[MENTION=12103]Poki[/MENTION] what you said makes a lot of sense. But now it's making me doubt my Si dominance. I really like that explanation though.
what makes you think your dom Si
And what about what I said makes you doubt it?
[MENTION=12103]Poki[/MENTION] what you said makes a lot of sense. But now it's making me doubt my Si dominance. I really like that explanation though.
I meant perception as in the people who like to argue that reality is nothing more then perception. I hate those arguments, its like really...lets go so far off into lala land where nothing is as its perceived and at that point we can argue anything with some of the wall stuff because its all just perception right and nothing is real. I had to try and stop that before it started from someone who read what I wrote. Not necessarily you.
Please tell me what exactly about that says it cannot be detected? I don't see that assumption anywhere in that definition.
Yeah I hate that stuff too.
The assumption is implicit in the statement that the J/P dichotomy only applies when you interact with the outer world - it's pretty clear from that.
what makes you think your dom Si
And what about what I said makes you doubt it?
For dom Si
Have a routine
Like to have a bunch of data before making decisions
I don't immediately "get" things the way Ni doms seem to do
I like to know the details of the stories, and similar things.
I feel as though I'm aware of my body
Not dom Si
I'm not as detailed as your brother, and feel like the art I make is more conceptual.
I don't get the implicit assumption. Even your example doesn't mean anything to me of Ti and Fi. One example doesn't show how a person comes across overall. I honestly don't know any IxxP person who comes across as J generally. While some of the order and structure may come out from time to time. Words such as "feel very", "looks", "may feel", "looks more" all show that the internal J/P does show its head, just not as much. To confirm this further down it uses words like generally, and prefers which are also not absolute words so you cant use specific examples to debunk it. You have to look at the whole picture and find what happens more or prefers. I like to use both because sometimes what actually happens more is environment driven, though they prefer the other.
Se - Outward and active focus on the objective world and on gathering factual data and sensory experiences
Si - Inward and reflective focus on subjective sensory experiences and on the storing of factual historical data
OK the implicit assumption is that the J/P of Ji/Pi cannot be detected outwardly as they state that the J/P dichotomy only applies when you interact with the outer world. Exactly what is unclear to you in this statement I've just given you?
"feel very", "looks", "may feel", "looks more" --> are you associating that stuff with Ji or with Pi?
apply and detects are not the same word. That means you have to look at only the outer world when applying J vs P or you may really screw things up as even though you detect P in the inner world, it is not used to apply the J/P dichotomy. It doesn't mean it cant be detected, it means you must use what you detect in thew outer world to determine and apply J vs P. you are reading into what is not said, inferring things that should not be inferred.
"feel very", "looks", "may feel", "looks more" - really not associating it to any...feel is more Fi, looks is more Se, I am more referring to the lack of black and white lines. Its saying basically whatever you use to "detect" whether it be P or J it will not match J 100% or P 100%. You will pick up both through your detection mechanism whatever it may be, could be either your Je, Ji, Pe, Pi.
No, they are not the same word but that does not address the problem I'm bringing up; let me rephrase, the implicit assumption is that the J/P of Ji/Pi cannot interact with the outer world by any means whatsoever. Do you understand what I'm saying now?
(As for the word usage. Obviously, if it cannot be detected, it also means there is no interaction to be detected.)
I will go further: when you see someone Judging, you cannot tell if this is the Ji or the Je function just from the fact that you've seen them doing this.
Sure.
Please tell me what you think of the text in post #48. Se, Si?
I understand exactly what you are saying, I don't get that implicit assumption from reading that. Fi does interact with the outer world through an extroverted function. Fi very frequently reacts to the outer world through Te. Ti through Fe, though I believe we can express through any of our extraverted functions. My Ti frequently expresses itself judgement outwardly by pulling in more data in an Se manner. In that manner you can get an idea of what Ti judgement is, but it does not mean we made a decision yet. It means we are analyzing possible paths.
Beggining seems Si, the end is indeterminate as you don't know through what form or method analysis is happening. That spans more then just Se or Si or a simple function.
What do you like about conceptual art? What does it portray to you?
That's my thinking too, however MBTI states that when Pi/Ji interacts via another function it doesn't count as J/P... this is where I disagree.
Yes it may involve more than Se/Si but I was asking you if you think it's Se or Si in terms of the Sensing.
Anyhow. Then you are saying you relate MBTI Si with socionics Si. Right?
Sometimes it can be difficult to tell, but I basically tell from whether or not people are "here" or not.
Take them hiking somewhere; are they thinking about the moment and reacting to things around them (including their own needs/internalized data, which is often the case in Si-users), or are they more thinking about random things, yakking on and on without regard to interacting directly with their physical surroundings?
If the former, than you have an S; if the latter, you have an N on your hands.
Sometimes it can be difficult to tell, but I basically tell from whether or not people are "here" or not.
Take them hiking somewhere; are they thinking about the moment and reacting to things around them (including their own needs/internalized data, which is often the case in Si-users), or are they more thinking about random things, yakking on and on without regard to interacting directly with their physical surroundings?
If the former, than you have an S; if the latter, you have an N on your hands.