Challenging Stereotypes - Se in service of Fi

[magpie]

Not Ne to me. Sorry.

This is how I visualize the ISFP from my perspective: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0hs2eq66L.../s1600/gifs_-_screensavers_320x240_no+(4).gif or maybe Swirl (Swirl.gif) | Tacoma World

Ni is layers. It's like bread. Baked lightly and well, but full of perfection and meaning. Bread seems like one layer but is actually many, which makes it fluffy, or whatever texture you want it to have. Ne sees layers. It's like, if Intuition were a building, Ni would be the building (floors and such on top of each other, piled) and Ne would be the bystander looking at it. They could see the layers, but not the content inside it.

Oh, no, I wasn't trying to describe Ne. I like your analogy.

 

[skimpit]

Oh, no, I wasn't trying to describe Ne. I like your analogy.

Oh I know you weren't, dear. I was trying to defend you. Poor ISFPs. They always get the brunt of things.

(K-pop ISFP time)

 

[Masokissed]

@ me next time

 

[Kierva]

@ me next time

stfu

 

[Masokissed]

stfu

 

[magpie]

@ me next time

@ you

 

[magpie]

I think a huge reason so many sensors mistype as intuitives is because they think things that are actually concrete are abstract. (Like emotions). Which is really just a fundamental misunderstanding about what abstract is, and really only a problem a sensor could have.

 

[magpie]

Possibilities can be concrete or actually are concrete to an extent if they are experienced or observed in relation to the concrete. Like having possible actions you can take in any given situation. Se will open you up to multiple possible actions and actions result in understandings if you use Fi and Se.

 

[magpie]

In reality there is no human on earth who only experiences the physical world or only experiences the abstract world. Both sensors and intuitives deal in both the theoretical and the material.

The thing is that intuitives start with the theoretical and use the theoretical to get to the physical. And sensors start with the physical and use the physical to get to the theoretical. So it's the same thing but the flow is in opposite directions. Ultimately it's possible to end up in the same place, but through different means. And there is also an inherently different understanding of theoretical and physical based off which one you start at and which one you end up at. How you get there flavors your understanding of where you've ended up.

 

[magpie]

lol this thread has a one star rating.

I bet it's from some sensor mistyped as INFP.

 

[Yuurei]

I've never had the patience for philosophy. People I encounter who try to describe their worldview through borrowed philosophical labels also bother the shit out of me. "Ohh I would describe myself as a rule consequentialist." Yeah, sure, girl. Good for you.

What someone believed was always less interesting to me than how they actually conduct themselves as a result of those beliefs.

...what the hell is that even? Aggravating.

 

[Poki]

I've seen it floating around that ISFPs are risk-averse and I want to point out that Se is not prone to avoiding risks or hanging back from taking chances. I just read an article about a photographer who died trying to ride on top of a subway car and I think it's pretty clear he was probably an Se user.

Wrong...now if it said...a guy was killed surfing a subway car its Se, a photographer getting killed on a subway car is not type related...need the why and underlying reason.

 

[magpie]

Wrong...now if it said...a guy was killed surfing a subway car its Se, a photographer getting killed on a subway car is not type related...need the why and underlying reason.

That's true. It was a bad example. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Yuurei]

I have to admit that I don't really understand the difference- tired pointing this out a while ago, no one responded -_-
I thought about it while walking outside at night.

Heard some rustling in the bushes and declared it " A rabbit." An immediate declaration yes, but not an random one. It sound like a rabbit, I didn't see it so it was obviously small like a rabbit. That sounds like obvious Se reasoning.
But intuition is not nonsense. An intuitive person wouldn't say " It's a giraffe cuz I said so!" Every person on earth learns and makes decisions based on past experience. If we did not no one would live past 12.

 

[Hiraeth]

I remember this thread, but this was around the time I didn't identify as an ISFP. There's a lot I want to address. Since I'm busy right now, I'll reply later.

 

[Hiraeth]

There are some things I want to clear up because I found what you said earlier interesting. I'll go through your first post and cherry pick some things here and there that I resonated with and others I didn't.

Fi is the way I structure my thoughts, emotions, experiences, observations, etc. Think of a cave mouth. You enter it and underneath is a vast space filled with winding catacombs, stalagmites and stalactites, pools, and rivers. Multiple tunnels branch out and in. It's confusing to an outsider but the whole thing is meticulously organized. New perceptions are placed inside, adding to the labyrinth. Stalactites are refined by running water. Catacombs are smoothed with footprints from much exploration. It's a system of careful organization and it's very, very large. Sometimes even I get lost there.

I think this is a good example to describe the complex nature of Fi. But honestly, the way you describe this sounds very Ne to me. Maybe it's because I don't incorporate a lot of colorful words and metaphors into my writing, but just the way this whole paragraph is structured gives off a more intuitive vibe overall.

Se is commonly perceived as a thought process and it's not. It's a way to information gather. Fi information gathers internally. Se information gathers externally. That is to say that Fi utilizes a great amount of thought about meanings and abstractions, or in other words, things that can't be touched, seen, heard, or smelled, but can be felt emotionally. There is a system of careful analysis which is helped by Ni in the ISFP. Deciphering patterns, making connections, testing them, and refining connections. Testing is where Se comes into play.

The part in bold sounds very Ne to me too, but I think I understand what you are saying. You are talking about hands-on experience rather than abstract concepts, right? ISFPs are able to make, test, and refine connections as long as we have experienced it firsthand, rather than simply theorizing about something?

I need to reality test to figure out whether my Fi is giving me an accurate picture of the world. To figure out whether I'm organizing right. There has to be some external connection or information gathering process or I'll fall into a world made up entirely of my own mind. I've been lost there before and it really can destroy you in a lot of ways. Relying on the Fi-Ni loop means that you stop taking in new information, which is something your world view can't grow or adapt without. Se is in service to Fi because Se, or experiences, give your Fi a more accurate picture of the world, of others, of yourself, and help you to develop as a person.

Se makes an ISFP adaptable and open to new perceptions. The Fi-Se-Ni combo makes ISFPS masters at juggling and integrating perceptions, at viewing multiple things from multiple points of view. At understanding others, understanding why they think the way they think, and taking that into consideration, both to accomodate others and to expand their own views. ISFPs are keenly aware of who they are and who they could be, and the possibilities inherent in that.

I like how you describe this, but isn't tert-Ni more of an "aha" moment that comes out of the blue because it's not one of the two main functions we are totally comfortable using? So in other words, it may not necessarily show up when we need it? But I have read that ISFPs can develop their Ni function over time to where it can work in close proximity to Se, is that what you are referring to? I'm not too keen on the tert-Ni function, so maybe you can elaborate on where I am missing the point or not. In addition, I'm still unsure if I need external connection/information to come to depths with understanding the world around me. But maybe there were times I was in an Fi-Ni loop without realizing it and being too comfortable in my own mind.

It's less about eating an apple to figure out what it tastes like and more about eating an apple because an apple is part of the universe, and eating it will tell me about the universe in a spiritual way.

I don't relate to this at all. If I decide to eat an apple, I would eat it solely because I am hungry and it's a healthy snack that tastes good. There is no spiritual context I am thinking about during that moment whatsoever.

I think there is a misunderstanding going on and I realize I'm not always good at articulating, and can struggle to describe things with clarity.

This is probably not made as an example towards ISFPs, but I want to say that I also struggle with articulating myself in words. I can picture the idea in my head, but once I am made to project my thoughts into words, it becomes very difficult to do so in a concise manner. Everything comes out jumbled up. I think this could be a common ISFP trait, since we tend to be more visual I would assume.

I realize now that saying "land of ideas" makes it sound like I live inside my head, which isn't what I meant. I meant more in a land of possibilities, which is what happens when you're in the moment. Like being aware of all possible actions you could take and just sort of understanding them all at once and making a decision without a long analytical process. A gut thing. So it's not going from one possibility to another and another, it's sort of seeing all posibilities and zeroing in.

I relate to this, but I also have an e6 possibly second in my tritype and you have it first. Could you maybe be confusing this with the cautious side to an e6? Just a thought. Although, this also sounds very Ne to me too, the whole thinking about the possibilities of a situation. In reference to ideas, sometimes I get an overwhelming bundle of ideas that flow in my head, but other times I can't come up with anything, like an artist's block. But this pertains to anything in general and not just artistic outlets.

On a side note, there are other things I could relate with INFPs, the whole daydreaming, idealistic, future/past thinking, and multiple perspective part mainly. Could it be possible for ISFPs to be idealistic? I've always considered myself that, but maybe it's just me being overly picky. I relate to getting lost in daydreams and forming my own stories in my head with other possible ideas I can add to make them fit this fantasy I dream of. Do you also fantasize about the past? Sometimes I look back on past events and think about alternative ways in how they could have formed to my own liking. The same happens for future events too, like envisioning what could happen at an event and then becoming disappointed when it doesn't turn out how I idealized it.

And the practical aspect of ISFPs I don't relate to at all. I am one of the least practical people ever. I don't do things just because they have a practical means to them, but rather if I am intrigued with them just for the sake of it. I do, however, consider myself very detail-oriented and can see many things that others wouldn't notice. But there are other times I have to try really hard, like when I am scrubbing the dishes and end up leaving some food stuck there without noticing it until someone else points it out (even from growing up with a crazy, OCD-like mother, I still can't clean things right) .

However, the main reason I decided to identify as an ISFP is because of a gut feeling I had inside and because it always took much more effort to decipher abstract concepts. As a child, I was naturally much better at hands-on activities than absorbing concepts from textbooks. Moreover, I am a walking stereotype of one, being an artist an all. I've always preferred drawing and painting over writing, which is known to be more of an INFP thing. But I must say, something that occurred to me recently is that I'm not very good at taking the main idea of something and breaking it down into smaller increments of it. It's much more natural for me to start small, like with a seed that grows into a tree with many different branches and leaves, if that makes sense. I think the latter is more in line with ISFPs.

Sorry, I'm sort of spinning this towards my direction and going off tangent, but I just want to find some common ground to see if you can somehow relate, since you seem pretty knowledgeable in understanding the ISFP psyche. Although, others are suggesting that you are probably an INFP, and I'm getting that vibe from you too. But I understand there are inaccurate stereotypes that you are trying to disprove as well.

 

[Hiraeth]

Yeesh, didn't realize my post was that long. I wouldn't blame people for not reading all of it, haha. I was also in a rush writing it, so hopefully it's not too incoherent at times.

 

[Pionart]

I think a huge reason so many sensors mistype as intuitives is because they think things that are actually concrete are abstract. (Like emotions). Which is really just a fundamental misunderstanding about what abstract is, and really only a problem a sensor could have.

I used to mistype as a sensor because I had a very abstract idea about what Si was that seemed to work. So I probably thought that abstract things were actually concrete.

Main example of this is the thoughts I would have when shown a particular stimulus - I would describe it as an "aesthetic" which I took to be the subjective sensory component, but probably it was more to do with the meaning of what I was seeing.

 

[Evo]

After reading first page i have decided that Pe is explained and we are getting into the S vs N stigma that Ne and Se processes different as if it actually processes, it percieves. S percieves different data then N from same situation...conclusion while based on data is irrelevant of source. Meaning S sees xyz, N sees abc...both can lead to qrs. Qrs doesnt define whether the person is S or N. Nor does the process to go from xyz to qrs or from abc to qrs.

True story.

 

[magpie]

There are some things I want to clear up because I found what you said earlier interesting. I'll go through your first post and cherry pick some things here and there that I resonated with and others I didn't.

Thanks so much for doing this.

I think this is a good example to describe the complex nature of Fi. But honestly, the way you describe this sounds very Ne to me. Maybe it's because I don't incorporate a lot of colorful words and metaphors into my writing, but just the way this whole paragraph is structured gives off a more intuitive vibe overall.

Huh, that's interesting. I suppose I could see how the use of metaphor could be viewed as Ne. To me it's taking something abstract (Fi) and relating it to something concrete (a cave), therefore making it more understandable. Also, it's sort of impossible to make thoughts or feelings understandable without using metaphors. Not everyone shares the same thoughts/feelings, but everyone knows what a cave is, and therefore the metaphor allows a point of reference across the board.

The part in bold sounds very Ne to me too, but I think I understand what you are saying. You are talking about hands-on experience rather than abstract concepts, right? ISFPs are able to make, test, and refine connections as long as we have experienced it firsthand, rather than simply theorizing about something?

Yes, exactly.

I like how you describe this, but isn't tert-Ni more of an "aha" moment that comes out of the blue because it's not one of the two main functions we are totally comfortable using? So in other words, it may not necessarily show up when we need it? But I have read that ISFPs can develop their Ni function over time to where it can work in close proximity to Se, is that what you are referring to? I'm not too keen on the tert-Ni function, so maybe you can elaborate on where I am missing the point or not. In addition, I'm still unsure if I need external connection/information to come to depths with understanding the world around me. But maybe there were times I was in an Fi-Ni loop without realizing it and being too comfortable in my own mind.

I think Ni can be an aha moment but I think in general the aha moment is a misrepresentation of what Ni is. Though obviously an Ni dom or aux would know better. I think Ni is more about filtering and sort of crystallizing. Like for example, the cave metaphor is something I actually see as more Ni than Ne. Because it's taking the concept of Fi and reducing it, crystallizing it into one coherent object related metaphor. From my view, Ne would take Fi and expand rather than sharpen. Does this make sense? But yeah, ISFPs can develop their Ni over time and then have it work with Se to make more sense of the world.

I don't relate to this at all. If I decide to eat an apple, I would eat it solely because I am hungry and it's a healthy snack that tastes good. There is no spiritual context I am thinking about during that moment whatsoever.

Yeah, I think I just let my own individual weirdness slip in there. Not sure anyone could relate to that part. Sorry about that.

This is probably not made as an example towards ISFPs, but I want to say that I also struggle with articulating myself in words. I can picture the idea in my head, but once I am made to project my thoughts into words, it becomes very difficult to do so in a concise manner. Everything comes out jumbled up. I think this could be a common ISFP trait, since we tend to be more visual I would assume.

A lot of the time I feel or know something with certainty but I can't figure out how to say what it is or how even to really describe it. So frustrating.

I relate to this, but I also have an e6 possibly second in my tritype and you have it first. Could you maybe be confusing this with the cautious side to an e6? Just a thought. Although, this also sounds very Ne to me too, the whole thinking about the possibilities of a situation. In reference to ideas, sometimes I get an overwhelming bundle of ideas that flow in my head, but other times I can't come up with anything, like an artist's block. But this pertains to anything in general and not just artistic outlets.

Anything I write is e6 influenced but I'm not sure I understand how it relates to the cautious side of e6? From my pov, Se gives me a gut understanding of possibilites related to concrete things/actions/whatever. Ne would start with one possibility which you would then expand (using Ne, of course) into multiple different possibilities. But I feel like I start with everything at once and then condense or choose, instinctually in an Se context. To me that isn't Ne, it's Fi-Se-Ni.

So I'm walking in the woods. I see falling leaves, a bird in a tree, I feel the sun on my face, I feel the sun's warmth contrasting with the snow on my feet, I hear the crunch of my feet, etc, because it's limitless. What I can take in is limitless. And I could do anything with all this information. That's possibilities. But because I can't interact with everything at once, I focus on one thing and react or interact. This is sort of a very reductive way of viewing it but I hope it helps this make more sense rather than being more confusing.

On a side note, there are other things I could relate with INFPs, the whole daydreaming, idealistic, future/past thinking, and multiple perspective part mainly. Could it be possible for ISFPs to be idealistic? I've always considered myself that, but maybe it's just me being overly picky. I relate to getting lost in daydreams and forming my own stories in my head with other possible ideas I can add to make them fit this fantasy I dream of. Do you also fantasize about the past? Sometimes I look back on past events and think about alternative ways in how they could have formed to my own liking. The same happens for future events too, like envisioning what could happen at an event and then becoming disappointed when it doesn't turn out how I idealized it.

I think ISFPs can be very idealistic, as idealism seems to be an Fi thing. I can't say I really fantasize about the past, though I do have a fixation on it which may or may not be type related. But yeah, I envision future events too.

And the practical aspect of ISFPs I don't relate to at all. I am one of the least practical people ever. I don't do things just because they have a practical means to them, but rather if I am intrigued with them just for the sake of it. I do, however, consider myself very detail-oriented and can see many things that others wouldn't notice. But there are other times I have to try really hard, like when I am scrubbing the dishes and end up leaving some food stuck there without noticing it until someone else points it out (even from growing up with a crazy, OCD-like mother, I still can't clean things right) .

I'm not that practical either, though I used to think I was way less practical than I actually am. I really only like discussing things that feel relevant in some way. It's sort of like only wanting to discuss things that are practically useful.

However, the main reason I decided to identify as an ISFP is because of a gut feeling I had inside and because it always took much more effort to decipher abstract concepts. As a child, I was naturally much better at hands-on activities than absorbing concepts from textbooks. Moreover, I am a walking stereotype of one, being an artist an all. I've always preferred drawing and painting over writing, which is known to be more of an INFP thing. But I must say, something that occurred to me recently is that I'm not very good at taking the main idea of something and breaking it down into smaller increments of it. It's much more natural for me to start small, like with a seed that grows into a tree with many different branches and leaves, if that makes sense. I think the latter is more in line with ISFPs.

That's interesting, because to me what you described with the tree that branches out is Ne and taking the main idea and breaking it down is Ni.

Sorry, I'm sort of spinning this towards my direction and going off tangent, but I just want to find some common ground to see if you can somehow relate, since you seem pretty knowledgeable in understanding the ISFP psyche. Although, others are suggesting that you are probably an INFP, and I'm getting that vibe from you too. But I understand there are inaccurate stereotypes that you are trying to disprove as well.

No need to apologize, thanks so much for writing this. I think it's pretty clear the issue is differing opinions on what Ne and Ni are. I don't mind being thought of as INFP, as I consider myself pretty balanced in regard to S/N, but I think further discussion on Ne vs Ni would probably clarify a lot of things for a lot of us.