User Tag List

First 122021222324 Last

Results 211 to 220 of 258

  1. #211
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yeah, that sounds a lot like my Dad...

    They're very rigid. Dislike the new. No need for invention or new discoveries. Everything that is needed can be found in the past.

    Hence why I think it's so ridiculous to call Ni and Si the exact same, cuz that's like saying there's no difference between an INTJ and an ISTJ, and, trust me, there's a difference.
    This seems to be going back to ISTJ stereotypes. Yeah, they exist for a reason, but it feels like we're defining Si as "being like Ni, except Si is more limited, in that it is rigid, bound in the past.

    There has to be a lot more to it than that. Is the rigidity the side effect of something else? Is that something else a strength that Ni lacks?

  2. #212
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanook View Post
    if you describe Ni and Si in such a way, that Ni is clearly superior, and if your description is inspired by something you have observed in real people, then you are most likely being distracted by stages of development. its generally true for N and S: for example, often they say that S types can't be abstract. but abstraction is a feature of a stage of development. if S types can't abstract by definition, it would imply that N types are really evolved S types, meaning that S and N are not typological dichotomies at all. this could be possible, but i don't think its the case in this universe.

    (by definition a type is a "horizontal" form, development is pictured "vertical", a type can maybe transform (rope -> butterfly) but it can't change (butterfly->grasshopper).)
    Hmmm, not sure exactly where this post came from, but...

    To be honest (and I've shared this sentiment with other users before): I do actually think N is higher order of thinking than S.

    I think N sprang up evolutionarily after S, and that, if you were to look at most other animals, almost none of them would ever be using N, while all of them would certainly be using S.

  3. #213
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    This seems to be going back to ISTJ stereotypes. Yeah, they exist for a reason, but it feels like we're defining Si as "being like Ni, except Si is more limited, in that it is rigid, bound in the past.

    There has to be a lot more to it than that. Is the rigidity the side effect of something else? Is that something else a strength that Ni lacks?
    Yup to the first (or the cause of).

    Sorta to the second (I, personally, think Ni can come up with all kinds of practical solutions, but can also have the tendency to get lost up in the clouds -- the strength of a user's Te function certainly aids in bringing Ni's loftier side back down to reality).

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Admittedly so...

    I thought as much while creating the descriptions.

    I have to say, though, that both descriptions are accurate.

    I might be taking off from the vantage point of an Ni user, with the inherent bias that this would generally create, but Si is inherently less creative than Ni, and pointing out this fact is important.

    As is pointing out how Si is more "practical" and less "in the clouds", but I'm not sure whether its "rigid molding" would be considered a *positive*. That's usually a knock on it: that it will apply a model ruthlessly, even when it shouldn't be. It can be a little too rigid, if you know what I'm sayin. Keep using the same worn out tool, when it should probably get a new one.
    I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say Ni is all the good stuff and Si is all the bad stuff.

    But I am also all for calling a spade a spade. And Si is very rigid. However, with that rigidity, comes a certain no-nonsense "practicality".

  4. #214
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    ^ Are we sure it's Si that causes the rigidity? Might it be the accompanying Te/Fe?
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #215
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    ^ Are we sure it's Si that causes the rigidity? Might it be the accompanying Te/Fe?
    Good point.

    But it is still Si.

    It's just in Te, Fe, Ti, or Fi's service...

  6. #216
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    ^ Are we sure it's Si that causes the rigidity? Might it be the accompanying Te/Fe?
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Good point.

    But it is still Si.

    It's just in Te, Fe, Ti, or Fi's service...
    And, more to that point, rigidity certainly seems to be what Si is good at: finding specific distinctions, errors, problems, incongruencies, etc. between some object(s) of perception and its own internalized framework(s).

    That sounds kind of rigid to me...

    Take Ni, on the other hand, which tries to find/make connections among objects of perception in order to change or add to its internalized framework(s).

    One (Si) compares the objects of perception to its internalized frameworks, seemingly with no intention of changing its internalized frameworks, but, rather, with the intention of seeing how the objects compare to its existent internalized frameworks, while the other (Ni) tries to constantly change, add to, or reshape its internalized frameworks by perceiving new connections amongst the objects of perception.

    One (Si) is inherently rigid; the other (Ni) is inherently flexible.

    And that's probably the biggest difference between ISTJs and INTJs...

    (Along with the flipped sides of the coins: that ISTJs are more "practical" [i.e., stick to their framework], while INTJs are more up in the clouds [i.e., constantly reshaping, changing, and/or adding to their frameworks])

  7. #217
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    It's why ISTJs would make a better everyday, run-of-the-mill accountant, while an INTJ would be better at expanding the rules of accounting to new and novel circumstances (like off-balance sheet derivatives, etc.).

    Or why, if an INTJ general and an ISTJ general could meet over and over again on the same battlefield with the exact same armies, why the INTJ general would probably beat the ISTJ general a higher percentage of the time the more times they were to fight...

  8. #218
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    It's why ISTJs would make a better everyday, run-of-the-mill accountant, while an INTJ would be better at expanding the rules of accounting to new and novel circumstances (like off-balance sheet derivatives, etc.).

    Or why, if an INTJ general and an ISTJ general could meet over and over again on the same battlefield with the exact same armies, why the INTJ general would probably kick the ISTJ general's ass a higher percentage of the time the more times they were to fight...
    So INTJs are similar to ISTJs, but are more, hmm, what's the word I'm looking for... superior?
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  9. #219
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    I confess I haven't read a single word of this thread, but that won't stop me from throwing in my 2 cents:

    OK, so I'm pretty sure both Si and Ni are about anticipating things before they happen, whereas Ne and Se are about reacting to things while they happen. So both Si and Ni draw on the past, and both Si and Ni predict the future - but they don't share the same focus.

    • Introverted Sensation is about physical anticipation - you can "feel" the physical outcome of something before actually experiencing it, because you're drawing from and reliving a rich database of past sensations. You feel sick when looking at a piece of food because the food looks or smells like a bad experience you've had in the past. You haven't actually tasted the food, and other people might think that there's nothing wrong with the food, but you're still convinced that it will be bad for you.

    • Introverted Intuition is about contextual anticipation - you can detach yourself from the meaning of things and think in terms of symbols or archetypes being applied to different contexts. By doing this, you just "know" the outcome of something, because you've subconsciously picked up on patterns and symbols that point to it as an inevitability. You have yet to experience this, because it hasn't happened yet - but still you know, with almost absolute certainty, that it will.


    This is probably only a small part of the difference between the two, and I still can't wrap my head around Ni enough to give a genuine description of how its experienced, but it just happened to be something I was thinking about today and I felt like sharing.
    Not a big fan of this description...

    Doesn't really get to the core of the issue at all, in my opinion.

  10. #220
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yeah, that sounds a lot like my Dad...

    They're very rigid. Dislike the new. No need for invention or new discoveries. Everything that is needed can be found in the past.

    Hence why I think it's so ridiculous to call Ni and Si the exact same, cuz that's like saying there's no difference between an INTJ and an ISTJ, and, trust me, there's a difference.
    INTJ can be just as stubborn in this regard as ISTJ. Its gotta a different ring to it though. Its like how INTP can get stuck on Si detail while ISTP are coined as more functional. Ni doesnt get hung up on new discoveries...since Ni has been coined "workable" Ni would get stuck on what doesnt work or didnt work or something along those lines.
    Im out, its been fun

Similar Threads

  1. Ni vs. Si comparative Ni TEST
    By musttry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 10:36 AM
  2. Ni vs. Si comparative Si TEST
    By musttry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-30-2010, 11:35 AM
  3. Ni vs Si, and more
    By Cimarron in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-19-2009, 11:58 AM
  4. Ni and Si Doms: What does the internal world look like?
    By BlueScreen in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 07-26-2009, 06:01 PM
  5. Ni and Si
    By run in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-05-2009, 11:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO