Well ya, he did the first one first. Then he took all the data he had and tried to use it to figure out what Si is.Originally Posted by Poptart
Yes
No
Well ya, he did the first one first. Then he took all the data he had and tried to use it to figure out what Si is.
O BS stands for Si. Why? great question idk
BS (БС) belaya sensorika (белая сенсорика) - white sensorics
i wonder if si lead is more likely to vacillate in its views... i feel like i have so many views that aren't pinpointed, but swing back and forth, as though they cannot center... thoughts like "maybe i'm wrong," "well if i think of it that way," "i can see it this other way," "maybe it's actually that," like this mb blind flexibility. at each presentation of the view it is said with a sort of "certainty" for the sake of the point i guess but it is actually not certain, and it is ready and able to move, and may have a circuit along which it moves... ofc it also depends what kinds of views, i guess i was thinking like ideologically, about one's preferences, one's feelings about others, how forgiving/understanding one is regarding something...
mb it's also that then at every point in time whatever is currently happening, the views can be best oriented to that situation, but in the meantime it feels lost.
but also i guess no matter what they are they feel wrong... it's like this entire way of consciousness is wrong... it's not the views, it's the entire thing.
Last edited by marooned; 07-22-2021 at 08:29 PM.
I relate to this description. My beliefs really depend on an external source and I feel like I need that external source near me physically, say a Bible in my possession, to feel a connection to those beliefs because otherwise, my beliefs are very malleable depending on my environment and subsequent psychological state and I'm prone to confusion on what my true beliefs are. This is in part why I find socionics frustrating because it seems based more on beliefs that are not clearly defined nor tangible while lacking consensus so I never feel certain on my own type.
While I struggle to find some certainty on what I believe, I am rarely prone to doubt of what I feel. I'm acutely aware of my sensations to the point I have to detach myself a little from them so that I'm not overwhelmed by them.
A lot of what I do to try to feel happy has to do with evoking a certain internal state which I try to evoke via my senses. It could be through caffeine, tobacco, petting a cat, lighting incense, playing a certain style of music. However, my impressions are much more detailed. If I want coffee, I consider what kind of coffee I should get that fits into my budget while also having a certain taste and not being too acidic where I feel sick later on. If it's a cigar, size and flavor matters. I look for something smaller because of the way it feels and for the price and something dark with full flavor since anything less is unsatisfying. I have many cats but each cat feels a certain way. Each coat feels different when I stroke the cat's fur.
However, I always assumed this is what everyone else feels.
I really think that if someone has difficulty identifying with Si base then that's probably not their base.
But the functions are hard to understand, so maybe the problem is trying to understand something that has not been fully understood yet.
Jung gave a very vague and general description of the functions because they are much more complex than what can be ever described in words, just like trying to describe a computer you just can't make people understand it with just a few sentences, but you can get an idea of what he is pointing to
Sometimes you don't have motivation because you lack purpose.
Sometimes you don't have purpose, because you lack self-knowledge
Sometimes you don't have self-knowledge because you lack love
Sometimes you don't have love because you lack self-love
Sometimes you don't have self-love because you lack guess what? Ask Gulenko!!
"homeostasis or creating pleasant sensations for themselves or others, if they are not "natural caregivers"."
All of these things are definitely Si. I don't see what the problem is. If someone doesn't relate to these or the other Si themes then maybe they are simply not SEI.
Socionic descriptions apparently don't relate to behavior... but cognitive processes according to my ex-boyfriend. He insists that psychosophy explains behaviors and that I am simply SEI with 1st will, 2nd emotion, 3rd logic and 4th physics that needs a more physical ILE with 1st physics, 2nd logic, 3rd emotion, and 4th will... He says he gets along better with his "perfect" duals than with me apparently so...
Maybe I am just too stupid to really understand the theory fully in the way he does and admittedly I have interacted with less people than my boyfriend... However I can confidently say that I absolutely do not relate to the erotic styles, Si base, or Ne seeking descriptions as they are. Maybe people will just want to say that I am blind or something when it comes to assessing my own behaviors... IDK...
It's worth taking into consideration that I am 4w3, and since 4 is an image type, it greatly blurs the lines into a strange sense of identity, it wants to maintain individuality and does not want to be misunderstood. Those motivations and fears will play into my behavior here so make of that what you will.
I believe they should be rewritten to provide a more accurate reflection onto the actual thought process of a human and not the behaviors... However I still disagree with my ex that type even matters in ITR if it is just thought processes and not behavior, then goal and ideal alignment and good communication, proper alignment in behaviors matters more than anything else in the world. Many people say duality is not 100% perfect all the time, and so it is in my best interests to look for someone using this alignment rather than use Socionics theory.
I think you already know at this point that your ex bf is full of shit.
Yeah but what if I am also full of shit? I mean I am clearly depressed at this point so anything I say or do might not even be real I don't know... Since I am not mentally right at all...
I get the feeling that my thoughts don't actually go through externally correctly and that I seem to be expressing some "rhetoric" according to others so...
I'm trying to better display my thoughts externally but since I usually don't talk to many people who will want to hear them or write them down I lose some ability to fully express it all, like all the dialogue just stays in my head and then leaves but some of it stays without ever going down...
Overthinking, rhetoric, something something...
I feel unable to actually focus my attention externally to get things done so I'm thinking I may possibly have an attention deficit disorder of some sort and depression since these things have been issues all my life...
You seem like a pretty normal IEI with all the self-doubt and dramatics, I don't think there's anything wrong with you.
This is a common fallacy. Think about it, if a theory doesn't match up with your behavior what is it even doing? The main way cognition manifests is through behavior.
If people use arguments like "I cant i just feel it okay" then yes, they probably don't know what they're talking about.
Yeah, basically the actual theory is practically worthless at that point... I guess he thinks the descriptions are exaggerations of behavior or something? I get that he really isn't an informative source... Since everyone has seemingly different criteria as for what constitutes a type or an information element and since clear cut, sensible explanations of types seem like a rarity on this forum, it's hard to sort it all out...
My behavior seems more SEI-ish at this point by my postings on this forum, and I don't really see enough clear cut, solid arguments for myself being another type vs SEI to justify retyping myself (I mean, there are other SEIs that have trouble seeing Si base and Ne DS in themselves, maybe my self perception is just severely wonky, besides it's more common for SEIs to think they are Beta NF types when they are not, due to stereotypes and stuff like that.
I can't retype until I have enough evidence to justify another type and defend that typing, now the evidence points in favor of SEI...
That's totally fair, but it seems like you're not weighting the evidence correctly given that you don't relate to Si leading. That should be one of the most important things to consider.
The overthinking stuff does seem more like IEI or some type with high Ni.
I'm not exactly sure what undiscovered force holds you in place but please contact your nearest physics department.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Do you want to be SEI?
[QUOTE=MidnightWilderness;1463399]It may just be me, but I think the current definitions of Si are unrelatable and do us a great disservice. Every single time there is a discussion about SEIs, it seems to me that the same old stereotypes get conflated as the truth... Many people will not think of themselves as Si base if they do not have a focus on homeostasis or creating pleasant sensations for themselves or others, if they are not "natural caregivers"/QUOTE]
Well, first off, being a natural caregiver is a mbti stereotype for Fe or Si-Fe combo, whatever. Preferring Fe over Fi doesn't mean you wanna take care of people, that's retarded. However, preferring Si over Se does indeed mean you focus more on pleasant subjective sensations over intensity or expansion of sensations Se.
I guess, Si base people would be the best at explaining their experience. But, from my point of view it is basically this for those who value Si over Se overall: Si has a tendency of wanting to minimize the impact of the object on the senses and being more selective rather than expansive with sensations. It is an irrational function, so any claims like memory recall, sorting order of things, or things like that is nonsense. Hence noticing many details rather than specific ones is more of an Se trait IMO. Homeostasis is to create a balance between the self and the environment and Se wants to suck the environment dry, that is for base types at least.I wanted to start a discussion about what it truly means to be Si base
Last edited by Lycantrope; 08-05-2021 at 09:18 PM.
I ought to say it's already coherent but as if people like to generalize everything, it'd be better to re-define it depends on accustomary perception of function itself.
Although, that'd be a waste of time and rather work such as Ni between both IEI and ILI which is, on that regard, differentiated by their Creative or Instrumental function, Te/Fe. And if you were to refer which description of Si that you might want to rectify, I'd like to suggest this for you instead, Aushra's Dual Nature of Man:
S - the qualities of space, that is, that it occurs on well-being are in this space, people;
S - the relationship between the processes occurring in the same time - space;
Might not be that helpful but here is the definition of Si by Socionics IME on Wikipedia:
Senses (S) is responsible for detailed perception of physical sensations; questions of comfort, utility, and pleasure; and a sense of harmony and acclimation with one's environment (especially physical). S understands how well a person or thing's behavior agrees with its nature as well as the differences between comfortable behaviors and positions and uncomfortable ones.
And overall, I'd despise those descriptions that end up stereotyping functions, just like what some Socionics authors did in the past.
Si is not...:
Beauty, art, fashion, having good taste, practicing good hygiene, eating well, taking care of your body, being healthy, having a sense of aesthetics, knowing how to design your living arrangements, knowing how to dress and groom yourself, knowing how to use makeup, smelling good, being physically attractive.
Typology Diagnostic Service
Typology Discord Server
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Si is external fields of dynamics, "comfort" is not the definition of Si but only a typical example to help you understand Si.
There is an formal, mathematical definition on Si: external dynamics of fields. I think this is the fundamental definition in Socionics. In-depth descriptions are in Jung's Psychological Types. Socionics definitions and Jung's descriptions are indeed the same (my comments ) so I don't find any reason to redefine.
In my opinion, the Socionics community has been very good but it's always like a pyramid. Different people come for different reasons so there are always different views.
If you have to redefine an element to relate to it, then you are probably not SEI.
I'm not sure if it's redefining or clarifying it needs, but I understand your distaste for the way Si-base types get stereotyped. It irks my ISTp aunt as well. My understanding (and remember this is coming from someone who has it as a Role Function, so I'm biased) is that Si is best thought of as the balance to Ne (much in the same way Se is the natural balance to Ni). There's a certain either-or kind of rigidity to Ne imparted to it by its extroversion which Si doesn't have. Si is fluid. Ne is of course an expanding and exploratory sort of element, but it does its exploring in a somewhat stiff kind of way. Ne sends probes out in straight lines in every direction. Its leaps can be wild at times, but the probes themselves are simple machines. Si doesn't operate in this sort of linear way since it's more about the relationship between oneself and one's surroundings/impressions/emotions/body. It isn't perceiving anything concretely 'there' but rather perceives the implied reality between things as well as the changes in those realities. I think really what Si perceives is dissonance. This is very much tied to the homeostasis definition, but a bit broader. Si senses when a relationship between things is somehow 'off' and seeks to correct it somehow.
I think of Ne and Si working together to explore the universe. Ne launches its exploratory probes in straight lines - unperturbed by terrain, and like water flowing down a rocky hill Si feels out the path of least resistance to wherever the Ne probe scouted out. Ne is scanning the horizon from a tall tree, and Si is down on the ground gliding through the jungle. Ne can't effectively navigate down on the ground on its own except by sheer dumb luck of trying every option, because it isn't sensitive to its immediate surroundings like Si is. Si is how we survive moment to moment. It knows what berries are safe to eat, what water source looks questionable, which paths are least fraught with danger, and it is always listening to what the forest is telling it. I think it could aptly be described as "wise" or "street-smart" depending on how exactly you want to characterize it. I perceive strong Si types as incredibly "aware" of what's going on in a way that I feel I am not at all. I don't know how to listen to the jungle. I know it's important, but I'm hopeless at doing so because to listen to the jungle I have to stop listening to the strange mushrooms I found on the trail. The mushrooms will teach you something about the jungle too, but knowing what it is to be a rock isn't going to help you survive. This is why Ni and Si simply cannot be active at once. Ni necessitates departure from the self, while Si is the very essence of being in yourself in the place that you are.
I think MBTI's definition of Si as having to do with memory is influenced by what Si as a Base Function looks like. When Base, Si is very good at using memory and imagination to more complexly solve local problems it encounters in the jungle. This doesn't mean that Si-Base people have a good memory (though they very well might), but just that the element Si itself is good at recognizing the patterns it has encountered before and altering them as necessary to suit its current situation.
Si in ISFps specifically is going to very often be applied to social situations due to that being a point of focus for Fe-Creatives. I think Alphas in general will navigate social situations analogously to the jungle scenario I described above, with the Si Egos spending more time on the ground and the Ne Egos being more in the trees scanning the horizons. The catch being that the Ne Egos are Ti-Creatives, and therefore not as likely to focus on their social reality. For Si Egos who feel they aren't particularly good at managing their social lives, I would guess they may be spending too little time scanning their horizons and should consider looking out for healthier long-term solutions. I think they can get caught up in the jungle at times because sometimes there simply is no "path of least resistance" and Si needs to be bailed out by other elements.
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
