In the ENFp Silly Switch Thread, some interesting points came up. While at the time I could sense a similarity in what was being argued, I couldn't express it. So, I placed it on the mental back burner, trusting my mind to bring it back up when it's ready to express what I had seen.
Some NeFi's made points about Se being their silly switch and/or their aggressive switch. What I saw was that it was the same switch, but the content being expressed was different. Now, I think I understand why the difference.
If Ne allows us to see multiple possibilities, and Fi allows us to evaluate those possibilities, wouldn't it make sense then that Se allows us to assert our own personal evaluations?
If the evaluation turned out negative, then what we assert would be negative.
If the evaluation turned out to be positive, then what we assert would be positive.
This works for the silly switch, the aggressive switch, the meddling switch, as well as the experimenting switch. In each of these,
1. we have an evaluation in mind (good/bad, like/dislike, should/shouldn't, what-if, etc)
2. we "flip the Se role switch"...allowing us to assert the good/bad, like/dislike, should/shouldn't, what-if etc.
3. thus playing the silly, aggressive, meddling, experimenting role.
I believe that SiTe's would also have this switch of asserting their personal evaluations. I wonder, though, if there might perhaps be more thought put into it than an NeFi's assertions.