User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Se vs. Ne

  1. #11
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    My understanding:

    Both are "hyper-active" and involve being present and "in-the-moment" - acting in the world as it presents itself and then compounding upon it.

    - Se draws direct, sensate experience out of the external world - touching, feeling, seeing, moving. It's physical and instinctive.
    - Ne draws out and suggests possibilities of the external world - what if this happened? What if we did this? Hey, let's go do that! It's cerebral, contextual and scatter-brained.
    Hello

  2. #12
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    My understanding:

    Both are "hyper-active" and involve being present and "in-the-moment" - acting in the world as it presents itself and then compounding upon it.

    - Se draws direct, sensate experience out of the external world - touching, feeling, seeing, moving. It's physical and instinctive.
    - Ne draws out and suggests possibilities of the external world - what if this happened? What if we did this? Hey, let's go do that! It's cerebral, contextual and scatter-brained.
    I prefer the socionics distinction between kinetic and potential energy. Both can be very cerebral.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!
    Likes Chanaynay liked this post

  3. #13
    Senior Member KitchenFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    632

    Default

    Se and Ne both can draw upon the superego as Id, it's Visceral lead cognitive action. Presence from Point 9 there's upon all three into three Actions. 1w9 who may exercise Se and Ne will tend to overcompensate and miss the finer balance that requires all points including think feel Point Sis's Instinctive Property the primary drive of Super Ego an other three or the three into three's that the 1w9 requires to balance interpretively its three part field of attention: mood conches agenda.

    There are two direction around the circle of the enneagram and 1w9 like all types utilises both directions twice.

    4 + 4 + 1 = 9 ,the principle of unification has been honoured and two sets of four has a centre function personalities identity.

  4. #14
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    1,862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    Se hears what was said.
    Ne hears what was meant.

    (best I can do when hyper analysing such small facets of a being)
    I like this. I was starting to work on a cognitive function based model of language processing the other day and this seems like it will be useful.

  5. #15
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty6226 View Post
    Could you explain the difference?
    According to Jung (JCF), Se is about a focus on fact and what is evident, acknowledging the world for what it is. In modern MBTI, Se is taken a lot more literally, associated with sports, physical crafts, hedonism & a presence in the now & here. In Socionics, Se is about direct behavior aimed at making an immediate impact, influencing, bending and pushing situations and people in order to achieve an objective or desire. In Dario Nardi's neurological studies, the brain scans he associates as Se doms are those that are in a constant state of readiness to leap into action.

    Jung views Ne is almost like that which Socionics attributes to Ne, constantly seen not just any possibilities but specifically the possibilities of manipulating everything and everyone in their environment, which is almost like Socionics Se. But he also associated much of what other systems view as Ne, he attributed Ne with the ability to steal ideas from his concept of the collective subconscious and take them as your own, which I suppose is where he theorized their ideas come from. After that, the descriptions become a lot more consistent: In MBTI, Ne is mostly associated with creativity & divergent thinking, a focus on the possibilities & potential, and mixing ideas to make brand new ones. in Socionics it is similar, it is about recognizing possibilities, creating new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize the potential in others, reconciling differing perspectives and viewpoints & rapidly generate ideas. Dario Nardi associates Ne brain scans that light up like a Christmas tree all across without any focus on a particular area.

    I would say pick your system, but almost nobody is really a system puritan. If you are lucky enough to fit the definitions of the same functions in all systems across, which is entirely possible, it would make your life simpler. Personally I do fit the same functions across the board, and I highly recommend it. If you don't, please press "undo" and try again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty6226 View Post
    So would Ne be more paranoid, as they have Si and Ne working together to both help them remember the past and predict future outcomes?

    Or would Se be more paranoid because they have Ni and are more liable to have hard hunches about what they pick up in someones present behavior?
    I would say that with all systems, the answer to that question is Ni. When dominant, it is very easy for inferior Se to get obsessed with a single fact or two and build it into a mountain. This is even more true with socionics Ni & Se, in which there is a certain rejection of the concept of time - The fact all the other times you were paranoid turned out to be wrong are a lot less likely to stand in the way of future paranoia.
    You can come up with theories using Ne, including theories about what might happen or how the world might end, but it's not really a predictive function, it just places some of it's ideas in the future because it has nowhere to place them right now. As @21lux explained pretty well, Si can be afraid of change in general, but doesn't really focus on any one negative vision.

  6. #16
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,032

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    According to Jung (JCF), Se is about a focus on fact and what is evident, acknowledging the world for what it is. In modern MBTI, Se is taken a lot more literally, associated with sports, physical crafts, hedonism & a presence in the now & here. In Socionics, Se is about direct behavior aimed at making an immediate impact, influencing, bending and pushing situations and people in order to achieve an objective or desire. In Dario Nardi's neurological studies, the brain scans he associates as Se doms are those that are in a constant state of readiness to leap into action.

    Jung views Ne is almost like that which Socionics attributes to Ne, constantly seen not just any possibilities but specifically the possibilities of manipulating everything and everyone in their environment, which is almost like Socionics Se. But he also associated much of what other systems view as Ne, he attributed Ne with the ability to steal ideas from his concept of the collective subconscious and take them as your own, which I suppose is where he theorized their ideas come from. After that, the descriptions become a lot more consistent: In MBTI, Ne is mostly associated with creativity & divergent thinking, a focus on the possibilities & potential, and mixing ideas to make brand new ones. in Socionics it is similar, it is about recognizing possibilities, creating new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize the potential in others, reconciling differing perspectives and viewpoints & rapidly generate ideas. Dario Nardi associates Ne brain scans that light up like a Christmas tree all across without any focus on a particular area.

    I would say pick your system, but almost nobody is really a system puritan. If you are lucky enough to fit the definitions of the same functions in all systems across, which is entirely possible, it would make your life simpler. Personally I do fit the same functions across the board, and I highly recommend it. If you don't, please press "undo" and try again.



    I would say that with all systems, the answer to that question is Ni. When dominant, it is very easy for inferior Se to get obsessed with a single fact or two and build it into a mountain. This is even more true with socionics Ni & Se, in which there is a certain rejection of the concept of time - The fact all the other times you were paranoid turned out to be wrong are a lot less likely to stand in the way of future paranoia.
    You can come up with theories using Ne, including theories about what might happen or how the world might end, but it's not really a predictive function, it just places some of it's ideas in the future because it has nowhere to place them right now. As @21lux explained pretty well, Si can be afraid of change in general, but doesn't really focus on any one negative vision.
    I think being able to act on Ne and trust Ne requires a certain amount of confidence that only comes with experience. In general, our society doesn't trust Intuition. Halls of learning should be a great place for NTPS to devote themselves, except for the fact that navigating it effectively demands specialization, which is anathema to Ne. The goal of our educational system is to produce specialists, not generalists, which is unfortunate, I think. Speculation is discouraged as irrelevant and untrustworthy, and only fact-gathering is valued. There's nothing wrong with fact-gathering, but it tends to miss a lot of things on its own.


    I've found that Ne can actually predict things pretty well, or at the very least locate something in the correct ballpark, if missing the precise coordinates somewhat.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78
    Likes Mane, Xander liked this post

  7. #17
    metamorphosing Flâneuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    InFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    I've read that S-types are actually more likely to be capital 'P' Paranoid, because their inferior N can flare up and spiral into crazy worst-case scenarios. They're much less optimistic about the future, which is probably why they're always so prepared for everything.
    I think this is more common among SJs, with their tertiary and inferior Ne, than it is among SPs, who in my experience tend to be pretty optimistic about the future. I've even found that it's not uncommon for young SPs, especially xSFPs, to have big dreams and not be wary enough of what can go wrong.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Jung views Ne is almost like that which Socionics attributes to Ne, constantly seen not just any possibilities but specifically the possibilities of manipulating everything and everyone in their environment, which is almost like Socionics Se.
    This is incorrect and this is why Augusta distinguished the two between potential and kinetic energy. Ne, also according to Jung, is about potential. Not so much the potential to act on something in the actual, but understanding potential in an ideological sense. It comes with transformation that is associated with intuition e.g. envisioning what something else could become, rather than seeing something for what it is or understanding how it can change in the present e.g. if I push this cup off the table, I will clearly see it fall off the table.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

Similar Threads

  1. [Se] Se = "What could be" vs. Ne = "What can't be"
    By strychnine in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-26-2015, 11:37 PM
  2. Is this a case of Ni/Se vs. Ne/Si?
    By Cygnus in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-24-2015, 10:12 PM
  3. Si vs Se / Ni vs Ne
    By Ribonuke in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-13-2013, 12:30 PM
  4. Explanation for SJs dislike of change [Si vs Ne/Ni/Se]
    By Snow Turtle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 06:37 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