takes and existential angst = Tarkovsky, etc.).

Typical observations would be something like:

"I wouldn't wear that." +
"He looks like a douchebag."
"That picture's overexposed." or
"I (don't) like this area."
"I wonder if the cashier will think I'm stealing if I bring this Poland spring bottle in with me." +
"I like the way that ___ looks, I'll bring my camera with me next time." + (Would be , but it's just an observation about liking something without going into why or how it makes you feel)
(Watching Nymphomaniac) "The dialogue is awkward and melodramatic. He's trying to do some existential/philosophical thing, but he's pretty bad at it."
etc. +Je

[suedehead]

Sounds like a mix of Se and Ni.

Interesting. For the ones you marked as Ni, why that as opposed to Ne?

[Narc]

Interesting. For the ones you marked as Ni, why that as opposed to Ne?

Could be Ne too.

[ashlesha]

Could be Ne too.

depending on..? how realistic or intentional the what-ifs are?

[Narc]

depending on..? how realistic or intentional the what-ifs are?

Tends to depend on how many possibilities there are and how specific they are.

Going from my own experience, Ni (plus the other functions) would be like "he's acting in this way and saying this to his girlfriend, based on her reaction and temperament, they are likely to have a fight this evening in front of everyone".

Ne would be more like "she might get angry at him, she might just laugh it off, it's hard to say at this stage". Less linked into specifics, but still takes into account the signs and information on hand, and probably more tied into the actual moment.

For the record, the boyfriend and girlfriend did have that fight in front of everyone. I didn't see the ensuring threesome with the boyfriend, his ex-girlfriend and the current girlfriend coming, though.

[ashlesha]

Going from my own experience, Ni (plus the other functions) would be like "he's acting in this way and saying this to his girlfriend, based on her reaction and temperament, they are likely to have a fight this evening in front of everyone".

Ne would be more like "she might get angry at him, she might just laugh it off, it's hard to say at this stage". Less linked into specifics, but still takes into account the signs and information on hand, and probably more tied into the actual moment.

based on this i really like Ni from others but the Ne one also seems natural to me. what would Se be like?

For the record, the boyfriend and girlfriend did have that fight in front of everyone. I didn't see the ensuring threesome with the boyfriend, his ex-girlfriend and the current girlfriend coming, though.

[Narc]

based on this i really like Ni from others but the Ne one also seems natural to me. what would Se be like?

You could use Suedehead's posts in this thread for Se. Look at the statements with the IE symbols next to them, and the extract I've pasted below:

• "When I look at an object, I'm either indifferent towards it, or perceive it as it is..my mind doesn't really go anywhere else with it."
  
  
• When I do get some sort of mental imagery, it usually involves either a memory, or something concrete that I'd like to do in the future." (added together with [the motivation for action), [I want to do it] and [it's now a task that needs to be accomplished]).

[Narc]

That's really oversimplifying. :\

There is more in-depth information freely available, I'm more in the business of presenting concise and easy to understand information.

[suedehead]

I guess I can see how that works in my case. I can remember being convinced that I had hurt someones feelings when a girl I was flirting with at the time decided to rush out dramatically at the end of class after I had acted somewhat aloof towards her (I was stressed out and didn't feel like having a conversation), to which an ILE responded "hey, maybe she just had to take shit."

[Narc]

It's not informative if it's wrong.

What's actually wrong about it?

[DirectorAbbie]

Fi
my attitude towards another, I like it, I hate it, being drawn towards or repelled away from something based on my internal feelings, noticing the deeper emotional connections between people regardless of outward expression. ethical standards. compassion for another based on an ability to empathize.

I know Fi has often been linked with ethical standards, but is there any evidence for that or is it just a rumor that's been going around? Has any Fi type connected Fi with ethical standards?

[Narc]

It attributes IEs to universally basic faculties of human action.

There may be a connection between IEs and behaviour regardless of the IEs being held to be information metabolism elements, it may just be less direct. Correlation rather than causation.

[STARWRS789]

Fe
how I express myself externally. crying, laughing, sharing the mood of others, shifting one's emotional expression to be in sync with others. civility, respect for others based on rank, eg. being courteous to your sister because she's your sister. being involved in events for the sake of social harmony, eg. family gatherings, birthday parties. raising and lowering one's voice for emotional impact, gesticulation.





Fe- I'm aware of others' social affect. I'm responsible creating social conditions for them to be more civilized (eg. by publicly pointing out when they're being rude).

Wow I really can connect with theses descriptions, especially the part that says Fe values watching the social conduct of others (making dialogue more civilized) since I monitor what my brother says constantly! He can't seem to tell when a joke is going too far. Also, I have extreme deference to rank...symbols of power like clothing stand out for me. I also gesticulate like crazy! Whenever I have a flood of ideas in my head, or am trying to explain something, I get talk so fast and get winded from trying to show physically with my hands and arm movements what I'm saying! Plus I frequently modulate my mood to match other people in conversation. I think my second function could really be Fe after having read all this. Thanks for the insight!

[ConcreteButterfly]

^ no problem STARWRS789 I'm glad it was of some use

More thoughts (just basically trying to clarify the ideas to myself):


mobilizing function ( as producing):
- Se- enforce their will over self and others/the environment
- Te- express their knowledge and do work
- Ne- share their insights into the broader context and how different processes correlate, reveal possibilities
- Fe - command attention of the group; sway group sentiment
- Si - display physical calm and balance
- Ti - reveal a clear and logical thought process
- Ni - reveal consistent internal beliefs
- Fi - express genuine feelings

more about the hidden agenda:


- Se- to be wealthy -to have power over themselves and others, to be able to physically and emotionally express themselves in any way whatsoever. freedom of mobility, freedom of expression. want to "own" themselves entirely, and by extension, the world.
- Te- to know -to have the facts, and observe how one thing literally leads to another without bias. wants a mechanical understanding of the way the world works.
- Ne- to be perfect. ? ??
- Fe - to be loved. to be admired and respected by their social group. to be in a position in the hierarchy worthy of respect, and receive the applause and recognition commensurate with that position.
- Si - to be healthy. basically to be calm and unstressed at all times. to be "one" with the world in terms of physical balance. do not want to be shaken.
- Ti - to understand. to have a systematic logical explanation for everything. want their thoughts to be ordered, clear, and easy to express.
- Ni - to belief - internal psychic harmony. they want to be "true to themselves" in terms of their beliefs; fear chaos.
- Fi - to love. to be attached emotionally to others, Want to "Care" , want to show they are passionate ?

[Beautiful sky]

I luv it, especially the following bits:


^This is why I think Fi is "Implicit Object Statics"; I'm able to detect how people (objects) are feeling (static property), even if they're not expressing emotion (implicit)



^I've heard many a Ti-ego talk about "common sense"



here's how I define Si:



so if this is how the functions are manifested while in the secondary position, how about when they're in the primary position? I'm curious.

People already know you're IEE so stop posting these ridiculous comments.

[ConcreteButterfly]

DIMENSIONALITY OF INFORMATION ELEMENTS

1st- personal experience
2nd- norms
3rd- present situation
4th- situation across time

more dimensions = more factors considered

1D = BLIND when stressed. choke point. On/Off, very unstable. little "grey area". unable to be creative here, unable to follow standards. only learn from direct experience. main criterion: "what I've done before" (what has worked before).

2D = considers personal experience in context of social norms, usually adheres to norms. less suggestive, more confident. recognizes good use of this function vs. poor use.

3D = responds to the present situation as though it were unique, requiring a unique response. creative; adaptive. ignores impact over time

4D = monolith of the functions, always attracts relevant info, responds in a situationally appropriate way. additionally considers situation across time - how it has been before, how it will be next. easily remembers info here, easily anticipates changes.

[silverchris9]

This is baller. I just kinda riffed on some of the things said for a while because I thought there were really interesting things here. Hope it's not too silly.

Ne
opportunities, "What could be", "if this, then that", alternatives, options, Plan B, C, D, etc., substituting one physical experience for another based on its essential properties, reading between the lines, "white space" in art, focusing on the broader context that brings the immediate details together

Why, "if this, then that?" I imagine Ne as less deductive than that? Or maybe less sequential? But I have trouble figuring out how Ne works. The first step and the last step make sense to me but everything that happens in-between is a blank. I'm curious about Ne.

Se
direct perception of the world through my senses; colors, tastes, sights, sounds, tactile impressions, the volitional strength of objects, physical forces impacting me, colliding with the world to get what I want, protect my territory, occupy space, control possessions, subordinate others to my will

Yeah. I imagine Se as living in a physical world, a world wherein everything reacts as quickly and easily to me as physical objects do (or don't). Looking at some people/situations/emotions/non-physical things as like a ball, easy to manipulate or deform or change according to my will (although it doesn't necessarily feel like an act of will, no more than lifting an apple to your mouth feels like an act of will). And some people/situations/emotions/non-physical things are like a mountain, difficult or impossible to manipulate or deform or change, but not impossible, if you have enough people or tools or technology. (And that DOES feel like a huge act of will, just as moving a mountain is a huge act of will). I think your description is interesting insofar as it emphasizes the weird paradoxical subjectivity of Se. It's the most external of all the functions in a sense, but somehow it's all about how everything relates to me. I guess that's an analogue to how sensory data works, right? Sensory data is all about outside but it weirdly implies inside? Or the will? Which is in me, but is about what's outside of me. I guess sensory data is also in me but not about me, right? Like, sensory data doesn't exist outside of the perceiving subject, it becomes sensory data when it comes into contact with the perceiving subject. And I guess the first thing you naturally do to interpret sensory data is to decide what it means for me---this object will hurt me, this object will provide me with something I want/need, this object can be used for this, that object can be used for that. Imagine what it must be like to see the world like that. Even if you know intellectually that that's not really how the world works (and you have your Ti or Fi to tell you how you ought to relate to people and not treat them like objects), that must be a fascinating way to have data come at you initially.

Ni
tracing the path of energy to its eventual conclusion, foresight, prediction, seeing the end point of any activity, playing with the symbolism behind an action, feeling the passage of time, chosing the most oppotune time to act, detachment from one's immediate sensory environment

Another thing I love about these descriptions is how they push the essence and manifestation of the function all together. That's how we experience them, after all. We don't experience essence here and manifestations over there, we experience it all in a jumble. We "trace the path of energy" and "choose the most opportune time to act" simultaneously. They're the same thing. I agree with the detachment, but it's like a weird consequence of operating entirely in this weird head-space. It doesn't have to do with the nature of Ni, just a weird side-effect. When I'm writing poems, I like to be either a) alone, or b) forget that any other humans are anywhere in the vicinity/exist. It almost makes it so thinking the thought is more valuable than expressing it, staying in the flow of the thoughts, not slowing them down to write them. Anyway, I think the core of Ni is moving backwards and forwards along a relationship, which is how temporality keeps getting brought into it. But like you said, a symbol/meaning relationship is one that you can move backwards and forwards along, in the sense that a metaphor is temporal: meaning from one word flows into another word. A tree is a daydream. Now some of the meanings of "daydream" are put into "tree". Or symbols---this "stands for" or "substitutes for" that. It's another relationship that you can move backwards and forwards along. It's not just time. It's signifier/signified relationships, it's logical priority, it's part/whole (when the part implies the whole or the whole implies the parts).

Ti
heirarchy and system analysis, how one thing logically leads to another, "common sense", range of action derived from rank, my "own" sense of understanding of the way things are, as opposed to from an external source eg. a teacher, or textbook. deductive logic. the position something occupies relative to others

Yeah. Ti develops a set of tools for "knowing it for myself." You didn't tell me, I discovered it for myself, I learned it for myself, I proved it for myself using this set of tools. Logic is a system that anybody can use to prove or disprove an idea. With logic, you never have to just take an idea as true because someone says it, you can evaluate it for yourself. Or like, the Reformation: I have a Bible now, I can see if what you say about God is true for myself. Or even Constitutions/Codes of Law: I can prove what you did is wrong according to the laws of this country. Also the Ti reliance on the immutability of things---part of the difference between TiNe and TiSe---TiSe, being Ni valuing, is maybe a little more accepting of the flux inside of the stability, whereas TiNe is more rooted in "these truths we hold to be self-evident," these truths come from the essence of things, from the nature of things. Like "pure logic," which comes from the form of the proposition, not necessarily what's being said, or what physical objects are being moved/changed/affected. I was surprised at first by "the position something occupies relative to others," but that totally makes sense. It's a very Beta thing, I think: creating a system of hierarchy based on how power/authority flows. It's external statics of fields---what is always true about relationships. I guess a hierarchy is a good example of something dependably true about the relationships between people.

Fi
my attitude towards another, I like it, I hate it, being drawn towards or repelled away from something based on my internal feelings, noticing the deeper emotional connections between people regardless of outward expression. ethical standards. compassion for another based on an ability to empathize.

Yeah, I like this, especially "noticing the deeper emotional connections between people regardless of outward expression." I think that's a good differentiation between Fe and Fi. Which is not to say that Fe-valuers don't notice the deep connections (especially Beta NFs). But the Fe emotional vibe is more about the outward expression, whereas Fi = internal statics of fields---the long-term connections, the reliable connections, the connections that don't change day-to-day and moment-to-moment. Fe is all about the moment-to-moment. Like in acting, where they tell you to "change faster!" (playwriting, in a sense, is all about putting people in situations where they have to change quickly and visibly---all dat Fe). Also Fi is about fields, so the data you're responding to is relational: I don't like this, I don't like that. Whereas Fe is about objects, so the data you're responding to is object based: I feel good, I feel bad ---> what changed on the outside that caused this change on the inside? ---> oh, this made me feel good, that made me feel bad ---> I like this, I don't like that. I guess that's why Fi feels kinda mystical, like Ni, because it's a judgment that doesn't seem to have any basis, because it is the judgment that happens first. "I like this, I don't like that" happens BEFORE "I don't like this because, I don't like that because," which is probably a point of contention between TiSe and FiNe especially. And I guess the empathy is kinda a side-effect, or a quick generalization, a sort of natural way of developing? "I have these strong feelings and I'm a human---I guess all humans have these strong feelings. I'm going to try to protect and consider their feelings just as I would want someone to protect and consider mine." Feelings as reactions to things moreso than as changes of state (states that are understood in terms of their relationship to other states---Fe)

Fe
how I express myself externally. crying, laughing, sharing the mood of others, shifting one's emotional expression to be in sync with others. civility, respect for others based on rank, eg. being courteous to your sister because she's your sister. being involved in events for the sake of social harmony, eg. family gatherings, birthday parties. raising and lowering one's voice for emotional impact, gesticulation.

This feels off to me. I mean, I've never thought of Fe as ethical in that way? I think Fe is likely to judge how someone effects the emotional atmosphere, but not as "right" and "wrong" but rather as "good" and "bad" or "desirable" or "undesirable." Fe to me is the function that dislikes people because they don't "fit in," meaning that they work against the vibe of the room, the vibe the Fe-valuer is trying to create/enjoy/sustain. Being too serious in a frivolous environment, being too frivolous in a serious environment. I guess though I can see how that involves being courteous, but I resist the idea that it's necessarily based on any fundamental aspect of the relationship between people, like "you must be courteous to your sister because she's your sister." That to me is more internal statics of fields (Fi)---you should always behave in manner x in situation y (just, it's less explicit-Ti about it and more internal-Fi about it) Whereas Fe is internal dynamics of objects---how does what's happening outside affect what's happening inside? It's more situation-by-situation and less general rules. But totally on the gesticulation and the being in sync and etc. It's all about knowing how what you do can affect the internal dynamics (i.e., emotions) of others. How I express myself externally in terms of how that affects others (and myself) internally. I mean, this sounds a bit like it was written from a nonvaluer POV. I would say that, if anything, the fault of Fe is less conformity and more manipulation. I find Fe emotionally manipulative (especially Fe-leading types, who appear not to be conscious of their attempts to emotionally manipulate you). So less, "I gotta be nice to my sis 'cause she's my sis" and more "I gotta be nice to my sis 'cause she's got candy." Also I think Fe valuers are big believers in the whole "the closer I am to people the more I show them my REAL emotions," which to nonvaluers looks like "how come you're nicer to strangers than you are to me?"

Fe- I'm aware of others' social affect. I'm responsible creating social conditions for them to be more civilized (eg. by publicly pointing out when they're being rude).

I mean... I guess. That's like Blanche DuBois Fe, the whole civilized thing. I totally agree with I'm aware of others' social affect (and effect). But I feel more like I'm responsible for creating an atmosphere in which we can achieve whatever we want to achieve, like... if the goal of the hour is having fun, then I'm gonna encourage behavior that involves having fun and (emotionally) punish or smooth over or ignore or avoid behavior that prevents me/us from having fun. I certainly don't aim at making people more "civilized" in general. I do think NiFe in particular has the capacity to aspire to a higher way of being, but that higher way of being would only submit to being called "civilized" pre-1950, certainly, at least in the US? Since the 60s, civilized = the man, and the man is the opposite of the higher way of being. I do see more what you mean by the whole "publicly pointing out when people are rude" thing, but again that sounds like a nonvaluer POV---and a real master of Fe social etiquette would NEVER disrupt the atmosphere by telling someone harshly that they're being rude. More like a subtle dig that shames them into shutting up, backed up by the threat of a growling Se-ego to the side or in the corner. There's also the whole "don't tell others what to do" ethic that exists in the age of globalization and different cultures bumping up against others, and that's another barrier in the way of a "help people be civilized" thing. Also Fe FEELINGS are often exactly the thing that inspires the reaction "can't we all just be civil to each other?" while the Fe-egos shout at each other in torrid and explosive passion.

LSI - TiSeFeNi
Based on what I believe will happen next , I manipulate the will of others and precipitate an appropriate emotional response from them . This allows me to maintain my position in the system.

Yes. That's my Dad, pretty much exactly. Make them back down, make them feel stupid, all as a means of getting them to take the desired action (i.e., "manipulate the will"). And it's totally based in the "if I do x, I'll get reaction y, so we can collectively achieve z" Ni/Ti kind of reasoning. Snaps to this, imo. I don't know that I 100% agree with the rendering of your cycle, but I totally agree that there must be some kind of cycle that the valued functions work in to produce behavior. Or at least that it would be valuable/insightful to develop one.

IEI - NiFeSeTi
Based on how clearly I understand the system , I manipulate the emotional reactions of others , which draws out their volitional forces , and lets me maintain my beliefs about how things change over time

Yeah. The only thing I'd say is "lets me keep developing my beliefs about how things change over time," or "keep learning about how things change over time." The reason you draw out others' will, make them reveal what they want, make them push, make them use their energy/force is to learn more about how things change. The goal is to understand change and the forces that cause it better. Give me more to see so that I can learn more about how it works. But otherwise I totally buy this. But I get how that might change your formulation about maintaining the leading function.

SLE - SeTiNiFe
Based on the emotional reactions of others , I manipulate the logical constructs that underlie my choices , which maintains my beliefs about the future , This allows me to continue dominating the environment

And here maybe it's more about using Ti to update the belief about the future (Ni)?

[silverchris9]

Oh now that I think about it, I can see how IEIs and SLEs would be interested in maintaining their/our beliefs about the future, if we think about the future in terms of an outcome, a goal, but more expansively than that, a vision of a personal (or group) future: this is what the future will be like. Certainly that's a part of the motivation/aims of the SLE, and for me at least, that's a major part of how I motivate myself too.

[ConcreteButterfly]

so if this is how the functions are manifested while in the secondary position, how about when they're in the primary position? I'm curious.

I wanted to write more on this. It seems like the base function assumes this information is already in a certain state, and you're more or less "discovering" or affirming what that state is, while the creative assumes nothing - you take it from a baseline of zero and modify it up and down the y-axis

so:
Ne base- assumes there is a "whole" (connections between different external processes)
Ne creative- creates external connections to form a whole

Fe base- assumes emotional expressions and relationships exist
Fe creative- creates relationships and expressions

Te base- assumes knowledge + movement
Te creative - creates knowledge + movement

Se base- assumes competing volitional forces exist
Se creative- creates competing forces

Fi base= assumes unexpressed feelings exist
Fi creative = creates unexpressed feelings

Ti base = assumes rules and understanding exists
Ti base = creates rules and understanding

Si base = assumes certain innervations and state of health
Si creative = creates innervations + state of health

Ni base = assumes there an internal "whole" (connections between different ideas)
Ni creative = creates an internal whole by linking ideas


Base is not neutral, it is "searching". It is uncovering on the assumption that there already is something there. In your creative you're not surprised to find this information missing in the environment, you in fact expect this, and feel responsible for filling the gap. When there is a lot of your creative function already in the environment, it can make you feel useless.

So base Se, for example, assumes there are forces at play in every situation, that there is a "leader" and weaklings and everyone is fighting for their share of the territory ---- that everyone wants POWER. This is a cognitive error but a totally natural one. Everyone believes that others see life through the lens of their own base function. With the creative you're more able to see how this information is situational, sometimes absent and often totally irrelevant.

Base Fe perceives life to have a set of stable relationships and expressions "built in". Creative Fe takes the raw, barely perceptible dynamic energy (if that) of a person's internal emotional state (Fi) and condenses it, precipitating an outward response (Fe) and establishing a relationship.

Creative is your personal Swiss army knife, it's what you use to change the world around you, but you approach it recognizing that this information isn't always already out there. With the base you're more blind, you're like a fish in the ocean, and unable to sense water, when it comes to your base. Using your creative is like going swimming. Lol I hope that makes sense.

And base function bias works nicely around your dual, who has the same bias but is unconscious of it. Around your dual you become aware. So an ILI realizes his subtle impression that there are competing forces at play most clearly around an SEE, an SEI's vague recognition of an external "whole" becomes most clear around an ILE, and an ESE's hazy impression of the "system" is brought into sharp focus around an LII.

[Becca]

Ok, in the first they probably would not be something you produce so much as something you accept as inherent to reality. You become something of a hypersensitive, constant switched on "receptacle" to this kind information. So if Creative Si creates comfort, base Si absorbs the comfort or discomfort already latent in the environment. At times it may adjust it through the creative, but as a natural state, it presupposes that there IS a comfortable "zone" that they can tune into and strive to be sensitive enough to do it.
In the base position you're just as much, if not more, aware of how this element is experienced by others, but you don't feel responsible for changing it. Any position of power you have over others re: your base is more due to others recognizing your competency and thrusting you into an influential position. By contrast, power gained through the creative is quite deliberate, and you can if desired mislead others of your competency here and make them think you are weak in it. Creative Te, for instance, imparts knowledge, but it can also make people believe they are idiots and have no knowledge, and thus nothing to teach, if it suits their base.
Interestingly the base tends to have more actual impact on society than the creative, even though we use the latter specifically for that purpose. Your base is so well developed it shines out like a beacon to others, and people end up mimicking your example. Unwittingly you create a circle of 'rivals' around yourself, people who start using your base function openly in direct competition with you, usually you dont even notice this but spontaneously adjust to it, being as fluent in this function as you are. You are like a concentrated "pool" of this energy, imagine red dye in clear water, that draws out the same in others. Creative function by contrast is very different. It can also influence, but only situationally, and always in way that supports your base.

I don't understand this fully. I have a hard time using Ne, and it is not something I can easily "impart" as a creative function. I would like to, and I am constantly frustrated when I can't. I agree with the part about making others believe I am weak in it when I am not, and this is not even a choice on my part. Sometimes I wish I can be stronger in it, but it seems that I really am not good in it.

I wanted to write more on this. It seems like the base function assumes this information is already in a certain state, and you're more or less "discovering" or affirming what that state is, while the creative assumes nothing - you take it from a baseline of zero and modify it up and down the y-axis

so:
Ne base- assumes there is a "whole" (connections between different external processes)
Ne creative- creates external connections to form a whole

Fe base- assumes emotional expressions and relationships exist
Fe creative- creates relationships and expressions

Te base- assumes knowledge + movement
Te creative - creates knowledge + movement

Se base- assumes competing volitional forces exist
Se creative- creates competing forces

Fi base= assumes unexpressed feelings exist
Fi creative = creates unexpressed feelings

Ti base = assumes rules and understanding exists
Ti base = creates rules and understanding

Si base = assumes certain innervations and state of health
Si creative = creates innervations + state of health

Ni base = assumes there an internal "whole" (connections between different ideas)
Ni creative = creates an internal whole by linking ideas


Base is not neutral, it is "searching". It is uncovering on the assumption that there already is something there. In your creative you're not surprised to find this information missing in the environment, you in fact expect this, and feel responsible for filling the gap. When there is a lot of your creative function already in the environment, it can make you feel useless.

So base Se, for example, assumes there are forces at play in every situation, that there is a "leader" and weaklings and everyone is fighting for their share of the territory ---- that everyone wants POWER. This is a cognitive error but a totally natural one. Everyone believes that others see life through the lens of their own base function. With the creative you're more able to see how this information is situational, sometimes absent and often totally irrelevant.

Base Fe perceives life to have a set of stable relationships and expressions "built in". Creative Fe takes the raw, barely perceptible dynamic energy (if that) of a person's internal emotional state (Fi) and condenses it, precipitating an outward response (Fe) and establishing a relationship.

Creative is your personal Swiss army knife, it's what you use to change the world around you, but you approach it recognizing that this information isn't always already out there. With the base you're more blind, you're like a fish in the ocean, and unable to sense water, when it comes to your base. Using your creative is like going swimming. Lol I hope that makes sense.

And base function bias works nicely around your dual, who has the same bias but is unconscious of it. Around your dual you become aware. So an ILI realizes his subtle impression that there are competing forces at play most clearly around an SEE, an SEI's vague recognition of an external "whole" becomes most clear around an ILE, and an ESE's hazy impression of the "system" is brought into sharp focus around an LII.

Very interesting. I think I understand better now...creative function is something that we need in order to change our world? So therefore it's harder to find?
I like this very much thank you