Se/Ni vs Si/Ne

[Joy]

I sorta see Si types as taking care of Ne types by actually doing things to take care of their physical state.

I see Se types "take care of" Ni types by leveraging things. This could mean that they do it with money, power over/influence with other people, effort, etc. This could even mean telling the Ni type to do something.

[Subteigh]

is like a positive feedback, moving away from the current system, whereas is like a negative feedback, seeing to maintain balance by doing things as they were in the past. This is why they are complimentary.

helps cope with power structures and objects in the here and now (it knows the real power of things), helps have a sense of perspective and context for which events occur (from the past and into the future).

So \ duality is about maintaining equilibrium with the environment, \ is about maintaining long-term + short-term power structures (of objects\people\ideologies etc.).

[Jonathan]

I sorta see Si types as taking care of Ne types by actually doing things to take care of their physical state.

I see Se types "take care of" Ni types by leveraging things. This could mean that they do it with money, power over/influence with other people, effort, etc. This could even mean telling the Ni type to do something.

This is pretty good...it seems somewhat accurate based on observation. However, this conception of Se vs. Si makes it sound as if Si types are the only people who "do things" whereas Se types merely get other people to do their work.

I don't think that's true. In fact, I think Ne types are the most likely to think of what should be done and try to get other people to do it.

I think Se types actually "do" a lot of stuff in the practical sphere, just as Si types do. And I don't think Se is just about money and power over people.

Here's another possible take on it:

Ni imagines various things, things out in the world that seem impossible, and that Se types actually try to do. Si is more about what's real now, what's here now. Ne isn't so much about imagining counter-realities as about coming up with directions, alternatives, new "here nows" to go to.

[Subteigh]

I think is about what was real in the past...is true in the present (but because isn't as abstract as , and is tailored to the individual, being introverted, it appears to be following what us real in the present.

[leckysupport]

I think Introverted Sensing is about what was real in the past...is true in the present

Nope, that's . Any attention on the past or future and how they relate to now. Or how now and the past relate to the future and so on IMO is linked to .

Interlinking of events or pretty much anything is .

[Subteigh]

tries to seek homeostatis with it's environment by recreating past sensations in the present, does this with visions to determine long-term trends.

[leckysupport]

tries to seek homeostatis with it's environment by recreating past sensations in the present

Linking of these past sensations is ruled over by . Reconising these sensations is .

[Subteigh]

I personally think all Ixxp types are past-oriented, and live their present + future on how they experience the past. I think visions\dreams etc. are very real to types, with less of a focus on sensations - that would be .

[Joy]

I sorta see Si types as taking care of Ne types by actually doing things to take care of their physical state.

I see Se types "take care of" Ni types by leveraging things. This could mean that they do it with money, power over/influence with other people, effort, etc. This could even mean telling the Ni type to do something.

This is pretty good...it seems somewhat accurate based on observation. However, this conception of Se vs. Si makes it sound as if Si types are the only people who "do things" whereas Se types merely get other people to do their work.

I don't think that's true. In fact, I think Ne types are the most likely to think of what should be done and try to get other people to do it.

I think Se types actually "do" a lot of stuff in the practical sphere, just as Si types do. And I don't think Se is just about money and power over people.

Here's another possible take on it:

Ni imagines various things, things out in the world that seem impossible, and that Se types actually try to do. Si is more about what's real now, what's here now. Ne isn't so much about imagining counter-realities as about coming up with directions, alternatives, new "here nows" to go to.

I tried to cover that with the "effort" thing in the list.

Good observations on your part, too Subterranean.

[Logos]

I personally think all Ixxp types are past-oriented, and live their present + future on how they experience the past. I think visions\dreams etc. are very real to types, with less of a focus on sensations - that would be .

That would imply that they live their lives out of an almost expected linear progression based upon the experiential velocity from which they came.

[Subteigh]

Yes, it would, apart from Ixxp Dynamic types are passive to the objects which give them their sensations, and cannot actively control them. They might actvely see a certain point in a trend, though.

(If a Ixxp is too hot from siting close to a fire, they move away from the fire, they don't (actively) turn it down).

[leckysupport]

I personally think all Ixxp types are past-oriented, and live their present + future on how they experience the past.

Why do you think this btw?

[Subteigh]

The Static and Dynamic dichotomies refer to the percieving functions IMO, Static being and with Dynamic being and . Which results in Static being Ixxj and Exxp, Dynamic Ixxp and Exxj.

Static (from the definitions) implies control of objects in the here-and-now, Dynamic implies control of time (over a period of time obviously). Each dichotomy loses out at the expense of the over.

Dynamic types cannot 'know' the future, because no one can. But they can predict the future, which must come from prior experience. It doesn't come from the here-and-now because Dynamic types don't know objects in the here-and-now - they instead percieve how they change over time. This change occurs in an environmental context (the surrounds), which in a Dynamic type is the site at which the change occurs. Time is an environmental factor, and Dynamic types are able to actively change these environmental contexts in thier mind. However, they are 'passive' to objects in the here-and-now, and so observe them and make impressions of them.

They recall the context of all the objects they experience, and so in the future can 'see' the objects falling back into place, allowing them to take advantage of the situation. This means the event doesn't happen in the 'here-and-now' - the objects aren't there to begin with - Dynamic types must wait for the right moment.

types do this through visions, through sensations. Both can apply to objects and fields depending on the context. E.g. Dynamic types may not be able to manipulate objects in the external world, but they can in their internal world, and Static types cannot manipulate the environmental context in the external world, but can internally - it allows them 'experiment' with 'external' objects in the mind.