A visual example of Si, Se, Ne and Ni

[photon]

Because you need the complete object/pattern in order to identify it.

The way I see it the IEs are different ways of perceiving then processing a certain type of information. The functions don't need to work together in a pattern to recognise the object? For example:
Money is a means of enrichment.
Money is stamped paper notes of certain value.

The first statement is Se, the second is Te. They are both different ways of a perceiving the object. This is relevant to your example of the car as well.

We know that LSE and SLI are focused on facts, so it makes sense that Si is about identification/recognition of objects.

That doesn't make sense...Why not just use the actual definition of Si?

This is very typical of SLI (SiTe), but not SLE.

I was deliberately giving an example of Si (and unintentionally Te maybe), so indeed it's not SLE.

I am not claiming that Ne is "recognising the object's potential". Instead, Ne directs attention to a potential object (i.e. hidden object) that is relevant to another object (or a "scene" ... for example, a park could be an object)
-----
EDIT: "recognising the object's potential" ... This is a possible interpretation as well. But it is still not about identification... Ne directs attention to a potential object (or an object's potential). "Extroverted" functions are about motivated interactions.

Identification? Why does it have to be about identifying objects?
That seems correct, I don't disagree with that.

I don't think the functions are objective. Btw, what exactly do you mean by 'objective'? Furthermore, I am not sure Si and Ne are the complete opposite.

Objective is focusing on the information of the single object only, without being influenced by a personal attitude towards the object or it's relations. Hard to explain, but subjective functions in comparison focus on the relations between objects. Hence why Te is often about manufacturing, methods and procedures while Ti creates systems and classifications, perhaps like you are doing now.

Why aren't Si and Ne the opposite? They're both irrational elements but it's sensing/intuition and objective/subjective which are opposites.

[Petter]

The way I see it the IEs are different ways of perceiving then processing a certain type of information. The functions don't need to work together in a pattern to recognise the object? For example:

Money is a means of enrichment.
Money is stamped paper notes of certain value.

The first statement is Se, the second is Te. They are both different ways of a perceiving the object. This is relevant to your example of the car as well.

I am not claiming that the functions must work in a pattern to recognize the object. Si itself is about pattern recognition, and an object is a specific pattern.

That doesn't make sense...Why not just use the actual definition of Si?

Why do you think it doesn't make sense?

What definition are you referring to?

I was deliberately giving an example of Si (and unintentionally Te maybe), so indeed it's not SLE.

My point is that SLI is indeed sensitive about those things you mentioned, and SLE is not. So it makes sense that Si actually is related to them.

"Any sensor type will focus on the details of the car - the colour is red, it takes up a lot of space, surface looks shiny, textures etc. Si specifically would be the focus on comfort, how the seating feels for example. When you just the car seat's distance to the wheel, or you go in the car seat and feel your legs are too close/far from the pedals, you're using Si. "

Identification? Why does it have to be about identifying objects?

That seems correct, I don't disagree with that.

Because we need at least one cognitive function that identifies objects. "Is this a poisonous plant or is it edible?"

Objective is focusing on the information of the single object only, without being influenced by a personal attitude towards the object or it's relations. Hard to explain, but subjective functions in comparison focus on the relations between objects. Hence why Te is often about manufacturing, methods and procedures while Ti creates systems and classifications, perhaps like you are doing now.

Okay, so you think Socionics object vs. field (i.e. relations between objects) is accurate.

"Se: perception of the appearance and shape of an object
(outward traits of objects: form, shape, strength, power, readiness, willpower, mobilization, the location of objects in space)

Si: perception of the internal situation of an object
(tangible connections between processes happening in one place and time: how events affect one's inner state; sensations, what one experiences physically)"

One obvious problem here is that form and shape etc. are also sensations. They are visual sensations. EDIT: All sensations are equally subjective. (We don't know the true nature of reality ...which is a classic problem in philosophy).

Why aren't Si and Ne the opposite? They're both irrational elements but it's sensing/intuition and objective/subjective which are opposites.

If the usual descriptions of the functions (Jung, mbti, Aushra...) are accurate, then Si and Ne are opposite. But I don't think those descriptions are accurate.