Proposed definition #2: The unknown is dangerous, so anchor yourself in the known
Introverted Sensation (Si) is the attitude that the unknown mostly contains threats that will undermine life and order. Given the precariousness of life--so many things have to be jjjjust right--the odds of something unknown being beneficial are very low. Consequently life demands that we carefully filter the unknown before letting it into a position of influence, that we construct barriers against the unknown, etc.
For example, in engineering, one is primarily concerned with designing systems that won't fail even though most of the exact causes of failure are not knowable in any precise way. Engineers learn many different ways in which things fail, and learn to design so that the things work, or at least major disasters don't occur, even when things go wrong--as they inevitably will. A bridge is typically designed to hold a load 6 times bigger than the biggest anticipated load, simply so it will resist unexpected troubles--shearing winds, or cracks in unexpected places, or who-knows-what that might come along and can never be fully anticipated. The full breadth of relevant dangerous factors is inherently unknowable.
An everyday example is to allow some extra time when leaving on a trip. The reason for leaving some extra time is because the world is filled with unpredictable things that could make you late. Very few unpredictable things could come along and make you early if you left late.
From the Si standpoint, the more you're going to depend on something, the more carefully you'd better inspect it, because you never know what unknown things might go awry, you only know that most of them are bad.
There's more on it here: Introverted Sensation
Proposed definition #2: The unknown is dangerous, so anchor yourself in the known
Introverted Sensation (Si) is the attitude that the unknown mostly contains threats that will undermine life and order. Given the precariousness of life--so many things have to be jjjjust right--the odds of something unknown being beneficial are very low. Consequently life demands that we carefully filter the unknown before letting it into a position of influence, that we construct barriers against the unknown, etc.
For example, in engineering, one is primarily concerned with designing systems that won't fail even though most of the exact causes of failure are not knowable in any precise way. Engineers learn many different ways in which things fail, and learn to design so that the things work, or at least major disasters don't occur, even when things go wrong--as they inevitably will. A bridge is typically designed to hold a load 6 times bigger than the biggest anticipated load, simply so it will resist unexpected troubles--shearing winds, or cracks in unexpected places, or who-knows-what that might come along and can never be fully anticipated. The full breadth of relevant dangerous factors is inherently unknowable.
An everyday example is to allow some extra time when leaving on a trip. The reason for leaving some extra time is because the world is filled with unpredictable things that could make you late. Very few unpredictable things could come along and make you early if you left late.
From the Si standpoint, the more you're going to depend on something, the more carefully you'd better inspect it, because you never know what unknown things might go awry, you only know that most of them are bad.
Dig this...
Do you people think Si is related to remembering details?
Actually, BlueWing described it very well - actually, I think it's a quote from Jung - in his INTJ profile. I'll see if I can find it.for some reason this function doesn't make much sense to me. i feel like i completely get the other 7...
(hope this is the right place)
i mean, i've read a bunch of definitions, but it's just not clicking right...
QFT
FAIL
I think of it as the intake of sensations, filtered through memory.
There's always a comparison, simply. To what was.
The Se would just enjoy the new sensation e.g. "mmmm.. this wine is lovely, chocolate!" The Si would be, "hey, this wine tastes like the other bottle I had the other day, it is slightly better though, has a richer hint of chocolate".
Hence the insecurity, methinks. Because there's always some standard that will have to be lived up to. Something that blows it, will be something new, hence unfamiliar grounds, so wariness results. Something that falls short, will be picked on/not accepted, because it doesn't live up to what they expect.
So Si. Memory of sensations. Does that help?
I think Alceros has the right take on this - it has to do with details, because the examples you've given for Se and Si both have to do with memories (of chocolate), but one is richer in details.
Uber gave some good examples, but I don't agree with the first one, ie, believing gossip. IMO opinion and experience, ISJs are less likely to listen to and accept gossip than some other types. An exception would be hearing something about someone already known to be untrustworthy. In that case, Si would come forward and say "I believe that because he also did 1, 2, & 3."
Jae Rae
Very good explanation, and this is similar to how Ni works, except Ni is taking in thoughts instead of concrete data from the 5 senses.Dig this.
Si is like taking in every miniscule detail of the exact current surroundings. The reason the users are resistant to change is that it's a lot of (tiring) work acclimating yourself to every little thing. Once it's done, then extraversion can happen -- the person feels settled knowing exactly how everything is configured, and the colors and everything about it.
Good point.It's not about sensing the object -- on some degree, obviously the object has to be noticed... obviously. But it's focus is more on how it affects the self hence introversion.
...
thanks all. it was useful for me to see all those different ways of defining it in the same place.