A very specific question about Si

[guac]

I've been puzzling out Model B on and off for a week or two. From what I understand, we all have +Si, which encompasses things like physical comfort. -Si on the other hand, is about harmony. (veeery generally) Am I wrong?
However, many socionics authors describe IEIs as having a very good sense of harmony and beauty. Wouldn't this be -Si?
What am I getting wrong?

Thanks. Worth noting that my socionics understanding is not super deep yet.

[FreelancePoliceman]

This probably isn't what you're asking for, but I'm skeptical of the usefulness of positive and negative functions -- it's just as easy, if not easier, to explain these sorts of variations by the other function they're blocked with.

It may also be useful to think of the 6 non-ego functions as not really existing in themselves, but as shadows cast into different positions by stretching the mind into the shape of the ego functions. Si is your role function because Ni is your base: things that can for convenience' sake be explained by Si "existing" in a certain function are more probably tied to the nature of Ni, in your case. Socionics is a descriptive model, but impossible to verify; it's gotten a lot of additional theories like Model B to try to refine it, but there are problems taking them too far, as you've seen.

Anyway, Ni in general is good with recognizing harmony and beauty, and I'm sure you'll find plenty of descriptions that describe Ni like this, though I can't be bothered to find them. Many Ni-bases are talented photographers because of their capability for noticing this. They also often tend to speak in ways that I can't follow well about unities and patterns and such things fitting together. Make of that whatever you like.

[guac]

This probably isn't what you're asking for, but I'm skeptical of the usefulness of positive and negative functions -- it's just as easy, if not easier, to explain these sorts of variations by the other function they're blocked with.

It may also be useful to think of the 6 non-ego functions as not really existing in themselves, but as shadows cast into different positions by stretching the mind into the shape of the ego functions. Si is your role function because Ni is your base: things that can for convenience' sake be explained by Si "existing" in a certain function are more probably tied to the nature of Ni, in your case. Socionics is a descriptive model, but impossible to verify; it's gotten a lot of additional theories like Model B to try to refine it, but there are problems taking them too far, as you've seen.

Anyway, Ni in general is good with recognizing harmony and beauty, and I'm sure you'll find plenty of descriptions that describe Ni like this, though I can't be bothered to find them. Many Ni-bases are talented photographers because of their capability for noticing this. They also often tend to speak in ways that I can't follow well about unities and patterns and such things fitting together. Make of that whatever you like.

Yeah, I've been getting more and more skeptical of it..

Very interesting perspective, thanks!!!

[consentingadult]

I'm not convinced about + and - either. Si, as a lead function, ties in with the creative function, thus either Te or Fe. From there we can arrive at what Si is in SLIs and SEIs. For SLIs, Si is about discomfort reduction, for SEIs, it is about comfort creation. A subtle but important difference in attitudes. You can very clearly see the difference in esthetic attitudes between SLIs and SEIs.