Base/Ignoring and Creative/Demonstrative

[mfckr]

Hmm. The description sounds way over the top. Too much emphasis on supposed "novelty-seeking" and all of that; this is not type related.

As far as goes, um…*going with Aiss here that -ba is characterized by uncertainty; especially in + types. I think this can apply equally to -cr too in ENTjs, though it may be a subtype issue as well.

Personally I accept uncertainty and incompleteness of information as a given feature of life itself. Mises (INTp) sums this up pretty well:

“One of the fundamental conditions of mans existence and action is the fact that he does not know what will happen in the future.”

When I look outwards, everything is permeated by a haze of probability. And I make something of an uneasy peace to forge ahead in the face of that. Nothing is ever a 100% sure thing. But normally this is okay, and just something that remains in peripheral awareness, leaving me free to act on the exigencies of the moment without hesitation. Under stress though, it becomes too omnipresent. The mind swarms in every direction with myriad possibilities of what to do, what is known or unknown, what could go right or wrong, how it might play out, what the ensuing reaction chain of consequences may be… it's too much information, and paralyzes one into a gridlocked coma of indecision and hence inaction. Times like that I try to remember, "when you don't know what to do—act." Don't have to know exactly what direction to go or what's going to happen. Just do something, anything at all. Which isn't necessarily easy, but ultimately it's the only thing I know which breaks that cycle. And underscoring what Aiss said, I don't find myself uncertain about my ability to impact; it's more being uncertain of where to go with it and/or what the indirect effects of my actions may be (which I also see as related to weak/repressed ethical functions).

Some of this is probably relevant of disintegrating to E5 too, but hopefully sheds light on something about the (/) experience.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-]

.

[Azeroffs]

Aiss, Ashton, and PP

You all make good points. I'll see if I can take what you said into consideration for a new description of the Ni-types.

Hmm. The description sounds way over the top. Too much emphasis on supposed "novelty-seeking" and all of that; this is not type related.

What does Ne-base mean to you?

I had the occasion to see the interaction between an ILI and an LIE at a previous workplace. He (LIE) was talking almost exclusively about what will work and she (ILI) about what won't work. Often the LIE was hiding problems that he acknowledged while the ILI was always pointing them out! He was confident that these problems will certainly be solved "somehow" when the time comes and he used to dismiss me and that girl (who had also technical skills) with "let's move on and we'll see then".
The confidence of this LIE was based on the fact - which I acknowledge - that most of the times, the solutions are found along the way, so he could not see all the possibilities like the ILI, but he trusted that there are always ways out. The ILI used to point out things like "but couldn't we rather do <this way>?" and often after she was explaining why - the advantages of her alternative approach and the disadvantages of the established one - her ideas were changing the plans.

The bold made me lol. I totally relate to that. "It'll be fiiiiiinne. "

[Beautiful sky]

The other elements aren't going to be as clear as Fe and Fi. I'll try doing Te/Ti next, but the relationship isn't as clear to me and people seem to be reluctant to make many solid conclusions about them. Also, I'll have to get over some of my own biases. But here we go...


Te/Ti

Te-base are focused on particular cause and effect processes in the external environment. They know well how to manipulate things and make them work the way they want them to. They have a strong orientation toward tasks as they are drawn to produce beneficial results from their actions. As they are involved with these external processes they find general patterns and rules that can be concluded from the world. They can build a pretty strong knowledge base in this way. A potentially infinite number of conclusions can be drawn from the facts derived from the external world. Te-base are skilled in these comparisons and logical conclusion building, but they have a need to consult reality. If a structure becomes too far removed from reality, they become uninterested because it doesn't help them interact with the world and distrustful of it's accuracy even if it is logically valid. They may be reluctant to jump to conclusions even when it makes logical sense. If there's no external basis, it should be questioned.

Ti-base is focused very heavily on their thoughts. They know the thinking process most intimately, and have an innate understanding of how logic works. They are very aware of the logical connections that build up valid conclusions. They are well aware of the workings of the world and often refer to it in order to get more information from which more conclusions can be built. They feel little need to interact with the world though. They can much more easily learn about reality through reflection and conclusion building. They have a hard time denying logical structures because of exceptions to the rules. Just because there are slight exceptions doesn't mean the conclusion is completely incorrect. Often they will just reclassify the exception in order to explain why it was an outlier. Unless enough external evidence is shown to prove something to be incorrect, they won't let go of guidelines that represent how reality is at least most of the time.

Te-Creative are focused on causal functioning of the world. But, they spend less time directly involved with the world unlike Te-base. They spend more time observing the processes taking place and they begin to build an understanding of how it works. They become aware of elaborate explanations for the world they observe. When they do interact with their environment they are guided by how they understand what they are interacting with. However, they know the limitations of logical analysis and will quickly let go of explanations which they cannot rely on when interacting with the world.

Ti-Creative are focused on how they understand the world. They build and deconstruct understandings very often and quickly. They like the exercise of discovering new ways of explaining the world, but they are not concerned with maintaining all-encompassing systems the way Ti-base is. They need to stay in contact with external world in order to find new ways of understanding it. They find themselves deriving new patterns and ideas from processes occurring in the world, and this is because they are subconsciously noting all the ways in which the world functions. They don't feel the need to control the functions of the world the way Te-base does though.



I'm not as crazy about these descriptions.

nice, but Te base also concentrate on method and want to see the actual methods of others to evaluate the efficiency of the method in a given task. They evaluate things in terms of how well the subject performs and give countless criticism of how these tasks can be performed better. Ti doesn't care about evaluating how people perform their tasks or the quality of those tasks performed instead valuing how others prioritize things.

If you want to know if someones Te or Ti, wait for them to criticize your performance on a task.

[Brilliand]

If you want to know if someones Te or Ti, wait for them to criticize your performance on a task.

How do you identify a Ti person using this method?

(You would never know for sure that they were never going to do it - Halting problem)

[Azeroffs]

Ni-base is focused on the cause-effect relationship between events that occur and what meaning it may have. Often, it is in terms of what the occurrence means for the future or what may mean about the past. "What caused this and what effect will it have?" They are able to identify hidden intentions and future consequences better than any other type. They are also aware of the potential contained within new opportunities, situations, people, and other things, but this does not interest them if there isn't anything giving them the feeling that things are already heading in a certain direction, what something could become and what something is capable of is meaningless. They are mostly concerned only with what is going to happen and what actually exists as far as what seems likely.

Ni-creative is also focused on the implicit cause-effect relationship of events, but they are less concerned about observing these changes and determining all the causes and effects of events. Instead, they consider them only when deciding what the best ways of making changes or taking action are. They are also heavily oriented around potential they perceive in the world. They are driven towards bigger and better things and will take advantage of opportunities for change when they see it, but they don't require novelty. If things already seem to be going in a good direction, they are unlikely to deviate.

[Azeroffs]

So, real life is a bitch..long story short..

anyway.. here's my S descripts... I just wanted to get them out so I could finish this.

I'm still looking for feedback on my N descripts. Any feedback is appreciated.


Se-base are focused mostly on how the world appears through their senses. Their natural state is to take things for as exactly as they see it. They tend to be drawn to interact directly with their environment and make an impact on it. While being involved with the environment, the Se-base is aware of how the environment evolves. Se-base isn't concerned with the sensual experiences of the environment when it limits him however. There is little that can stop Se-bases determination. They tend to disregard physical limitations whether their own or ones that seem to be apparent around them. Despite taking things for what they are, they have a tendency to believe that they can change it no matter how it seems.

Si-base are focused mostly on the entirety of their sensual experience. They notice many of the most specific changes in their environment and how it affects them and others. While Si-base often do make a point to manipulate the environment as they see fit, it isn't always necessary. They usually prefer to experience an unaltered and naturally free-flowing environment. They can usually pull a good experience out of any situation, and rarely need to impose upon it. Imposing on the environment just unnecessarily disturbs the experience they are so focused on.

Se-creatives are also focused on the environment as it appears. They are not as driven to make an impact the way Se-base does however. They impose structure onto the environment and maintain a certain code of conduct , but they prefer to maintain an environment instead of constantly influencing it. They are very sensitive to the details of the changing environment, but they use this awareness to know when things have stepped out of bounds so that they know when they need to intervene, and they don't allow the free-flow the way Si-base does.

Si-creatives are focused on their sensual experience in the same way as Si-base. They are not as focused on just experiencing it the way Si-base is though. They use their detailed experience as a measure for how they can affect the environment. They are often perfectionistic in the way they do things. They are subconsciously oriented on the immediate environment, and so they are usually driven to make impacts on it but not for the sake of an impact. They want to accomplish specific endeavors on the details of their present situation when they act.

[anndelise]

Se-base are focused mostly on how the world appears through their senses. Their natural state is to accept things as exactly as they see it. They tend to be drawn to interact directly with their environment and make an impact on it. While being involved with the environment, the Se-base is aware of how the environment evolves. Se-base isn't concerned with the sensual experiences of the environment when it limits him however. There is little that can stop Se-bases determination. They tend to disregard physical limitations whether their own or ones that seem to be apparent around them.

...[]...

Se-creatives are also focused on the environment as it appears. They are not as driven to make an impact the way Se-base does however. They impose structure onto the environment and maintain a certain code of conduct , but they prefer to maintain an environment instead of constantly changing it. They are very sensitive to the details of the changing environment, but they use this awareness to know when things have stepped out of bounds so that they know when they need to intervene, and they don't allow the free-flow the way Si-base does..

...[]...

The first statement says that Se ACCEPTS things as exactly as they see it.
then it goes on to say
EXCEPT when it limits them
They'll DISREGARD limitations that seem apparent
They are driven to make an IMPACT

Disregarding some things or trying to change things isn't quite 'accepting things as exactly as they see it'.

They may be unaware of limitations, but unawareness doesn't mean disregards.
Being driven to make an impact suggests that one wants to change things (even if it's other people's perceptions) in some way. Which isn't quite acceptance.

I'm sure it's just me, but something about the wording for Se distracted me enough that nothing about Si sunk in.

[Blaze]

i agree with other users, these descriptions really are excellent. they give implicit explanation of the following two relations quite well:

the interaction between the base and ignoring explains why our activity partners can do no wrong....basically we ignore their polr....so we see absolutely nothing wrong with them. in a way there is more evaluation and judgment of our duals than of our activity partners, since the polr of our dual is our demonstrative.

also it makes sense why comparative relations can be so difficult. the creative function trumps the other person's polr so flexibly and completely. and the demonstrative function fills the other person's hidden agenda pretty well, so in a sense comparative partners really are able to hold one another at bay quite well. but it's quite a frustrating relationship as a result, even if the leading functions dovetail nicely. i find the enfp's use of Fe to be a draw, yet at the same time, the way they manipulate relations is so slippery and fast, it's a push away. then there's the Ne connection, which is also a draw. this relation seems to be very complex as a result.

[Beautiful sky]

I agree with you Blaze, and it's an excellent thread...I'm bookmarking it.

[Azeroffs]

The first statement says that Se ACCEPTS things as exactly as they see it.
then it goes on to say
EXCEPT when it limits them
They'll DISREGARD limitations that seem apparent
They are driven to make an IMPACT

Disregarding some things or trying to change things isn't quite 'accepting things as exactly as they see it'.

They may be unaware of limitations, but unawareness doesn't mean disregards.
Being driven to make an impact suggests that one wants to change things (even if it's other people's perceptions) in some way. Which isn't quite acceptance.

I'm sure it's just me, but something about the wording for Se distracted me enough that nothing about Si sunk in.

You're right. I guess what I mean is that despite taking things for what they are, they tend to believe that they can change it no matter how it seems. When I say 'accept', I mean that's how they perceive it, and not what they decide to do with it.


I disagree that Se-base aren't aware of limitations. I do think that they disregard them.

[Beautiful sky]

I disagree that Se-base aren't aware of limitations. I do think that they disregard them.

Would you please offer an example of this?

[Azeroffs]

Would you please offer an example of this?

well, I don't have a real example, but Se-base are very willful individuals. Even if they weren't aware of limitations, if it were pointed out to them, more often than not, they would disregard it.

I'll draw you a picture..
Imagine an Se-base on a football field who gets injured, not too seriously, but bad enough to deal with some heavy pain. The way I understand Se-base is that they would tough out the injury even with the risk of further injury to accomplish what he wants to accomplish on the field. I think he would be quite aware of how that injury will affect him and what limitations it would put on him, but would still try to push those limitations.


Personally, I would probably blow the injury out of proportion and think it is worse than what it is. I tend to blow even the smallest injuries out of proportion. I think they may be more serious that what I can tell. However, if someone tells me it's fine I can easily ignore it.

[Beautiful sky]

well, I don't have an example, but Se-base are very willful individuals. Even if they weren't aware of limitations, if it were pointed out to them, more often than not, they would disregard it.

I'll draw you a picture..
Imagine an Se-base on a football field who gets injured, not too seriously, but bad enough to deal with some heavy pain. The way I understand Se-base is that they would tough out the injury even with the risk of further injury to accomplish what he wants to accomplish on the field. I think he would be quite aware of how that injury will affect him and what limitations it would put on him, but would still try to push those limitations.

I agree with the first part, but the second, I have not observed. They stick hard and fast to an idea that even in the scope of things don't make any sense or change things significantly for them. I have seen Se types and in my personal experience, they trump on my functions because they do such a good job of not hearing, listening, agreeing, and changing their decision of accommodate the new information...I think this has to do with undervalued Ne. Would you agree?

[anndelise]

well, I don't have a real example, but Se-base are very willful individuals. Even if they weren't aware of limitations, if it were pointed out to them, more often than not, they would disregard it.

I'll draw you a picture..
Imagine an Se-base on a football field who gets injured, not too seriously, but bad enough to deal with some heavy pain. The way I understand Se-base is that they would tough out the injury even with the risk of further injury to accomplish what he wants to accomplish on the field. I think he would be quite aware of how that injury will affect him and what limitations it would put on him, but would still try to push those limitations.

I don't think they would disregard the limitations, but would instead want to know (or figure out) how they can get around those limitations.

As for the football player example, he'd likely limp a bit as a way of trying to get around the limitation of a painful injury. And don't forget the Ignoring Si coming into effect on that example. Would you have an example which didn't involve Ignoring Si?

The Se base that I've known (father, daughter, oldest brother, and a small handful of old friends), it wasn't that they ignored limitations or consequences, it's that they weren't usually initially aware of them. When they succeeded in an endeavor, it was usually after someone had a) pointed out a possible obstacle or negative consequence, b) learned how to look for those themselves, and c) found ways around them. The most effective ways around usually involved them receiving Ni of some kind.

[anndelise]

I agree with the first part, but the second, I have not observed. They stick hard and fast to an idea that even in the scope of things don't make any sense or change things significantly for them. I have seen Se types and in my personal experience, they trump on my functions because they do such a good job of not hearing, listening, agreeing, and changing their decision of accommodate the new information...I think this has to do with undervalued Ne. Would you agree?

This would usually be because the information you're supplying them isn't what they wanted/needed. Telling them to open their minds and think of other possibilities doesn't solve a problem, it just introduces new ones. So yeah, rather useless for them.

But if you offered solutions, instead of more problems, then they might at least consider the information you provide.

[Azeroffs]

I don't think they would disregard the limitations, but would instead want to know (or figure out) how they can get around those limitations.

As for the football player example, he'd likely limp a bit as a way of trying to get around the limitation of a painful injury. And don't forget the Ignoring Si coming into effect on that example. Would you have an example which didn't involve Ignoring Si?

The Se base that I've known (father, daughter, oldest brother, and a small handful of old friends), it wasn't that they ignored limitations or consequences, it's that they weren't usually initially aware of them. When they succeeded in an endeavor, it was usually after someone had a) pointed out a possible obstacle or negative consequence, b) learned how to look for those themselves, and c) found ways around them. The most effective ways around usually involved them receiving Ni of some kind.

The point I'm trying to make is through describing Si-ignoring. I agree that Se-types and Se-base especially are less aware of consequences. But, as I'm defining it, consequences and limitations are two different thing. I specifically said/meant physical limitations.

[Azeroffs]

Sounds more like EJs in general (esp. of the neurotic variety). You guys talk too much shit about = "will power" etc.

I think there's some overlap between EJ and Se, but the source of the will power is different. EJ are willful in that they know what they're doing and their unwilling to shake the course they've laid for themselves. So will power is in terms of endurance, focus, and being undaunted.

Se-base are willful in that they make quick confident decisions that are often perceived to be obvious and are driven to shake things up or get things moving. So, Se-base are just willful for the sake of it. Se-base just wants to see something happen especially if its them making it happen. They just like to exert their will.

[Azeroffs]

I'd like to see IE descriptions not done in terms of universally shared human qualities. I'd rather see them depicted in terms of what properties are uniquely exclusive to each.

Well I'm trying to focus on the influence part of Se and partially the exertion of will. I think that's the main characteristic, but it's hard to give real manifestations that encompass all representatives of a type without covering traits which could exist in other types. I don't think EJs are willful in that they aim to exert their will as I said, and I don't think they disregard limitations. Rather they either work within the sphere of certain limitations or they are unaware of them.

EJs do things according to what seems to be the best way to do it. EPs are more open ended. More act now and think later than any other type.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

You're right. I guess what I mean is that despite taking things for what they are, they tend to believe that they can change it no matter how it seems. When I say 'accept', I mean that's how they perceive it, and not what they decide to do with it.

"Taking things at face value" would be another way to phrase it.

I've been looking for information on , and this has been quite interesting; it helps me see how I utilize that element without actively valuing it.

Edit: *looks at previous posts's date* Wow, this is a necro-post. (o.O ) So Azeroffs, anything you might add or change now?

[redbaron]

I love this thread!

[squark]

bump

[squark]

I don't have any comments on the Fi/Fe section, but thought the Ti/Te section quite good. In later posts Ni/Ne and Si/Se are described but those aren't quite as good imo. Anyway, useful info overall.

[Myst]

I read these, hmm. I quite like the Fe/Fi stuff and some of the Ni/Ne stuff.

With the Ti/Te and Si/Se parts, I'm going to show how it applies to me, as a datapoint. I'll bold what I strongly relate to. Red is totally off. Rest is okayish/neutral/half-fitting. And I'll add my own summary on how I relate. The parts on how I personally relate are not criticism, that's simply additional datapoints.

Te/Ti

Te-base are focused on particular cause and effect processes in the external environment. They know well how to manipulate things and make them work the way they want them to. They have a strong orientation toward tasks as they are drawn to produce beneficial results from their actions. As they are involved with these external processes they find general patterns and rules that can be concluded from the world. They can build a pretty strong knowledge base in this way. A potentially infinite number of conclusions can be drawn from the facts derived from the external world. Te-base are skilled in these comparisons and logical conclusion building, but they have a need to consult reality. If a structure becomes too far removed from reality, they become uninterested because it doesn't help them interact with the world and distrustful of it's accuracy even if it is logically valid. They may be reluctant to jump to conclusions even when it makes logical sense. If there's no external basis, it should be questioned.

Ti-base is focused very heavily on what does and does not make sense. They are always aware of whether things fit together logically or not, and they are skilled at following a logical train of thought and coming to a logically accurate conclusion. They are well aware of the practical workings of the world and often refer to it in order to get more information from which more conclusions can be built. They feel little need to interact with the world though. They can much more easily learn about reality through reflection and conclusion building. They can be prone to dismissing evidence that contradicts their logical conclusions, because there are always exceptions to the rules. Often they will try to reclassify the contradictory fact in order to explain why it was an outlier. Unless enough external evidence is shown to prove something to be incorrect, they won't let go of guidelines that represent how reality is at least most of the time, and even then they prefer to understand the logical reason they were wrong before accepting the evidence.

Te-Creative are focused on causal functioning of the world. But, they spend less time directly involved with the world unlike Te-base. They spend more time observing the processes taking place and they begin to build an understanding of how it works. They also become aware of the various explanations behind why the world is the way it is. When they do interact with their environment they are guided by how they understand what they are interacting with. However, they know the limitations of logical analysis and will quickly let go of explanations which they cannot rely on when interacting with the world. For them, evidence always trumps explanations.

Ti-Creative are focused on how they understand the world. They build and deconstruct understandings very often and quickly. They like the exercise of discovering new ways of explaining the world, but they are not concerned with maintaining all-encompassing systems the way Ti-base is. While they enjoy coming up with new insights into why the world is the way it is, they are also always aware of the empirical evidence of how the world actually works, and take note when their explanations are not supported by facts. Contrary evidence causes them to question their logical analysis sooner than Ti-base, and they will freely adopt new explanations if they can find them. They find themselves deriving new patterns and ideas from processes occurring in the world, and this is because they are continually subconsciously taking note of all the ways in which the world functions. However, they are aware that there is more to the world than just the observable workings of it, and consequently they feel free to follow logical trains of thought beyond what fact and evidence can prove.

(Note: "external basis" that I partially bolded for me includes my own mental facts. That is, my own observations of my internal life.)

Hmm so on the whole... I do like to base my thinking in facts and concrete evidence like any Logical type will (and also task oriented like any Logical type is). This text didn't focus very well on how Ti and Te differ there. It reiterates never very well explained ideas on how Ti is supposed to go beyond what fact and evidence can prove and how Te treats facts and evidence as a purely external basis.

Ti base description is way too introverted for me personally with the idea of feeling little need to interact with the world. I'm far less constantly reflective than this, I'm more like, I think in bits "on the move", when I do something or when I talk to someone or I read up on something. That is, my active thinking is only "bits on the move", though it's always there, ready to start up for processing new information, with me switching between this and the -part spatial, part other sensory- awareness of my external surroundings, so essentially both processes will be running nicely, the thinking and the awareness of the environment. Otoh, hard to imagine for me how Te base learns about the world directly just by interacting with it... that part is alien to me (I understand it theoretically only). My "bits on the move" are reflective, removed from the object being analyzed, they are just short because of maintaining the "awareness of space" process too. But I do like my thinking to help me with interacting with the world in terms of achieving my goals or do something for other people's good, too. Parsing for too long -without any pause- the too removed (Intuitive) structures for me does make me feel I become too much inside my head, losing even the basic awareness of the environment and I really dislike that disconnect from it. Also, this is related to how far my train of thought will go from what my observations can support. I have the strong need to anchor my concepts to my observations in tangible reality, either directly or indirectly through a longer chain of logical reasoning where all the steps still have to be logically distinct. If I don't have at least the latter way of anchoring then concepts will feel too abstract and too "deep in the head" mentally again. Sometimes it can be nice to find new insights that way though, I guess.

A note on my two processes running together as above. This now is going to be a loose analogy with how the right brain hemisphere is supposedly more holistic and the left hemisphere is supposedly more analytical with spatial awareness being more based in the right hemisphere. So well for me it's like both approaches are working "at the same time" (by pretending to multitask by switching), the more "holistic" process (that is, not requiring much analysis) with the spatial awareness of the surroundings and awareness of certain quantifiable qualities/aspects derived from or linked to the spatial awareness or at least being a similarly holistic approach, along with the reflective "bits on the move" kind of analysis that's more analytical and not holistic. Though, I can make myself switch to the latter process fully for certain tasks and I can maintain it all day if I need to but the holistic side I think (besides a very very basic awareness of the surroundings being maintained) will still support it in the background as a great base for "feeling" some of those quantifiable aspects that can be numerical or even abstract conceptual.


OK now the S parts:

Se-base are focused mostly on how the world appears through their senses. Their natural state is to take things for as exactly as they see it. They tend to be drawn to interact directly with their environment and make an impact on it. While being involved with the environment, the Se-base is aware of how the environment evolves. Se-base isn't concerned with the sensual experiences of the environment when it limits him however. There is little that can stop Se-bases determination. They tend to disregard physical limitations whether their own or ones that seem to be apparent around them. Despite taking things for what they are, they have a tendency to believe that they can change it no matter how it seems.

Si-base are focused mostly on the entirety of their sensual experience. They notice many of the most specific changes in their environment and how it affects them and others. While Si-base often do make a point to manipulate the environment as they see fit, it isn't always necessary. They usually prefer to experience an unaltered and naturally free-flowing environment. They can usually pull a good experience out of any situation, and rarely need to impose upon it. Imposing on the environment just unnecessarily disturbs the experience they are so focused on.

Se-creatives are also focused on the environment as it appears. They are not as driven to make an impact the way Se-base does however. They impose structure onto the environment and maintain a certain code of conduct, but they prefer to maintain an environment instead of constantly influencing it. They are very sensitive to the details of the changing environment, but they use this awareness to know when things have stepped out of bounds so that they know when they need to intervene, and they don't allow the free-flow the way Si-base does.

Si-creatives are focused on their sensual experience in the same way as Si-base. They are not as focused on just experiencing it the way Si-base is though. They use their detailed experience as a measure for how they can affect the environment. They are often perfectionistic in the way they do things. They are subconsciously oriented on the immediate environment, and so they are usually driven to make impacts on it but not for the sake of an impact. They want to accomplish specific endeavors on the details of their present situation when they act.

OK, well that was ok, I related quite well to the Se creative stuff here. Best fitting of all four Se/Si descriptions for me. I would say the disregard for physical limitations (mentioned for Se base) for me is a more complex issue... I'm driven so I will push the limits a lot and I easily disregard my personal comfort in favour of imposing my structure, but it sometimes feels like a never-ending fight beween the limits pushing and limits wanting to assert themselves. It's not actually never-ending, lol, it only lasts for a short time before I finally end up managing to disregard the limits and forgetting about them neatly (pushing them out of my consciousness). And my life philosophy is strongly based on how I think where people think there are physical limits, they can be stretched actually quite surprisingly far. You have to only want your goal, truly strongly desire it and go for it and most limits don't actually exist as hard limits because you can push and stretch them skillfully (my view, but you can do it un-skillfully too if that's your only option lol, Si PoLRs!). I do grudgingly admit that some hard physical limits do exist somewhere but they exist very very far and you have a lot of leeway to move with.