good description of grip of the inferior in Ni dom

[INTP]

Found this quote and thought i would share it as it explains really well how inferior can fuck up your thought process:

Extraverted sensing has the natural strength of collecting evidence from the environment - people, things places. The fluid experience of information enables those using extraverted sensing to describe experiences well. But in its compensatory form, extraverted sensing leads to incorrect deductions from a single fact; at times a simple smell can lead to the catastrophic conclusion that a relationship is over. There is no step by step logic leading to the conclusion; it is as if the conclusion already existed and merely required the observation of a random fact to allow it to be arrived at.

This naturally extends to every other types of conclusions than just a relationship being over. Inferior ofc works similarly to other types aswell, but its not about seeing one fact like it is with inferior Se, but for example some far away logic supporting some weird idea that Fi dom has etc.

Also about the "as if the conclusion already existed part", when this sort of thing happens, the conclusion does already exist, just not in the consciousness, but there is some complex which gets activated(due to situation being at least partly similar to some past experience) and enforces some idea or conclusion about the current situation. This is also what Jung and Marie Von Franz were talking about when they said that inferior is connected to the shadow and other contents in the unconscious and working as a gateway for unconscious material coming to consciousness.

 

[WALMART]

[MENTION=17792]10blackroses[/MENTION]


A good piece on Se. I've thought developed Se users as having a very fluid perception of experience, as opposed to Ne's jagged interruptions between detail and thought, the former of which giving rise to your stated eidetic memory. Not saying they're mutually exclusive, but I'm sure you catch the gist.

 

[garbage]

Oh, my. Seems poignant to me.

But in its compensatory form, extraverted sensing leads to incorrect deductions from a single fact; at times a simple smell can lead to the catastrophic conclusion that a relationship is over.

"Fluidity" is a good word, tempering one's "just knowing" conclusions with actual real-world data.

 

[jryn1993]

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding because it's worded in a really abstract way, but wouldn't that be the N side of things that thinks the relationship is over? Obviously Se is what detects the smell, but any Se generally takes things at face value, so I'd imagine any wild conclusions like that are really the Ni at work.

 

[Infinite Bubble]

in its compensatory form, extraverted sensing leads to incorrect deductions from a single fact

Absolutely true. I do this a lot. It could be just one subtle piece of information, and that's it. To be fair though, I'm not always incorrect.

 

[INTP]

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding because it's worded in a really abstract way, but wouldn't that be the N side of things that thinks the relationship is over? Obviously Se is what detects the smell, but any Se generally takes things at face value, so I'd imagine any wild conclusions like that are really the Ni at work.

Yes kinda, but its the inferior Se that perceives that something so strongly that it sets Ni off to some delusional conclusions. What you said about Se taking things at face value is only partially true, while Se does see something as either existing or not, the value which Se perceives is the intensity of that thing. How relevant something is comes from the intensity of that thing and this relevance comes from Se, not Ni.

People often seem to forget that everything that comes from unconscious comes through N, N is after all defined by perception via unconscious. And in this case the intensity of something perceived by inferior Se comes through Ni and setting it off to wrong conclusions.

 

[jryn1993]

Yes kinda, but its the inferior Se that perceives that something so strongly that it sets Ni off to some delusional conclusions. What you said about Se taking things at face value is only partially true, while Se does see something as either existing or not, the value which Se perceives is the intensity of that thing. How relevant something is comes from the intensity of that thing and this relevance comes from Se, not Ni.

People often seem to forget that everything that comes from unconscious comes through N, N is after all defined by perception via unconscious. And in this case the intensity of something perceived by inferior Se comes through Ni and setting it off to wrong conclusions.

Ok, that makes more sense.

 

[KDude]

One just has to step outside the typical club on a Saturday night and observe the ridiculous fights and jealousy to draw the conclusion that Se dominants are susceptible to the most immature suspicions. Everything is potentially turned into something more than what it is (it doesn't help that they're drunk too).

 

[WALMART]

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding because it's worded in a really abstract way, but wouldn't that be the N side of things that thinks the relationship is over? Obviously Se is what detects the smell, but any Se generally takes things at face value, so I'd imagine any wild conclusions like that are really the Ni at work.

Yes, they are stating the Se INxJ's experience is/can be compensatory to their perceptions. The preconceived notions paint the picture, so to speak, as opposed to letting the picture speak for itself.

One just has to step outside the typical club on a Saturday night and observe the ridiculous fights and jealousy to draw the conclusion that Se dominants are susceptible to the most immature suspicions. Everything is potentially turned into something more than what it is (it doesn't help that they're drunk too).

Yeah, I'd definitely put it on alcohol before Se-doms. The Se-doms I know are alcohol tanks.