The Pi functions , yes. Everyone knows Si is about storing data. Si doesn't take in data. That's Se. Of course someone looking at a brick isn't using Se unless they think "There is a brick". Si then stores the memory so they know "This is what a brick is." Honestly no functions can work by themselves. Everyone has to use every function as they all play a role. Pi functions aren't about noticing things in the real world. They are about looking in and coming up with something from ourselves.
I believe these concepts diverge significantly from what Jung was saying about cognitive functions.
Se doesn't "take in data." Si doesn't "recall data." F doesn't "feel." T doesn't "think." These are typological labels that use old words in new ways, in order to provide an intuitive understanding of each. Rather, they are predispositions. As one "differentiates" or develops functions, one is not "using them more," but rather is developing a new way of understanding/perceiving/processing.
ENxPs having Se as their 8th function doesn't mean they're legally blind (though humor may be had at their expense in this regard), it means that they don't process what they sense in an "Se way." The "Se way" is much more than thinking, "There is a brick": it's being aware of everything around you and comprehending/appreciating it in a "concrete" (as opposed to "abstract") way, that not only is there a brick, but it's red and heavy and rough and makes a particular sound when you hit it and has a smell that most people won't notice, but you do, and everything about the brick says "brick" to you, and it is no more and no less than a brick, with no significant preconceptions about what a brick should be or could be. (run-on sentence intentional - all of these concepts are "just there" for one with a strongly developed Se)
"There is a brick," doesn't reflect one's
understanding of the brick.
What? So basically you're afraid of the possibilty that the mysticality of your function will be lost if you come up with some reasonable explanation of it? The discussionis not wrong by bringing other functions into play in how Ni works. Like I said, each function serves an individual purpose, but they cannot function fully without the other functions. Ni looks inwards. Ergo, it cannot absorb information directly from the outside world without first using an extraverted percieving function to get it.
Other functions do come into play with respect to how Ni works, but I don't believe they do so in the manner you suggest. Assume we're discussing an Ni dom. Then here are some possible ways other functions can affect Ni:
- Strong Te: Ni tends to process things in terms of objective, logical considerations, but not considering people/feelings as useful data.
- Strong Fe: Ni tends to process things in terms of people and interactions with people, but not so much in terms of logistical processes.
- No strong Te or Fe: Ni instead resorts to subjective judgment, either Ti or Fi, and one's type is more difficult to determine. Strong Ti will often make an INFJ self-type as an INTJ, and strong Fi will often make an INTJ self-type as an INFJ, for instance.
- Ni with no other well-differentiated functions: this Ni can be almost hopelessly abstract. There is usually some minor Te or Fe tendency such that one can determine type, but it isn't developed. Ideas are expressed in an extremely abstract way, with little concrete expression to ground them.
- Ni with several other well-differentiated functions: only found in older INxJs, if at all. Each function has weight with Ni, and one's intuition is altered accordingly. Fe/Te is still a primary consideration, but should that not yield results in a timely manner, Ti/Fi come in as backup. Se also comes into play, but it's more of an Ni/Se, where Ni doesn't completely go away, but it now has a greater awareness of "the real world." These INxJs tend to have unique characteristics that can make them difficult to type, since they're more "Fe/Ti" or "Te/Fi" than just Fe or Te. The tertiary function tends to "color" the personality with unique patterns, depending on how it came to be developed.
Se plays a role, but it's mostly subconscious until developed (much) later in life, yet young INxJs are perfectly capable of perceiving the world around themselves. They just tend to prefer their inner worlds. In conventional MBTI, it is Fe or Te that comes in to provide a "balance" to Ni, mostly by filtering out poor intuitions and training good intuitions.
Absorb is a word which here means "take in". Si doesn't "take in" information. It stores it and recalls it. There is a need for the term Si as Se does not draw from previously accessed data itself. Se and Si don't select at all. They bring information forward. The judgement functions make the selection because they are judging.
Si doesn't store information. The brain stores information. Se and Si (and Ne and Ni) are about "where your brain looks for information". Si means "concrete subjective," i.e., one tends to look for and recall one's subjective impressions of concrete reality. Se tends to look for current concrete input. Ne looks for current abstract input: an idea is as much an external object to Ne as a brick, but the brick brings up abstract brick ideas to link with other extroverted ideas. Ni looks at abstract subjective impressions, rather than concrete ones. For example, Ni remembers "meaning," and has a talent for saying things one has heard/read "in one's own words," but tends to do poorly when remembering the exact words. Si tend to recall the exact words and go from there. Si tends to be associated with "memory" because when well-developed it is exceptionally good at what most people consider to be "memorizing," namely memorizing specific facts and data, but it is not memory itself.
I would argue that all of the introverted (subjective) functions are essentially invocations of "memory." So not just Si, but Ni and Ti and Fi. In the Ti and Fi cases, the "memory" happens at the point of judgment, not the point of perception. I'd love to expand on this idea, but it requires its own post.
As for "selecting", I would argue that the perceiving functions
do select, just as much as the judging functions do. It is the
means of selection that is different. The judging functions make deliberate ("rational") selections, while the perceiving functions make "irrational" selections without conscious effort. One's perceiving functions "select" by tending to look at things in a particular way: what one sees determines that to which one may apply one's judgment.
Of course they do. What exactly would someone do if their only function was say Fi? How would that actually DO anything? They would be able to create their own values, right? Based on what?
Soo, what does Ni do? (And thus, what is Ni?)
Check out my description above for an Ni dom with no other well-developed functions. I would speculate that "just Fi" for an Fi-dom would be similar in many ways, with a predisposition to process everything in terms of a subjective, holistic vision, but generally unable to express one's ideas in a concrete, understandable manner. Values based on what? Assuming my parallel with Ni is valid, they'd be values based on background noise, essentially. They wouldn't be coherent, at least not such that one would be able to communicate them easily. It isn't that there is no input, no perception; rather, there is no extroverted function to connect the values in a meaningful way to the outside world. There would be a "subconscious" Ne or Se, but by virtue of being undifferentiated, it doesn't serve to ground the Fi values in reality, the result being an extremely introverted Fi dom.