If you were to help someone differentiate between Se and Si, how would you go about it?
If you were to help someone differentiate between Se and Si, how would you go about it?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Si: the physical state (of self and others), and how events affect it; physical needs, comfort, and stability
Se: the outward physical traits of objects; value (monetary or power), strength, shape, and readiness to mobilize
Se = Pushin stuff
Si = Touchin stuff
holy cow, no kidding!!!Originally Posted by discojoe
this is a damned good summary!
i remember the first week of wellbutrin when i tried it....
it was suddenly an Se world...
look at all the pretty toys i can play with!!!
it's like the world was full of objects to be moved around whenever/however i wanted
i don't normally pay attention to all those objects, but suddenly cars, trees, people, animals, lawn mowers sitting by the side of the road, and even rocks took on a whole new meaning!!!
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
LOVE itOriginally Posted by discojoe
My first thought was that I didn't see how anyone could confuse these two things. LOL They feel more different than any other two related functions . . . dunno if "related functions" is a good way to put it but i'm hoping everyone here knows what I mean.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Yes, it is usually the easiest dichotomy for me to see.Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Your pharmacist slip you some ecstacy? j/k, i tried a few antidepressants and it's overstimulation to the max...for me at least.Originally Posted by anndelise
apparently, not everyone gets an initial high off of it...I guess I got lucky.Originally Posted by jessica129
unfortunately, no matter how we tried to alter it, I never felt that way again.
I quite it after a month or so because it wasn't offering any positive benefits...especially considering the negative reactions.
Bummer really, cuz in that one week i was able to do a lot
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I've hardly tried legal drugs... funny enough all those brain pills scare the shit out of me
I had a paracetamol once - I took it in two halves, a day apart, just in case of complications.
Improving your happiness and changing your personality for the better
Jungian theory is not grounded in empirical data (pdf file)
The case against type dynamics (pdf file)
Cautionary comments regarding the MBTI (pdf file)
Reinterpreting the MBTI via the five-factor model (pdf file)
Do the Big Five personality traits interact to predict life outcomes? (pdf file)
The Big Five personality test outperformed the Jungian and Enneagram test in predicting life outcomes
Evidence of correlations between human partners based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of traits
Si: "that apple has a nice color, tastes good, has a good texture".
Se: "with a slap of my hand I can get that apple on the table flying right out of the window".
Si: dynamic irrational introverted sensations - you react to your every-changing internal perceptions
Se: static irrational extroverted perceptions - you perceive the static state of an object and immediately want to alter it
Si: "wow, she's beautiful".
Se: "I can easily kick your ass".
Si: "let's camp on that spot near the lake, it's gorgeous"
Se: "it's too close to where those other people have set up their tent".
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Ni is also dynamic, irrational and introverted; Ne is also static, irrational and extroverted.Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
Uhh - yes. And your point is? Se and Si is also sensing, Ne and Ni is intuition -- did you want me to point out the obvious too?Originally Posted by Stormy
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
How do you differentiate them?Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
Who's "them"? Ne and Ni as opposed to Se and Si?Originally Posted by Stormy
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Ni from Si and Ne from Se.Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
There is the "bodies and fields" definition.
I prefer to say that Si and Se are "closer" to the immediate senses, to the present reality, than Ne and Ni, which are a bit more "detached".
One way of putting it is to say that Si and Se are external and Ne and Ni are internal.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Is Thinking, being an External Function, then also 'closer' to the immediate senses, and Feeling more 'detached'?Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
Perhaps so, in a way. Doesn't it seem easier to conceive of a Thinking machine than of a Feeling machine? Feeling and Intuition are more "personal" than Sensing and Thinking, then. An ISTj robot seems easier to construct than an ENFp one.Originally Posted by Stormy
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Originally Posted by Expat
I've been conceiving Sensing and Thinking as 'physical', recently, and Intuition and Feeling as 'mental', although the terms are very hard to pin down exactly...something approaching dual-aspect metaphysical theories or panpsychism, possibly. It gets even more complicated when Static/Dynamic distinctions are made, of course, not least because what is Static under one attitude is Dynamic under the other.
[Stormy] [LII]
Yes, but because you also have the rational/irrational bit.Originally Posted by Stormy
and -- static but "pushing" for change --> extrovertion
and - static and "welcoming" stasis ---> introversion
and -- dynamic and "controlling" change --> extroversion
and -- dynamic and "welcoming" change ---> introversion
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
ooh good way to put itOriginally Posted by Expat
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
How can both 'welcoming' stasis and 'welcoming' change correspond to Introversion?Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
perceiving judging, easyOriginally Posted by Stormy
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I assume you mean perceiving corresponds to 'welcoming change', and judging corresponds to 'welcoming stasis', but in any case they're orthogonal to Introversion/Extraversion.Originally Posted by FDG
[Stormy] [LII]
Now I get what you mean. Yes there's the potential for a logical contradiction thereOriginally Posted by Stormy
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
No.Originally Posted by Stormy
Dynamic perceives change, Static perceives stasis
Rational dislikes "uncontrolled" change, Irrational wants change
Static + Irrational --> change must be caused ---> extroversion
Static + Rational ---> there is no uncontrolled change, no need for action ---> introversion
Dynamic + irrational ---> change is happening already ---> introversion
Dynamic + rational --> change is happening and must be controlled ---> extroversion
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
what he means is, that if you haveOriginally Posted by Expat
Fi Se let's say
Se pushes for change in your model, right? well in the case of creative, it doesn't, it pushes for stasis
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Originally Posted by Carla
I think Ne is more about what something means, or what it potentially means in relation to other things, though.
[Stormy] [LII]
My point is how can 'change must be caused' and 'change is happening and must be controlled' both equate to the same attitude (Extroversion), and likewise for Introversion.Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
I don't even want to think about bringing Positions into it, actually.Originally Posted by FDG
-
[Stormy] [LII]
Because of rationality or irrationality. Extroversion is a need to take action, Introversion is the absence of this need.Originally Posted by Stormy
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
I see; Extroversion concerns opposing whatever is considered to be dominant (stasis or change).Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
Yes; where in the case of and is not necessarily about opposing the change, but steering it into the direction you want. and is about kicking a sitting bull to get it running; and is about holding the bull by the horns to either make it stop or control its speed and direction.Originally Posted by Stormy
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
Thank you. In an incredibly round-about way, if is about 'kicking a sitting bull to get it running', what is - noticing how a running bull affects other bulls?Originally Posted by Expat
[Stormy] [LII]
Si/Ni rides the bull once it's moving, and steers it to make sure it doesn't run into a wall/other bulls/other shit.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Si is enjoying the ride itself, Ni is enjoying how the ride is proceeding - until it gets into an undesired direction, but then we are stepping into rationality.Originally Posted by Gilly
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
PeJi: Gets the bulls moving, but knows when it's necessary to let them sit.
JiPe: Lets the bulls sit, but knows when it's necessary to get them moving.
JePi: Stops and corrals the bulls, but knows when to just ride and steer.
PiJe: Steers the bulls while they move, but knows when to pull up.
Alternately, imagine a car. Ji is at rest/idling, Pe is firing up the engine and accelerating, Pi is steering while it's moving, and Je is the brakes.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
That is the only bit I am unsure about -- Ni and Si are about perceptions; if you steer it in any way, you are already stepping into rationality. Please note that I am talking about the function, not person; of course an IP will also steer it.Originally Posted by Gilly
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
But it's still in a moving state; rationality comes into play when it's stopped, either by the static state of being stopped, or the dynamic state of actively stopping.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...