Originally Posted by
niffer
I disagree. It *must* be both, at least to some minor degree, and especially in this case of them being from the same domain (sensing). You cannot technically have an IE as completely standalone as it is expressed with the cognition of a person, as all 8 IEs are necessary for IM/type and can and are being accessed, correct? You can have different ideas generally associated with and specific to each IE as you theoretically define them but when it comes to isolating which single IE is being used in practice from an activity being carried out it's negligible on whether that can be done; it must be more casual and blurry than that. In the bigger picture there may be one IE that's being used more compared to the other IEs (e.g. mostly Ne is being used with analogy or associated with making and understanding analogies, or mostly logical functions are used when doing mathematical calculations), but technically not only one in many cases with many activities, especially not when looking at the even bigger picture. Your brain is actively using many different parts of it, both introverted and extroverted cognition, all the time. It is not simple.
I do however, agree with you that there is merit in trying to define the IEs more in the sense of trying define which IEs are involved in which specific aspects of carrying out certain activities, and how. E.g. even saying that Ne is "analogy" is only true in a broad sense too, since without some degree of Ni usage the analogy would probably be off-base.
Reply With Quote