User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Pe and Pi

  1. #11
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I like this...mainly because Pi is really about one's impressions of things, whereas Pe is about external possibilities.
    Impressions vs possibilities. Sounds good to me

    Of course, this adds Je into it, because you're describing some reasoning in there too by "making sense" of things (being a Ji-dom, it's hard to fathom NOT thinking rationally first & foremost). Si-dom are often described as enjoying reviewing what they know, which is really just going over it, not arranging it in any order according to logic or value.

    Similar to how Je judges using external criteria & seeks to create & establish viable systems, Pe creates & searches for what is possible in reality; whereas Pi explores internal impressions & interpretations, making it less visible, much as Ji is about creating & perfecting systems in concept & also less visible in action. For the P types though, things just pop up & are followed, which is easiest to imagine when you think of it in terms of Se-doms exploring literal sensory experiences. J types use lines of reason to explore things, because they're trying to make sense, not just experience or become aware of.
    Hmmm, yes it is difficult for me to get away from drawing a conclusion.

    So p-types are primarily about the experience/impression in and of itself? And is this (ie. the bolded) why the perceiving functions are said to be "irrational" and the judging "rational"?

    And my long-winded way of interpreting this:
    The Si type perceives their subjective impression of tangible experience & facts & even people ("the object"). Their impression is still of the literal objects, but they prefer to focus on their own interpretive view of them. This is why Si is compared to impressionistic art; it's reality through the highly idiosyncratic view of the individual. It is colored by the unconscious, which determines what details the individual responds to & focuses on. Ni ignores all this in favor of going directly to the "image" from the unconscious that stirs the impression of the object. The image amounts to a symbol representing the essence of that object. This is why the Ni type experiences their iNtuitions as "objective", because it's not about their personal impression (as it is with the Si type), but an image representing a universal, core "truth" about the object arising from the collective unconscious. However, the individual is still interpreting this image & its "truth", and that's when it becomes highly subjective (as does every introvert's experience of the collective unconscious).
    This is where I get confused about how aspects of Fi and Ni cross over. Of course perceiving and judging are completely different processes but there are elements that resemble one another. Especially with phrases (implied or otherwise) like:

    subjective experience
    internal images
    the essence of things
    universal truth

    How are the Ni "images" and "essence" differ to the Fi versions? I mean, when you look at it both Ni and Fi are very interested in uncovering the inherent nature of things, right?

    And how does this "collective unconscious" work? Are you saying that Ni does have an objective view of some universal truth (ie. the "image" itself is genuinely apt and not a subjective construction) but that view can be clouded by interpretation?

    Also interesting is that you effectively describe Sensing vs. Intuiting, as direct vs. indirect/mediated modes of perception (rather than simply literal versus conceptual) - but also that Sensors are perhaps more personal in their contact with the object.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  2. #12
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    So p-types are primarily about the experience/impression in and of itself? And is this (ie. the bolded) why the perceiving functions are said to be "irrational" and the judging "rational"?
    That's my basic understanding, yes.

    This is where I get confused about how aspects of Fi and Ni cross over. Of course perceiving and judging are completely different processes but there are elements that resemble one another. Especially with phrases (implied or otherwise) like:

    subjective experience
    internal images
    the essence of things
    universal truth

    How are the Ni "images" and "essence" differ to the Fi versions? I mean, when you look at it both Ni and Fi are very interested in uncovering the inherent nature of things, right?

    And how does this "collective unconscious" work? Are you saying that Ni does have an objective view of some universal truth (ie. the "image" itself is genuinely apt and not a subjective construction) but that view can be clouded by interpretation?
    I've been thinking a lot about all of this, and I actually did a rough "how cognitive functions can be confused" write-up that I may post here (it's at PerC already, piggy-backed within another thread; I should just bite the bullet & post it as its own thread here). EDIT: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...86#post1711086

    In short, no I don't believe Ni has an objective view of some universal truth; I think the collective unconscious provides this universal knowledge to everyone, but the Ni types sees the image in its most conceptual form. In a weird way, this almost leaves it open to more interpretation because its stripped of all concrete support. However, they may experience it as objective; I think P types in general experience perceptions that way. Jung says of BOTH Pi types that they don't relate the inner image to themselves and that this is incomprehensible to J types. This is because J types relate it to themselves in the sense that they are aware they are forming subjective lines of reasoning using these images (or concepts) as the premise, whereas P types feel they are just "seeing" something & calling it what it is. Of course, P types are very much are interpreting, but just not in the form of reasoning; it's that immediate "knowing". This applies to Pe and external objects too.

    As for how the collective unconscious works, I'm still contemplating that too. It seems so vague in Jung's theory. I need to read more of his work. My short guess is that we experience it 2 basic ways: the imagination & dreams. I think feeling-tones are possibly connected to this also, but this is not noted by Jung.

    Also interesting is that you effectively describe Sensing vs. Intuiting, as direct vs. indirect/mediated modes of perception (rather than simply literal versus conceptual) - but also that Sensors are perhaps more personal in their contact with the object.
    Well, what I meant was the Ni type may FEEL this perception is objective in the sense that it's so conceptual it is not linked to a literal, personal experience of theirs. It just feels like a general truth to them.

    The Si type, IMO, also sees their perception as objective in the sense that they often feel they are just noting REAL facts (not their own spin on it). The difference is that the Si type will see it connected it to a personal experience (ie. they read it in X book), as opposed to seeing it as some universal insight come over them ("just knowing"). IDK if I'm explaining what I mean clearly....
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  3. #13
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I've been thinking a lot about all of this, and I actually did a rough "how cognitive functions can be confused" write-up that I may post here (it's at PerC already, piggy-backed within another thread; I should just bite the bullet & post it as its own thread here). EDIT: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...86#post1711086
    I will head over there now and take a look

    In short, no I don't believe Ni has an objective view of some universal truth; I think the collective unconscious provides this universal knowledge to everyone, but the Ni types sees the image in its most conceptual form. In a weird way, this almost leaves it open to more interpretation because its stripped of all concrete support. However, they may experience it as objective; I think P types in general experience perceptions that way. Jung says of BOTH Pi types that they don't relate the inner image to themselves and that this is incomprehensible to J types. This is because J types relate it to themselves in the sense that they are aware they are forming subjective lines of reasoning using these images (or concepts) as the premise, whereas P types feel they are just "seeing" something & calling it what it is. Of course, P types are very much are interpreting, but just not in the form of reasoning; it's that immediate "knowing". This applies to Pe and external objects too.
    Ahh, I see. I really should read Jung more thoroughly rather than in dribs and drabs.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

Similar Threads

  1. [Jung] What are Pe, Pi, Je, and Ji?
    By Babybop in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-12-2016, 05:28 PM
  2. Je/Pe and essential relationship to structure
    By Video in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-27-2013, 04:29 PM
  3. The purpose of Pi, Je, Pe, and Ji
    By Robopop in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-12-2011, 11:48 AM
  4. first-borns, family responsibility, and Pi vs Pe
    By the state i am in in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-19-2009, 11:14 PM
  5. The "divide" is Pe and Pi, not N or S
    By Venom in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 11:12 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