Base/Ignoring and Creative/Demonstrative

[Azeroffs]

I've started to look at the relationship between these functions in order to differentiate an element being in the base or creative slot.

The base function is looking for any and all information related to it. It doesn't want anything to limit it, and will purposefully overlook other data in order to maximize it. The ignoring function is often related to information in the base function. The type will take it into consideration and has a strong knowledge base in the area of their ignoring function, and they may even offer advice in it. However, the moment that the information in the ignoring function somehow interferes with the information in the base function, it is dismissed all together.

The creative function is not as strong and not as much of a priority as the base function. Not only that, but the demonstrative function is ingrained into the individual's subconscious, and they are usually not even aware of how much the element affects their actions. The individual doesn't focus on their creative all the time, but when they do, there is always an implicit consideration of the demonstrative. The individual may not have any values related to their demonstrative, but they can't help but be guided by it.

------------

Fe/Fi

With Fe base types, they are entirely focused on the implicit emotional dynamic that exists in peoples actions and interactions. They focus on manipulating or maintaining this in order to create mood that they would like to see. Most often this means upholding a positive, friendly, and fun atmosphere. While doing this they are aware of the bonds they are creating with others, and they enjoy creating these bonds with others. However, if they have to deal with being around people they dislike or if personal boundaries are crossed, they can easily overlook these personal fouls in the name of maintaining an atmosphere. They may even ignore the fact that they dislike someone if they see that person as fun to be around and contributing to interpersonal dynamics, and they will continue to put themselves in a position where they are around the person(i.e. invite them to parties, etc).

Fi base types have the opposite priority. They are very aware of how they feel about others, the implicit relationships that exist between people, and how to maintain, build, or break these relationships. They are skilled at working interpersonal dynamics and have to for the sake of their relationships. However, they refuse to dismiss their personal sentiments in order to maintain a friendly facade, and if pushed hard enough will even break a whole group dynamic because of the way they feel about a particular person and how they're acting. Fi-base types know that interpersonal dynamics don't always reflect what kind of relationship exists, so they will usually ignore them when determining what kind of relationship exists or what they would like to exist.

Fe creatives are like Fe-base in that they focus on interpersonal dynamics. They are aware of how they can change an atmosphere and manipulate emotions. More often than not though, they simply observe the changes going on, and are only occasionally driven to push things into a different direction. They form strong opinions of people and become clearly aware of the implicit relationships that are built and how they are built. When they do act on the interpersonal dynamics going on between people they do so with the consideration of how they feel about individuals involved. For example, they're not likely to act like best friends of people they don't know or dislike. Like Fi-base, they cannot ignore the relationships they have with people or the lack there of. However, they don't emphasize their personal feelings or implicit relationships the way Fi-base does, therefore they are unlikely to overtly ignore people they dislike or cling to people they like.

Fi-creatives focus on implicit relationships just as Fi-base does, but with a lesser priority. They aren't as focused on stable relationships as much as they like to change relationship or establish new ones. When their personal sentiments change, the way they interact with people changes to reflect it. Like Fe-base they are constantly changing the emotional atmosphere, but they tend to let themselves be emotionally free, always expressing their personal feelings. They don't feel the need to control an emotional atmosphere the way Fe-base does. Instead they subconsciously change it on a whim by letting their actions reflect their changing personal sentiments.

---------------

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.

(Thanks to Krig the Viking)

[Beautiful sky]

Great job, also look at how role and base can be interchanged at times, but not sustained for a long time with comfort. For example, if I were to assume Ti responsibilities all the time, I would surely get over stressed.

[Mattie]

The base function is looking for any and all information related to it. It doesn't want anything to limit it, and will purposefully overlook other data in order to maximize it.

As my working understanding of the Leading IME is, the Function composes all information through your leading. It is the lens you can't really escape, everything is filtered through it. Whenever I think of the Leading Function, I remember that scene from A Beautiful Mind where he sees the group of birds and walking people as math equations (or something to this effect), as if the composition of reality, to him, was understood only through mathematics. I don't see the leading IME as active, like not looking for related information, but just translating or fitting all information into its understanding. Because it is so ingrained in us, we take it for granted and don't see it working, we just assume that information is just presented in the composition of our Leading IME.

The ignoring function is often related to information in the base function. The type will take it into consideration and has a strong knowledge base in the area of their ignoring function, and they may even offer advice in it. However, the moment that the information in the ignoring function somehow interferes with the information in the base function, it is dismissed all together.

I think I basically agree with this. I see it as another passive process, the Ignoring IME is understood but rarely recognized because it muddles how things are understood to work through the Leading IME. Because of this, there's something jarring when attention is called to the Ignoring IME, like something has been left out or that something is plausible, but not satisfying. Because it only works tentatively with the Leading IME, it is usually just left out of the picture.

The creative function is not as strong and not as much of a priority as the base function. Not only that, but the demonstrative function is ingrained into the individual's subconscious, and they are usually not even aware of how much the element affects their actions. The individual doesn't focus on their creative all the time, but when they do, there is always an implicit consideration of the demonstrative. The individual may not have any values related to their demonstrative, but they can't help but be guided by it.

I really disagree, as from what I can tell, a type most focuses on their Creative IME; with my experiences in type, I tend to notice the Creative IME in others much before anything else. I think it's because it is the strongest "active" Function, you use it in reaction to the information that you come to understand through your leading IME. The world isn't composed of the creative IE's information, but it is the way things move, change, and are adjusted. It's possible that a type may think in the terms of it's Leading, and do in the terms of it's Creative; a little simple but gets at the idea I'm trying to reach for. I think the second most focus goes to the Mobilizing Function, as that's the IME that fits right along well with the Creative set-up the type already has.

As for the Demonstrative, I can only best describe that as a knee-jerk implementation when the Creative doesn't seem suitable for some reason. It feels awkward to use because you can't normally see why your Creative function would have an issue, but after enough time, this pops up. It feels redundant because it focuses on the Objects/Subjects that the leading and Mobilizing do, but you have a better understanding of how to use it more because it's been in the back of your mind for a long time, rather than proficiently using it often like the Creative. I'd like to work more on my understanding of the Ignoring and Demonstrative Functions, but I haven't gotten there yet.

[Azeroffs]

As my working understanding of the Leading IME is, the Function composes all information through your leading. It is the lens you can't really escape, everything is filtered through it. Whenever I think of the Leading Function, I remember that scene from A Beautiful Mind where he sees the group of birds and walking people as math equations (or something to this effect), as if the composition of reality, to him, was understood only through mathematics. I don't see the leading IME as active, like not looking for related information, but just translating or fitting all information into its understanding. Because it is so ingrained in us, we take it for granted and don't see it working, we just assume that information is just presented in the composition of our Leading IME.


I think I basically agree with this. I see it as another passive process, the Ignoring IME is understood but rarely recognized because it muddles how things are understood to work through the Leading IME. Because of this, there's something jarring when attention is called to the Ignoring IME, like something has been left out or that something is plausible, but not satisfying. Because it only works tentatively with the Leading IME, it is usually just left out of the picture.



I really disagree, as from what I can tell, a type most focuses on their Creative IME; with my experiences in type, I tend to notice the Creative IME in others much before anything else. I think it's because it is the strongest "active" Function, you use it in reaction to the information that you come to understand through your leading IME. The world isn't composed of the creative IE's information, but it is the way things move, change, and are adjusted. It's possible that a type may think in the terms of it's Leading, and do in the terms of it's Creative; a little simple but gets at the idea I'm trying to reach for. I think the second most focus goes to the Mobilizing Function, as that's the IME that fits right along well with the Creative set-up the type already has.

As for the Demonstrative, I can only best describe that as a knee-jerk implementation when the Creative doesn't seem suitable for some reason. It feels awkward to use because you can't normally see why your Creative function would have an issue, but after enough time, this pops up. It feels redundant because it focuses on the Objects/Subjects that the leading and Mobilizing do, but you have a better understanding of how to use it more because it's been in the back of your mind for a long time, rather than proficiently using it often like the Creative. I'd like to work more on my understanding of the Ignoring and Demonstrative Functions, but I haven't gotten there yet.

I think the issue we're having is that I don't view functions as active or inactive in terms of a person 'using' an element. The way I understand it is that people don't use an element. They are aware of it or they are not. People are always aware of their base, and cannot break awareness of it, and so you are most strongly focused on it. You are also strongly aware of your creative, especially when you need to be, but you aren't always focused on it the way you are with your base, so you aren't as strongly focused on it. Do you see the difference in how we approach it? If you can't agree with my approach, then I doubt we will be able to reconcile.

Also, the demonstrative is not 'used' just as other functions are not used. You are just subconsciously drawn to it. You are constantly acting within its context, but you aren't consciously aware of it. So technically you are just as aware of it and deal with it just as much as your base. The difference is that it's happening subconsciously, and so it's not a factor in how you consciously decide to conduct yourself.

[Krig the Viking]

Excellent analysis, Azeroffs! Not only do I think you are correct in your conclusions, but reading them has improved my own understanding, which can't be said for most posts on this forum.

I love few things better than a clear, precise, and accurate analysis of a complex phenomenon.

I think that your descriptions of Fe and Fi are somewhat skewed toward Alpha/Gamma Fe and Fi (-Fe and -Fi), but I think this actually results in a clearer and cleaner description.

I'm very much looking forward to your descriptions of the other elements.

[Azeroffs]

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.

[Krig the Viking]

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...

It's hard to follow up such a strong start. But still, 90% as good as "super-awesome" is still awesome.

Only two more to go!

[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.

[Mattie]

I think the issue we're having is that I don't view functions as active or inactive in terms of a person 'using' an element. The way I understand it is that people don't use an element. They are aware of it or they are not. People are always aware of their base, and cannot break awareness of it, and so you are most strongly focused on it. You are also strongly aware of your creative, especially when you need to be, but you aren't always focused on it the way you are with your base, so you aren't as strongly focused on it. Do you see the difference in how we approach it? If you can't agree with my approach, then I doubt we will be able to reconcile.

Also, the demonstrative is not 'used' just as other functions are not used. You are just subconsciously drawn to it. You are constantly acting within its context, but you aren't consciously aware of it. So technically you are just as aware of it and deal with it just as much as your base. The difference is that it's happening subconsciously, and so it's not a factor in how you consciously decide to conduct yourself.

I guess the point here isn't to flesh this out, as you're looking to just create descriptions from your understanding. So I'll just see what you come up with.

[leckysupport]

You are just subconsciously drawn to it. You are constantly acting within its context, but you aren't consciously aware of it. So technically you are just as aware of it and deal with it just as much as your base. The difference is that it's happening subconsciously, and so it's not a factor in how you consciously decide to conduct yourself.

I agree with this and I believe this issue highlights the problem of typing through thought processes. To be able to say you have the correct thought process you have to confirm it with a number of people of the same type which have the thought process you're focusing on. And how can you be sure that a person recognises their own socionically related thought processes? Mattie.

[Suz]

WOW these are awesome Azeroffs!!! Keep em coming!

p.s. save a copy of these somewhere in case the forum ever goes down or posts get deleted by a virus or something.

[Aiss]

I think the issue we're having is that I don't view functions as active or inactive in terms of a person 'using' an element. The way I understand it is that people don't use an element. They are aware of it or they are not. People are always aware of their base, and cannot break awareness of it, and so you are most strongly focused on it. You are also strongly aware of your creative, especially when you need to be, but you aren't always focused on it the way you are with your base, so you aren't as strongly focused on it. Do you see the difference in how we approach it? If you can't agree with my approach, then I doubt we will be able to reconcile.

Also, the demonstrative is not 'used' just as other functions are not used. You are just subconsciously drawn to it. You are constantly acting within its context, but you aren't consciously aware of it. So technically you are just as aware of it and deal with it just as much as your base. The difference is that it's happening subconsciously, and so it's not a factor in how you consciously decide to conduct yourself.

I couldn't agree more, especially with the emphasized part.

Though awareness of creative function information requires what may be called an 'active' focus, simply because it's not as natural as base - and if we make a distinction between information elements and aspects, 'using' the former becomes more or less equivalent to focusing on the respective information aspect anyway, it's just that terminology suggests associating thinking patterns with elements. That is not to say they don't affect it, but they are not the same nor is the correlation this simple.

[Jarno]

I want to do other elements, but I'll see how you all react to this first.

You have really great threads.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

With Fe base types, they are entirely focused on the implicit emotional dynamic that exists in peoples actions and interactions. They focus on manipulating or maintaining this in order to create mood that they would like to see. Most often this means upholding a positive, friendly, and fun atmosphere. While doing this they are aware of the bonds they are creating with others, and they enjoy creating these bonds with others. However, if they have to deal with being around people they dislike or if personal boundaries are crossed, they can easily overlook these personal fouls in the name of maintaining an atmosphere. They may even ignore the fact that they dislike someone if they see that person as fun to be around and contributing to interpersonal dynamics, and they will continue to put themselves in a position where they are around the person(i.e. invite them to parties, etc).

Fi base types have the opposite priority. They are very aware of how they feel about others, the implicit relationships that exist between people, and how to maintain, build, or break these relationships. They are skilled at working interpersonal dynamics and have to for the sake of their relationships. However, they refuse to dismiss their personal sentiments in order to maintain a friendly facade, and if pushed hard enough will even break a whole group dynamic because of the way they feel about a particular person and how they're acting. Fi-base types know that interpersonal dynamics don't always reflect what kind of relationship exists, so they will usually ignore them when determining what kind of relationship exists or what they would like to exist.

I don't like this, because I just don't feel that our brains are dichotomized in this fashion. I just really think you're using your imagination too much here. I mean, to me everybody is a little bit of both of these things....almost equally. People want close bonds, and they also want to lift up the mood of everybody around them. It's not an either or thing. It's hard to tell even what I myself prefer.

Furthermore, you insinuated that Fe was a 'friendly facade' and that Fi is inherently more 'real' (and thus of course, naturally and organically better than Fe). So you need to describe Fe better. I doubt Fe-types think they're 'putting on a facade' just because they (presumably) like lifting up the spirits of everybody around them. Oh, and- this is even more complicated, because you have to take into consideration where Fe is in the psyche, which to your credit I think you actually did so never mind that last sentence too much (though its just a friendly reminder =p)

[Azeroffs]

I don't like this, because I just don't feel that our brains are dichotomized in this fashion. I just really think you're using your imagination too much here. I mean, to me everybody is a little bit of both of these things....almost equally. People want close bonds, and they also want to lift up the mood of everybody around them. It's not an either or thing. It's hard to tell even what I myself prefer.

I clearly stated that it wasn't either or. Just that when it comes down to it, there is a clear preference for what is emphasized for rational feelers.

Furthermore, you insinuated that Fe was a 'friendly facade' and that Fi is inherently more 'real' (and thus of course, naturally and organically better than Fe). So you need to describe Fe better. I doubt Fe-types think they're 'putting on a facade' just because they (presumably) like lifting up the spirits of everybody around them. Oh, and- this is even more complicated, because you have to take into consideration where Fe is in the psyche, which to your credit I think you actually did so never mind that last sentence too much (though its just a friendly reminder =p)

I said 'friendly facade' to refer to how the individual (Fi-base) will view acting that way. Both Fi and Fe are real, it's just a matter of what you prefer to emphasize. I never mad any insinuations about one being better or worse. Just different. If some people happen to believe that one is somehow better or worse, that's their own value judgment. Also note the difference between Fe-base and Fe-creative. If an Fe-base is absolutely opposed to this, I'll reconsider it.

[Krig the Viking]

Also note the difference between Fe-base and Fe-creative.

Exactly. An IEI such as yourself, BnD, with Demonstrative Fi, is going to think about it more and take it somewhat more seriously than a type with Ignoring Fi, who will be aware of it but consider it much less important than Fe.

Keep in mind, also, that a lot of this occurs on a subconscious level. It's not like people go around thinking to themselves "I really like making people happy, but I don't care about my relationship with them!" It's just a tendency of behaviour that they probably wouldn't even be aware of unless you pointed it out.

[Azeroffs]

Ni/Ne

Ne-base is focused on hidden properties that they see as existing within people and things. They are driven to discover and bring to light the properties which they see as possible. They are motivated by new things because there is so many possible properties which could exist, and that sense of unknown inspires them. They are also clearly aware that certain things are more or less possible than others. They are aware that some things are predictable and that the possibilities aren't truly infinite. However, they don't let this stop them when they cannot be absolutely sure. They must experience for themselves whether or not something is truly possible or not, and they must test them all.

Ni-base is focused on, more than anything, the plausible causal relationships between occurrences and things that they have imagined. These things that they have imagined are more often than not, what they believe will happen in the future or what they remember from the past. They believe that they understand well how things exist when they have never experienced it or come to be certain of it. Because what they have imagined just makes so much sense, it cannot be ignored. They are aware that the world is far more unpredictable than the way they act it is, but they can't ignore the strength of their insight. They are just so certain that things are going to continue the way they seem to be. Part of them knows that things may go differently, but they refuse to act like things could go just any way. They know what's most likely going to happen and there's no point in fighting it.

Ne-creative is also focused on possibilities in the world, but they aren't focused with as much priority or enthusiasm. They don't naively go in directions they 'know' are fruitless, and they don't mind uncovering possibilities by the use of heavy reflection and deep analysis. They have very strong insight into how things likely are, and they use that to their advantage in uncovering new things. However, they refuse to go by hunches alone. They must have some rationale behind why things will go the way they believe or why things exist the way they do. Sometimes they have to come up with highly abstract explanations in order to do so.

Ni-creative are focused on how they believe things to exist or how they believe things will result. They trust their insight a lot when making decisions in the world, but they don't feel so sure that everything in the world is going to go as it seems to be. They have to make things go in the direction they decide. They limit their vision to particular actions. They understand well that the world is full of possibilities and things could go in many different directions. They subconsciously orient themselves around opportunities, and they are confident that they know which actions will take advantage of them. They often put themselves in a position where the possibilities are good for them, and they act with all the possible long-term consequences of the action in mind.

[ashlesha]

Ni is the element i have the most difficulty conceptualizing but the way you described it here and contrasted it with Ne made it really easy to understand.

thanks for all of these.

[ilikesex]

Ni/Ne

Ni-base

They believe that they understand well how things exist when they have never experienced it or come to be certain of it. Because what they have imagined just makes so much sense, it cannot be ignored. They are aware that the world is far more unpredictable than the way they act it is, but they can't ignore the strength of their insight. They are just so certain. Part of them knows that things may go differently, but they refuse to act like things could go just any way. They know what's most likely going to happen and there's no point in fighting it.



Ni-creative

They trust their insight a lot when making decisions in the world, but they don't feel so sure that everything in the world is going to go exactly as they expect. They limit their expectations. They understand well that the world is full of inherent uncertainty and things could go in many different directions, and they subconsciously orient themselves as such, but they are confident that they know which actions will have better results than others. They often put themselves in a position where the possibilities are good for them, and they act with all the possible long-term consequences of the action in mind.

wow.... really?

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Krig the Viking]

Ni-Creatives are very inpatient and their Ni is not at all exploring all the possibilities, like Ni-Base, but rather some quick view of the ensemble.

I think Pied has a point here. Ni-Base uses the information from their other functions (their creative function, mostly) to try to come up with the strongest possible impression of what is going to happen or what is likely to be true. Ni-Creative will get impressions situationally, but these impressions are used to further their Base function's goals. Their subconscious awareness of the hidden potential of things makes them aware that their Ni impressions are not 100% reliable, making them more willing and able to change what they think is going to happen after gaining new information on the potential of things.

[Azeroffs]

This is the first thing I looked at, and this is very wrong, IMO. It's exactly the opposite. Ni-Creative are exactly "bang-bang - this is it!" but the Ni Irrationals are always undecided! If you are right, I'll have to retype all my IXIs as XIEs and the other way around.

I'll have to reword what I said. You're right. I didn't try to make it sound like Ni-bases are the ones full of certainty and Ni-creatives are not.

I understand Ni-base as a someone who has many ideas about the way things are going, and feel sure that things will continue to go that way. The reason why their characteristic uncertainty manifests is that they have little to no foundation for why they think that and they don't feel like they can change the way things are going. They are floating down a one tract river. They may be able to change their position on the river, but they aren't confident that they can really change anything. They ignore possibilities because things are going to go the way they're going to go regardless of anything.

With Ni base, they see a river with many different routes that split and reconnect, and such. They are confident in their ability to change their path with the decisions they make as a result. They are innately aware of all the different ways in which things could go, and don't pretend to know exactly where things are going beyond the way they act. They know what results from their actions, but they don't confidently extend their predictive ability to the world at large.

The types are very confident in the information of the Creative function, they take it as "obvious" and don't have patience about it. It is stripped-down to the hard core and that's what they use - this making sense with what you said about Ne and Ti, IMO, I'll probably check the others, too.
---

I overall agree about what you said about Ti/Ne, this is probably related to your understanding in the fact that Ti Base types tend to create "perfect" systems that work, dismissing some things that just don't fit but are neither clear enough. The problem is that the same things happens with Te. Ni-Creatives are very inpatient and their Ni is not at all exploring all the possibilities, like Ni-Base, but rather some quick view of the ensemble. It is rather strange to understand that the realm of Base covers and overlooks details of other nature (other functions) but to Ni you make this exception - because the problem is that Ni itself is uncertainty! Ni Base is itself the certainty that "we surely overlooked something" - which you won't see in Ni Creative types.

I think that you seem to confuse the "maximization" of the Base function with something that comes from either T/S or Rationality, and this "something" is connected to certainty, something that makes you sure. But the problem is that Internal functions are not about certain but rather what is be beyond the obvious. Or probably another bias: Te is not flexible the same way Ti is not flexible, when overused, they simply work in different manners.

I'm not sure why you got the idea that I think Te-base is more flexible than Ti-base.

I didn't mean that Ni-creatives explore possibilities. They are just aware of them at the same level as Ne-base, just subconsciosly. That awareness orients them around opportunities from which they choose, but they aren't drawn to explore opportunities. Ni-base is the least possibility-oriented intuitive type. They see things as going one way and one way only for the most part.

I disagree that Ni is uncertainty. Ni is the awareness of, most often, the cause-effect relationship of events through time. But mostly just abstract causal events. Ni is unfounded certainty. It's essentially belief.

[Aiss]

Furthermore, you insinuated that Fe was a 'friendly facade' and that Fi is inherently more 'real' (and thus of course, naturally and organically better than Fe).

This seems to be how Fe quite consistently comes off to Fi-types, so it is probably a natural and organic view for a Te-dominant. It's more the result of misinterpretation of each other than anything else, probably.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Suz]

I think Azeroffs is right in an absolute manner, it's not how they come across, but what they actually usually do. And that's about Fe Base.

The problem that I have is that the same thing applies to Fi Base types. And I actually think that this "friendly facade" is more applicable to Fi Base types than Fe Base, where IMO more applicable is "happy-to-see-you" facade.

Agree. Because Fi-egos use Fe towards an Fi purpose.

As an Fi-valuer, I view use of Fi towards an Fe purpose such as would be done by an Fe-ego as highly fake and i have a keen radar for this. However, when this happens I will put on a friendly facade, yes, in the hopes that an Fi-bond can be established. Unless of course the person has done something egregious enough that I wouldn't want to. In which case I avoid and ignore.

So yes PP, I believe you to be correct in this observation.

p.s. awesome sig!!

[Creepy-]

.

[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.