gross over simplification of information aspects/elements

[Joy]

This is just a random idea that I haven't put a whole lot of thought into yet... I'm not suggesting these are good definitions/descriptions. Consider yourself warned.

Te: what people/things are doing
Fe: how people/things are feeling

Si: what people/things are doing with each other
Ni: what people/things have, will, or could be doing with each other

Se: the existing characteristics of people/things
Ne: the potential characteristics of people/things

Ti: what people/things are in relation to each other
Fi: how people/things feel in relation to each other

[Expat]

Si: what people/things are doing with each other

That's the most problematic one, I think.

[Gilly]

Si: How things are physically affecting one another
Ni: How events precipitate new events (this has always been the hard one, hasn't it?)

[tcaudilllg]

For a while I've been considering things under labcoat's approach of defining the elements by their relations to their opposites. It seems to me that if traffics , then should rely on for its data. Taking the memories of observed objects and their energies into consideration, acts as a sort of simulation program that puts all of those objects in the same make-believe environment and moves them forward in time under various assumptions and scenarios. That's my definition of for now.

You could probably make the same case for as a processor of . If you think of things as "belonging" somewhere or another and yet not actually in their places, then with you can imagine what the world would be like if they were in their places as such. (I remember you said something about this relationship, labcoat, but I don't remember what exactly. I'm pretty sure I came up with the = world where everything is in its place (or not in its place in the negative form) on my own though.)

Using hitta's +/- view, an ENTp w/- would "be open to" doomsday possibilities, and draw conclusions as to the proper course of action from them, creating a system that can guide the unfilled needs to pasture.

(Err wait... heh that should be ENFp drawing positive feeling vibes that they can "do something" to make things better, heh. Oh oops, ah discussed the pathological ENTp form instead!)

[Joy]

Si: How things are physically affecting one another

How about: Si: How people/things are physically affecting one another?

Ni: How events precipitate new events (this has always been the hard one, hasn't it?)

The hard one to state simply and yet explain well? Yes.

Si and Ni were particularly difficult in this topic because of the format.

[Logos]

Si: what people/things are doing with each other

That's the most problematic one, I think.

Yeah, that description just sounds...naughty.

[Joy]

Si: physical processes that take place and how they're related to each other
Ni: abstract processes that take place and how they're related to each other

[tcaudilllg]

Si: physical processes that take place and how they're related to each other
Ni: abstract processes that take place and how they're related to each other

OK, those we can work with. Although it's not entirely clear what's meant by "physical" and "abstract".

[Ezra]

Si: physical processes that take place and how they're related to each other
Ni: abstract processes that take place and how they're related to each other

OK, those we can work with. Although it's not entirely clear what's meant by "physical" and "abstract".

I agree. But I think it's fairly obvious what they mean. By physical is meant those which are concrete and related to the body. For a simplistic example, as I am sat here at my laptop, say I felt a pain in my back, and thought 'that is related to the fact that my posture is shit', that is a use Si. It is physical. An example of an abstract process would be, for example, a conspiracy theorist connecting the 9/11 incident (concrete) to the Illuminati (more abstract) to a secret organisation planning onworld domination (very abstract) being controlled by an alien race (pointlessly abstract). Take Ron L. Hubbard and Scientology. Although tainted by Te (he's cited as an LIE), can you imagine a Si leading or secondary coming up with that? No. It's evidently the work of someone who is strong in and who values Ni.