Demonstrative Functions

[DirectorAbbie]

Tell me about yours. I'm especially interested in that of introverts, since I view mine as an animal instinct, which wouldn't make sense for an introvert.

[Creepy-male]

I think the demonstrative works in a way subverted by the creative. That's how I understand it, anyway. That's why I try to be diplomatic (Fi) and forgiving (Fe).

[CILi]

I'll be honest. I had to look mine up.

Contrary to type, I wouldn't say I'm all that skilled at , really. Futuristic, sci-fi techno-babble really perks my interest; but history puts me to sleep. I can often see the step-wise process of how things change over time, but it feels very foreign to me. I don't like all that structure with my change. I wanna float around in it, grabbing info and stuff from all over the place.

This quote from WikiSocion really hits home with me, though: "He usually dismisses supernatural claims as being silly, wishful thinking, unless they happen to be related to the very specific religion he feels inclined to believe in..."

That's me to a T. I'm an evangelical Christian, and I'm not really tied down to a single denomination or set of dogma, or whatever. Apart from that, though, all things religion, para-religion, pseudo-religion, or flat-out occult really creep me out (and always have). I'm passionate about my faith and genuinely interested in others' (whatever it may be); but, in that one little sphere for me, Anything Different = Scary. I'm rigid, inflexible, skeptical, detached. I'd never thought of it before from a Socionics perspective; but, long as I can remember, it's always made me reeeally uncomfortable.

I view mine as an animal instinct, which wouldn't make sense for an introvert.

x2

Fill me in.

[717495]

The vibe I got from demonstrative is:

obvious, comes about when needed, unconscious so its nothing that captures interest

[Ezra]

Since I wrote it (on the basis of all the useful socionics sources I could find on Te in the SLE), and since it makes complete sense to me:

SLEs have the ability to pick out information which will help them achieve a goal; they will often refer to well-known facts, statistics and historical examples to back up their claims. Often their own viewpoint will remain standing in the face of a majority opinion, as they know how to formulate a strong argument. SLEs will often question the authenticity or reliability of informational sources, preferring not to use those which are doubtful or which have been proven wrong in the past. They enjoy learning about a wide variety of things, and are motivated by the prospect of rewards and status; they like to prove their authority and skills e.g. through a large amount of academic awards or extra curricular certificates.

SLEs are very practical, hard-working individuals. They know how to utilize their time effectively in order to reach any given goal, and have no problem discerning efficiency and utility from incompetence and uselessness. Nonetheless, they retain a kind of "don't care" attitude when it comes to productivity and effectiveness. They feel that it is a waste of time to sit around and discuss efficiency, and would rather act effectively. SLEs may playfully mock those who they believe are "obsessed" with productivity, efficiency or effective action.

SLEs often assume the role of someone who is always ready to assist people in their practical affairs, even to the point of others' annoyance or offense to the SLE's obtrusiveness (which is simply enthusiasm to the SLE). They enjoy receiving thanks for their services, and take full responsibility for their actions. Their intentions towards others in this area are generally always good.

It's not perfect, but it does make a lot of sense.

[DirectorAbbie]

My demonstrative function is . I've seen ESEs act the same way about it that I do. We can easily get fierce. is often used to protect . Personally, it is easier for me to activate my base function, and for someone else to activate my demonstrative function. They can do this differnt ways. If someone activates their own and I'm in the mood, I may retaliate with my own. If someone attacks my , it'll often activate my . I can also activate it myself, which is probably the only way to get without tagging along.

[FreelancePoliceman]

What I perceive to be Ni is almost a mood that comes over me at certain times. It’s hard for me to explain “feelings” like this, but it’s as if I ordinarily go through life in first-person perspective, and use Ne to anticipate and overcome problems. Conscious use of Ni is more like shifting to a third-person perspective; I stop being able to “navigate” so well, but this comes with a broader perspective, less suited for immediate engagement with the world, but more suited for reflection and analysis of my actions and surroundings. The goal of Ni as I understand it is to continually ask what’s important in a given situation; what should be done. This is how I tend to think at these times.

I think my use of Ni is different from Ni-valuers’ in that I only have the patience to think this way for matters directly relevant and important to me. Ni people can meditate on the symbolism of a painting or an analogy between a fork and the universe for hours. I generally just don’t care about that sort of thing and generally don’t relate to Ni people’s fascination with what usually seem to me pointless comparisons, stories that don’t go anywhere, or speculations about impossibilities.

I wonder if I use Ni “passively” also. I’m good at reading situations quickly. Small details often jump out at me — any hints of what might not be as it appears form a picture in my mind. And I’m good at pre-emptively evading trouble: “reading the wind,” I suppose. This seems different from Ne in that Ne seems to be more of a constructive process, generating many different ideas, while Ni presents itself or feels more like an evaluatory function; just finding “what’s there.”

It’s hard to talk concretely about mental processes, so I apologize if this seems vague. I’d also appreciate it if an Ni person could tell me what they think of this, particularly if they think I’ve gotten Ni all wrong.

[PinKDiGiT18]

My demonstrative is something that requires a stimulus for me to recognize it. It may be others’ use of it, it may be others’ needing it, it may be perception that it’s something of ability for me. I feel outsiders more readily see a person’s demonstrative in the conscious realm than the person themselves. People who have my demonstrative in their ego often intimidate me for some reason, and I’ve concluded that the reason for this is that bringing the demonstrative into the conscious realm makes you a moving target for PoLR darts. I notice I (Fi base) intimidate Fi demonstratives as well, and I could never pinpoint why until now.

[persimmonism]

My demonstrative is something that requires a stimulus for me to recognize it. It may be others’ use of it, it may be others’ needing it, it may be perception that it’s something of ability for me. I feel outsiders more readily see a person’s demonstrative in the conscious realm than the person themselves. People who have my demonstrative in their ego often intimidate me for some reason, andI’ve concluded that the reason for this is that bringing the demonstrative into the conscious realm makes you a moving target for PoLR darts.I notice I (Fi base) intimidate Fi demonstratives as well, and I could never pinpoint why until now.

For me it's because you guys are blind to Fe, but not because you're hopelessly bad at it like Fi PoLRs-- so this really disarms me, sometimes making me feel silly. The bolded, I never thought of as a reason but probably also true.

------

I agree with FP that the demo is definitely used passively. the more conscious it becomes, the more of a hassle it feels..

[The Reality Denialist]

Demonstrative as I listened one LII (cosmologist): totally clear and incredibly obvious while very boring [thinking about gods and stuff].

[persimmonism]

I think my use of Ni is different from Ni-valuers’ in that I only have the patience to think this way for matters directly relevant and important to me. Ni people can meditate on the symbolism of a painting or an analogy between a fork and the universe for hours. I generally just don’t care about that sort of thing and generally don’t relate to Ni people’s fascination with what usually seem to me pointless comparisons, stories that don’t go anywhere, or speculations about impossibilities.

I don't like Ni in a vacuum (pointlessly finding meaning in things). But obviously, what you view as the "pointless" parts of Ni is broader than what I view it as, haha.
As a beta NF I'm strictly interested in Ni applied to F (human) domains. I like finding new ways (hence the best way) to look at things, weaving narratives, almost exclusively when something about it interests or stimulates me emotionally in some way. The more exciting the better. In that case I need to get to the bottom of it. It's also the 4 in me speaking-- I'm hopelessly drawn to the emotionally colorful, for better or for worse.
Hm, I suppose I could meditate on the singular meaning of a painting for a long time--if it strikes a strong emotional chord within me.

Conscious use of Ni is more like shifting to a third-person perspective; I stop being able to “navigate” so well, but this comes with a broader perspective, less suited for immediate engagement with the world, but more suited for reflection and analysis of my actions and surroundings.
[..]
This seems different from Ne in that Ne seems to be more of a constructive process, generating many different ideas, while Ni presents itself or feels more like an evaluatory function; just finding “what’s there.”

Maybe you're also sensing the difference between intuition in the inert versus contact position. I feel the same way about Fi/Fe.

[rose]

The way I see my demo is, if let's say the world is a huge mechanism full of cogs, as focus on a set of cogs.
They are too numerous to count and there are people playing favorites with them, studying them non-stop and rarely ever looking else where. They become experts at a few cogs.
I may take interest in a part of the mechanism, tho it's temporairy. I prefer to step back and look at all I can see.
It's anoying to see how this set of cog is hindering another and knowing there's nothing I can do about it, even more so when the cogs are being cared for and showcased as the better part that must be accepted above all else no matter the problems it causes elsewhere.

[MissDucki]

I kinda view my Fi as a tool when needed. It's more like a detached observation tool that I use and can easily maneuver to create equilibrium when needed. I always appreciate it when I get positive outcomes but it is a tool that I don't prefer to use. I grew up around a lot of Fi users and I have had a lot of closer Fi users as friends so I utilize this tool from time to time. I find that Fi valuers think I am a Fi user at times until they really know me and it really shows that I don't value it. I always look at Fi at a distance.

Another note I have observed with Fi is that I am always looking for the 'bottom line' of ethics in people. Like, what is the line that I should not cross and how can I be flexible enough to avoid it. Once I see it, I see everything else as fair game so to speak. For example, I have a few ethical aspects that I refuse to make definitive judgements about, everything else is fair game and deserves doubt in perspective or a 'live and let live' attitude. Plus, I am decent a being flexible with psychological distance with others.

[Baqer]

I'd consider myself pretty average at Te, capable of it, but not exactly the best. Thing is though is I'm willing to help with it if someone asks, so when I find a person whose Te polr and can't do anything without a specific set of instructions made specifically for them, it's nice to actually feel useful and do whatever it is for them.

[BrainlessSquid]

For whoever it may interest:

I realized recently that I'm really good at persuasion.
I'm also exciting when giving oral presentations.
I'm also good at developing good emotions in others for the best (like when I have to go to job interviews. One of my interviewers said after being hired that she had very good feelings when talking to me).
I can be a very good + "exciting" writer without doing too much effort. Actually it is quite the opposite: the less I think about what I write, the best people respond to it

I'm really good at these things now but I remember when I was younger and it wasn't very evident. I think when I started to understand human nature a little better things started to fit and now it is magical. It's my secret weapon that I rarely use to be honest (like once a week at most)

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I understand how people feel about one another in a deep way, and the connections something has with another. 'Oh you're X, that reminds me of Y' is a Fi thing really and my mind does that sort of thing a lot. I understand when somebody feels repulsed about something, and are trying to use Te to make the repulsion 'objective' but Te and Fi are intricately related and so the deeper feeling behind it is something very Fi.

I don't really value it myself though, because tbh I like when people get over their own feelings about something and learn to see things more truly objective- which is Fe/Ti. It annoys me when somebody is being ultra Fi and are just seeing their connection to something else (or their hatred to it) and not much else... I also will sacrifice my own Fi likeness on something for something else too because I just put other things as a priority. Probably why I don't even have a romantic relationship yet.