Ne vs Se

[valaki]

I dont think this is an Se-Ne difference. I mean my ENTP friend is the same as yours, but me on the other hand, i need to know(and do know ) exactly how to hit(and why to hit like that) before even trying(and also prefer to know where i would hit if i would hit someone before trying).

I also don't really analyse the "why" as much as I'm just doing it. With kinesthetic stuff in general I don't involve such conscious analysis

 

[INTP]

Erm... there's an autosave function, so you could've just pressed restore

Unless you mean you accidentally deleted the whole thing, though even then it could be restored if acting quickly enough

Too bad though

I accidentally pasted when i wanted to copy and it autosaved immediately.

Uhm yeah, that was posted already. What's an Se direction/goal like? And a Ti one? (I mean I can generally see what these would be, but if you got something more to say about it, I'll be curious to hear it.)

There is no goal on Se, goals are something that come from stuff beyond functions(functions take in data and process the data, motivation i.e. strive towards a goal comes from different things in the psyche or maybe out of the functions F would have something to do with it). Se just perceives and focuses first on things that release the strongest sensation and Ti seeks to define things.

The term is still pretty clear in terms of how it's related to mastery of something and to consciousness. And so when considering that, how is it reconciled with the idea of a refined (=differentiated) function being more conscious?

Though I can see one reason why consciousness is good for a differentiated function, because its (consciousness') function is control over processing stuff. And so having consciousness for a (jungian) function obviously means more control over direction of things .

I still have the issue mentioned about automaticity though.

But if this is what you were writing about for an hour before it got lost, well, I guess bad luck I can only hope you feel like writing a bit of it again

Mhmm and I got another issue about it, the way intuition is explained (in MBTI anyway), it often reminds me of simple automaticity though I'm sure the two shouldn't be the same thing.

Lets say you have two people, one knows everything there is about cars and one knows next to nothing about them, and they both see 5 cars in front of them. The person who knows next to nothing sees that there are two sport cars(one yellow and one red), one black limo and two normal cars(one green and one blue). The person who knows everything about car sees a red ferrari from a year 1987 with v8 engine, a yellow lamborgini from year XXXX that has XX motor, he sees a black limo made by mercedes benz its a custom model that was manufactured in italy in year 2005 and there are only four of them in the world etc etc etc.
I think its obvious to you that the one who knows everything about cars has more differentiated view on the cars that they both perceive. Who do you think gets more input in his consciousness about the cars? (assuming that what i said on the example is everything you need to know in order to answer the question correctly)

and yes i explained my issues about the term automaticity, gave many examples of differentiation and explained it in great detail in neural level and i dont really feel like writing anymore now

 

[valaki]

There is no goal on Se, goals are something that come from stuff beyond functions(functions take in data and process the data, motivation i.e. strive towards a goal comes from different things in the psyche or maybe out of the functions F would have something to do with it). Se just perceives and focuses first on things that release the strongest sensation and Ti seeks to define things.

OK on the same page about this

Why would F be different from other functions though in terms of possibly having something to do with motivations?


"Differentiation consists in the separation of the function from other functions, and in the separation of its individual parts from each other. Without differentiation direction is impossible, since the direction of a function towards a goal depends on the elimination of anything irrelevant."

Now what if a mix of two functions is a better tool for a goal than one differentiated function? Why does something become irrelevant for the goal just because it's from another function?

Lets say you have two people, one knows everything there is about cars and one knows next to nothing about them, and they both see 5 cars in front of them. The person who knows next to nothing sees that there are two sport cars(one yellow and one red), one black limo and two normal cars(one green and one blue). The person who knows everything about car sees a red ferrari from a year 1987 with v8 engine, a yellow lamborgini from year XXXX that has XX motor, he sees a black limo made by mercedes benz its a custom model that was manufactured in italy in year 2005 and there are only four of them in the world etc etc etc.
I think its obvious to you that the one who knows everything about cars has more differentiated view on the cars that they both perceive. Who do you think gets more input in his consciousness about the cars? (assuming that what i said on the example is everything you need to know in order to answer the question correctly)

I can't answer that. It could go either way. Unless I misunderstand your question. The person who knows everything about cars might look longer at the details of the cars in front of them OR might just quickly take a look to identify the cars and instantly remember all those facts, consciously or not even consciously. The same for the other person, he may spend time looking OR may give a quick glance and decide that these cars aren't terribly interesting.

What do you think the answer is?

and yes i explained my issues about the term automaticity, gave many examples of differentiation and explained it in great detail in neural level and i dont really feel like writing anymore now

Alright maybe after a good night's sleep ? The neural level stuff would be so really interesting :O

 

[greenfairy]

so would you say that Ne has steps between leaps that are less obvious and take place on a conceptual rather than concrete level? that seems really 'typology 101' to me, but i think you're right. maybe it's harder for me as an Ne dom to tell how random someone is being. i suppose it gives me a pretty high tolerance for randomness.

i also have a hard time knowing if someone is working in concepts sometimes. i don't think the underpinnings of the connections i make are always readily apparent, so i don't usually expect to understand someone else's. it's also possible that i assign their connections my own personal analysis, when in reality they were doing something much more straightforward.

i'd love to learn to sidestep my Ne bias in order to see their differences more clearly.

Se-Ni takes in raw sensory data, facts, information, etc. flcuses on what is true and undeniable, then constructs simple arguments and empirical observations based on it (like Descartes' method but with S stuff instead of T stuff). Like, this is a room with stuff in it, these are the things, temperature, people doing actions, purpose of the building, purpose of the actions, my place in it. All empirical. Ni is the conceptual processing that glues it all together; Ni can also go above that and theorize about possible hidden meanings, especially in an Ni-Se person.

Ne-Si is the other way around. Ne takes in information and Si organizes it into the cnocrete and stores it. Ne then takes these stored facts and theorizes opssibilities based on them, along with their (mostly unconscious) sensory data).

Pe takes in, Pi organizes, P primary processes and expands while P secondary holds.

I don't know if this helps at all, but it sort of describes how I see it. I'd also like to better understand the perceiving functions.

 

[Southern Kross]

It's just a theory SK...Our external functions are ways that we interact with the external world...I assume they are not just outlets for expression but also inlets for external information...Once taken inside, the data is handled and analyzed by our internal functions...???

I as an INFJ (i.e. Fe-aux) for instance am using Fe to send Fe packets into the environment and absorbing back the Fe reaction reflected back on to me (or rather filtering the reflected data thru my Fe-aux filter)...Yeah...they are filters that work both ways....

I think like what [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] said, Ne is experienced so unconsciously, and I would think Se would be too for SPs. I think this is compounded by the fact that there is a unconscious element behind Ji too and this means NPs and SPs are less aware/invested of the impact of their behaviour*. The idea of framing Pe with such conscious intentions behind it feels like it is missing the point. I don't think you're wrong to describe Ne as "ping-ing"; I think this is in fact how it works. It just that we have no control over that or any real awareness that it's going on.

My antogonistic description of Ne/Se is based on my interactions with RL ESxPs and ENTPs...Ne/Se-aux may be weaker in effect relative to Ne/Se-dom therefore the former perhaps might not be coming across as that antagonistic...

Dominant extraverted functions perhaps have greater effect on the external world and the people in it whereas in aux position they are more passive and shadowed by the dominant introverted function...

I just don't think that even extroverted Pe is like that. I don't see ExxPs like that in general. I do agree that there are some that are. I've been on the receiving end of ESTP cruelty in a big way while going through school. ESTPs seemed to smell my weakness and would go after it like no other type. I grew up basically hating the type (before having knowledge of MBTI) and was always giving them a wide berth. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about?

I am just putting ideas forward in raw form for discussion...

That's fine. I'm not saying you shouldn't. I was just trying to express how foreign your ideas felt to me. I'm trying to figure out if the foreignness is because you're seeing something I'm missing or if you're off track. I'm trying to feel it out and I mean no insult in that.


*I'm adding a huge disclaimer for this because I know this isn't always true. I just mean to say that xxxPs are by nature less 'directive' people. OTOH EXTPs, for example, can make the best courtroom lawyers or con men, which includes a large element of consciousness of how to persuade or affect people. I'm not sure how to reconcile this just yet.

Does that mean perceiving processes are the only type of processes thru which one can gather information from within or without?

I was more like thinking that our external functions (be them judging or perceiving) are the boundaryies of our ego that make contact with the external/physical world...They are our facade, our interface with the world...therefore they would/should be capable of working both ways, to flavor (format) our output to the external world as well as to filter and allow incoming information...

Whereas our internal functions are parts of our ego that aren't visible to the external world...They deal with what our external functions allow inside ourselves thru the ego boundary...

Yes, this is true.

But speaking for FPs anyway (not sure on the TPs - there may be an equivalent), I would say that we believe in maintaining a state of "innocence", so to speak. By this I mean, I think that deep down we want to be relatively blithe - perhaps it is important to how we process the world for us to remain so. Whether this is right or wrong (or just plain naive and silly) is besides the point to us, because we feel we're responding to something that feels right.

I used the example of a surfer riding a wave to describe how it feels to use Pe. We accept that the wave happens on its own and its forces are outside our control. We don't really think about how the wave forms or functions - we don't really want to. The wave just is what is it is, and we just respond to it and catch a ride. It seems crazy to me to think of trying to create a wave or try to direct or shape and existing one in a certain way - that seems like circumventing the laws of nature. I suppose I do sometimes do that, but it feels like a evil thing (and I'm not that great at it either). It's like I'm exploiting my inside knowledge of the wave. It also undermines what I'm doing in a way too, because to be a good surfer requires a certain degree of submission to the laws of nature.

(Note, this is just describing how it feels. I don't mean to direct how you see the same behaviour or to say this is the only correct way of being)

As for Ne/Se-dom, I've seen that they are actively gauging my reactions to certain stimuli (scenarios/possibilities) that they consciously choose to send my way...they are proactively trying to decipher what's beneath my facade/interface...to find out what makes me tick...

Ni-dom does the same but in a more passive/reactive manner...it gathers data already available in the background (or whatever comes in its way) but doesn't try to elicit further data thru some forced reaction...it doesn't try to force the external object to react...

So based on this, INFJs gather Fe-Se raw data from the external world and use Ni-Ti to analyze and make sense of that data...??

Hmm. Perhaps what you're describing is what Ne/Se users do to shape their perceptions. We need to bounce our ideas off something or someone to see if they're working or are accurate. I suppose Ne/Se doms have more of a hunger for input and if they can't get it passively, they will actively search for it. They need to know what your thoughts/feelings/opinions/attitudes/experiences are to compare to their own and figure out if they're on the right track.

 

[yeghor]

I just don't think that even extroverted Pe is like that. I don't see ExxPs like that in general. I do agree that there are some that are. I've been on the receiving end of ESTP cruelty in a big way while going through school. ESTPs seemed to smell my weakness and would go after it like no other type. I grew up basically hating the type (before having knowledge of MBTI) and was always giving them a wide berth. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about?

...

*I'm adding a huge disclaimer for this because I know this isn't always true. I just mean to say that xxxPs are by nature less 'directive' people. OTOH EXTPs, for example, can make the best courtroom lawyers or con men, which includes a large element of consciousness of how to persuade or affect people. I'm not sure how to reconcile this just yet.

Yes, my experience with ExTPs has been similar...ESTPs are more physical whereas ENTPs are more verbal/mental to that end...And ESTPs are relatively more abundant in the society...so I may not have had or noticed too much interaction with ENTPs while growing up...

My ENTP friend, for instance, when he's in his data-mining/gathering mode, seems to be selecting specific questions from a list of multiple possible ones to ask so as to hone in on the specific piece of information that he seeks...the questions are leading somehow...

Also he uses the same mechanism to format and limit his responses to the outside world so as to resist yielding certain information about himself that he deems would give away his vulnerabilities/weak spots...like deflecting questions, giving vague or short/non-clarifying or even misleading answers etc...

He does all these in a consciously controlled manner...He consciously uses his Ne-dom to actively ping the environment to gather data as well as limit or falsify information he yields so as to cloak his inner/true self and resist external data gathering attempts...Furthermore, he uses the same mechanism to alter his approach/wording to each person so as to ensure their willing or unwilling cooperation...charm and manipulation...

I think (have experienced) Se-doms do the same in regards to Se data...Ne-dom seems to be more covert/mental whereas Se-dom more overt/physical in approach...

I do not have too much experience with ENFPs in RL other than my elder sister...Don't know how Ne-dom plays out for them...

Perhaps they are using Ne to gather data about the emotional landscape of the individual...

 

[five sounds]

Yes, my experience with ExTPs has been similar...ESTPs are more physical whereas ENTPs are more verbal/mental to that end...And ESTPs are relatively more abundant in the society...so I may not have had or noticed too much interaction with ENTPs while growing up...

My ENTP friend, for instance, when he's in his data-mining/gathering mode, seems to be selecting specific questions from a list of multiple possible ones to ask so as to hone in on the specific piece of information that he seeks...the questions are leading somehow...

Also he uses the same mechanism to format and limit his responses to the outside world so as to resist yielding certain information about himself that he deems would give away his vulnerabilities/weak spots...like deflecting questions, giving vague or short/non-clarifying or even misleading answers etc...

He does both of these in a consciously controlled manner...He consciously uses his Ne-dom to actively ping the environment to gather data as well as limit or falsify information he yields so as to cloak his inner/true self and resist external data gathering attempts...Furthermore, he uses the same mechanism to alter his approach/wording to each person so as to ensure their willing or unwilling cooperation...charm and manipulation...

I think (have experienced) Se-doms do the same in regards to Se data...Ne-dom seems to be more covert/mental whereas Se-dom more overt/physical in approach...

I do not have too much experience with ENFPs in RL other than my elder sister...Don't know how Ne-dom plays out for them...

Perhaps they are using Ne to gather data about the emotional landscape of the individual...

i relate to the way you described Ne information collection in your ENTP friend. i'm less direct with it for sure. i don't want to like drill into people. but i kinda do. or situations. i definitely ask series of questions and test out different possibilities to figure things out.

i do it in any area that i find truth/self-searchy or emotionally important to me. if something is important to me, i go on a data collecting hunt. i dig deep into research or find the right people to ask the right questions to satisfy or understand whatever is going on.

to go further with it, i really don't subscribe to any one thing usually. i'm not like a *fill-in-the-blank* activist, although there are some issues that are more important to me than others, and ones i try to live out in my life. mostly though, my personal values and emotional stuff is a hodge podge of little bits of everything that i have found that i feel fit together and speak to me.

...and if something doesn't fit, i go on another hunt

 

[yeghor]

My ENTP friend, for instance, when he's in his data-mining/gathering mode, seems to be selecting specific questions from a list of multiple possible ones to ask so as to hone in on the specific piece of information that he seeks...the questions are leading somehow...

I must clarify that I do the data mining thing myself as well but I am much more timid (less aggressive) compared to Ne-dom when doing that...

I do not have the assertiveness to keep pushing when the other person is unwilling or not comfortable to give answers...cause I would not like to be pushed either...

I am relatively more insistent in online settigns though...so I guess it has something to do with potential negative repercussions of insisting on pushing for answers, which may be more severe for me in RL...

i relate to the way you described Ne information collection in your ENTP friend. i'm less direct with it for sure. i don't want to like drill into people. but i kinda do. or situations. i definitely ask series of questions and test out different possibilities to figure things out.

i do it in any area that i find self-searchy or emotionally important to me. if something is important to me, i go on a data collecting hunt. i dig deep into research or find the right people to ask the right questions to satisfy or understand whatever is going on.

to go further with it, i really don't subscribe to any one thing usually. i'm not like a *fill-in-the-blank* activist, although there are some issues that are more important to me than others, and ones i try to live out in my life. mostly though, my personal values and emotional stuff is a hodge podge of little bits of everything that i have found that i felt fits together and speaks to me.

...and if something doesn't fit, i go on another hunt

So you are using your Ne-dom function to feel out the external object (be it a person or smt else) and to decide whether it (or he/she) feels right to or for you...?

 

[Starry]

so then it's most white people are racists. which is kind of fine with me. i mean, i'm not saying i agree with that statement in particular, but that kind of logic is cool with me. when it has to be an 'all ______ are ________', i immediately think of how that exists at varying levels on a spectrum on just how ____ each ______ really is. i just can't believe most things are that simple and straightforward. lol oh no am i stuck forever?

I just wanted to quickly point out that it's most only to you...but not to her. She became friends with me because she qualified me differently. Not because she altered her ideology.

 

[Feline]

I'm not Se so I haven't really observed a butterfly's physical traits)

lol

 

[Feline]

[MENTION=7595] My only experience with Se is in strong service to Ni, which affects its flavor considerably.

Would you be able to explain how it works?

I am an Ne-Si. The way I think that works is:

Si is like a huge store of info (of a subjective nature), imprints of actual sensory experiences, that are somehow catalogued whichever which way I assign internal significance during the experience. For example if I walk downtown, I cannot store all the details, so I make mental maps instead, based on shape, color, types of store, traffic, whether I care or not about the library, etc.

Ne makes connections and has this huge Si-store to work with. Also, Si checks that the random connections made fit with the Si-store of info. In a conversation with a person, I'll be collecting tons of info into the store especially about things I care about or Ne-generated ideas that I am pursuing. So either to be able to generate Ne-ideas or to be able to check them.

To me it's kind of Si->Ne->Si or Ne->Si

I'm not clear how Ni-Se would go? I think I've had weird moments of Ni at times, that don't feel great (ultra inferior I guess) and kind of claustrophobic. And at those times, it felt like it was really an empty Ni without any kind of Se-input if that is even possible. It felt like being unreal and seeing the future without that much clarity. So I kind of wonder how Se works in the normal Se-Ni dynamic of an Ni-dom.

 

[Feline]

I dont know who associates Se with gut feelings, but thats just stupid. Sure Ni can(and will in many situations) be "fed" by Se, but its not Se that gives the gut feelings, Se gives conscious perceptions.


I underlined some important things:

Are these direct Jung quotes?

 

[INTP]

Are these direct Jung quotes?

Yes

 

[Werebudgie]

Would you be able to explain how it works?

Not at this point; my analytical attention is really strongly elsewhere for the time being and the words aren't coming. Will post a real answer if mt attention returns to this enough to be able to really answer the question. My apologies for not having the space to answer at the moment.

 

[Feline]

Not at this point; my analytical attention is really strongly elsewhere for the time being and the words aren't coming. Will post a real answer if mt attention returns to this enough to be able to really answer the question. My apologies for not having the space to answer at the moment.

No problem

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Se is awesome and underrated in the amateur typology community. Many great innovators and artists have probably been Se dominants or auxiliaries. Se aux types can be just as creative and innovative as intuitive types, if they are willing to listen to and use their Ni, in my opinion.

Of course that doesn't really answer your question. Sorry about that.

 

[Thalassa]

I think like what [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] said, Ne is experienced so unconsciously, and I would think Se would be too for SPs. I think this is compounded by the fact that there is a unconscious element behind Ji too and this means NPs and SPs are less aware/invested of the impact of their behaviour*. The idea of framing Pe with such conscious intentions behind it feels like it is missing the point. I don't think you're wrong to describe Ne as "ping-ing"; I think this is in fact how it works. It just that we have no control over that or any real awareness that it's going on.


I just don't think that even extroverted Pe is like that. I don't see ExxPs like that in general. I do agree that there are some that are. I've been on the receiving end of ESTP cruelty in a big way while going through school. ESTPs seemed to smell my weakness and would go after it like no other type. I grew up basically hating the type (before having knowledge of MBTI) and was always giving them a wide berth. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about?


That's fine. I'm not saying you shouldn't. I was just trying to express how foreign your ideas felt to me. I'm trying to figure out if the foreignness is because you're seeing something I'm missing or if you're off track. I'm trying to feel it out and I mean no insult in that.


*I'm adding a huge disclaimer for this because I know this isn't always true. I just mean to say that xxxPs are by nature less 'directive' people. OTOH EXTPs, for example, can make the best courtroom lawyers or con men, which includes a large element of consciousness of how to persuade or affect people. I'm not sure how to reconcile this just yet.


Yes, this is true.

But speaking for FPs anyway (not sure on the TPs - there may be an equivalent), I would say that we believe in maintaining a state of "innocence", so to speak. By this I mean, I think that deep down we want to be relatively blithe - perhaps it is important to how we process the world for us to remain so. Whether this is right or wrong (or just plain naive and silly) is besides the point to us, because we feel we're responding to something that feels right.

I used the example of a surfer riding a wave to describe how it feels to use Pe. We accept that the wave happens on its own and its forces are outside our control. We don't really think about how the wave forms or functions - we don't really want to. The wave just is what is it is, and we just respond to it and catch a ride. It seems crazy to me to think of trying to create a wave or try to direct or shape and existing one in a certain way - that seems like circumventing the laws of nature. I suppose I do sometimes do that, but it feels like a evil thing (and I'm not that great at it either). It's like I'm exploiting my inside knowledge of the wave. It also undermines what I'm doing in a way too, because to be a good surfer requires a certain degree of submission to the laws of nature.

(Note, this is just describing how it feels. I don't mean to direct how you see the same behaviour or to say this is the only correct way of being)


Hmm. Perhaps what you're describing is what Ne/Se users do to shape their perceptions. We need to bounce our ideas off something or someone to see if they're working or are accurate. I suppose Ne/Se doms have more of a hunger for input and if they can't get it passively, they will actively search for it. They need to know what your thoughts/feelings/opinions/attitudes/experiences are to compare to their own and figure out if they're on the right track.

The reason why adult ExTP make great lawyer or con men is tertiary Fe...and Se cares very much about the impact of his or her behavior on the environment, it's just that Se cares how intense it is, so can very easily be viewed as rude, immoral, histrionic, brutish ....Se gauges for impact...so ESTP is the ultimate archetype of the politician or con man because of need to impact + social know how from tertiary Fe supplementing the "mechanism of things" or "way things tick" of Ti.

In interaction styles STP is the same as IxxJ and ExxJ in their ability to chart the course or be directive. ISTP charts the course with Ti/Se and ESTP makes Se/Fe directive.

 

[Thalassa]

Se is awesome and underrated in the amateur typology community. Many great innovators and artists have probably been Se dominants or auxiliaries. Se aux types can be just as creative and innovative as intuitive types, if they are willing to listen to and use their Ni, in my opinion.

Of course that doesn't really answer your question. Sorry about that.

Se types are creative, as are Si types. I am pretty sure Andy Warhol was ISFJ...his scene was largely social in nature, with just a touch of the ESFJ social bully pressed on at points, but he was incredibly meek and behind the scenes, ate the same thing for lunch every day, and made a fortune and fame off of being able to 1) meme and interpret with Si what was going on around him, voila silk screen of the same image different ways, making more of an Fe observation about commercials and United States factory culture (his scene was in fact called the Factory) and 2) using Fe to see and surround himself advantageously with the coolest people of his era.

Andy Warhol saw beauty in repetition, not of the Se reality, but his own Si view of the thing. He took women, like Edie Sedgwick and made them his Si ideal of beauty, then also made them repetitive images, before discarding them socially. He was powerful because of this weird combination of mildness and critical nitpicking social snobbery (I think his Fe may have been unhealthy because of his isolation as a child due to illness, and he is rumored to have died a virgin because of Catholic guilt about his homosexuality).

 

[Southern Kross]

The reason why adult ExTP make great lawyer or con men is tertiary Fe...and Se cares very much about the impact of his or her behavior on the environment, it's just that Se cares how intense it is, so can very easily be viewed as rude, immoral, histrionic, brutish ....Se gauges for impact...so ESTP is the ultimate archetype of the politician or con man because of need to impact + social know how from tertiary Fe supplementing the "mechanism of things" or "way things tick" of Ti.

In interaction styles STP is the same as IxxJ and ExxJ in their ability to chart the course or be directive. ISTP charts the course with Ti/Se and ESTP makes Se/Fe directive.

This is interesting.

I never thought of Se as specificly needing an impact on the environment. I suppose this is why ESXPs make good comedians because they can read the vibe of the crowd and then tap into and capitalize on that.

But is this still a conscious element? Is it only with the addition of Fe that consciousness enters into it? Are SFPs more instinctive in nature than STPs?

 

[Thalassa]

This is interesting.

I never thought of Se as specificly needing an impact on the environment. I suppose this is why ESXPs make good comedians because they can read the vibe of the crowd and then tap into and capitalize on that.

But is this still a conscious element? Is it only with the addition of Fe that consciousness enters into it? Are SFPs more instinctive in nature than STPs?

That's a good question and I think Se maybe "wants" to impact the environment because of heightened awareness of dynamics in the environment. Jung called SeF the cultural realist, so in SFPs the awareness and impact extends to the culture through a feeling function, rather than measuring and acting on things and people as objects or projects or something...ESFPs have tertiary Te though so as fully functional adults may also act on objects, I think Se/Te accounts a lot for a trend of "making things pop" in commercial art with intense color and clean lines...so it probably varies by the individual. I saw an INTJ on another forum putting Lana del Rey and her style beautifully as an ISFP she is adventurous and rebellious and wants to experience things she can't explain from a sensorial standpoint, and that made so much sense to me, I don't know how much tertiary Ni plays into that but I also want to experience things I can't explain, especially things of beauty. That's definitely more unconscious.