Challenging Stereotypes - Se in service of Fi

[magpie]

This is inspired both by [MENTION=23583]Yamato Nadeshiko[/MENTION]'s wonderful series on Si and on my growing frustration with the way Se types are perceived on this site. I can only really talk about the way Se functions for me, which is in the service of Fi. Please feel free to ask questions. I'll probably add more to this thread when I think of it.

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.

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.

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.

The world is constantly changing. Nothing is set in stone. No one point of view is right, and ISFPs have an inherent awareness of the way multiple seemingly contradictory concepts exist at once.

 

[OrangeAppled]

And so how does this differ from Ne in service of Fi? Your last two paragraphs sound remarkably like a preference for intuition, in addition to Fi.

And why is it only INFPs who don't insist on defining themselves heavily by our tertiary?

 

[magpie]

And so how does this differ from Ne in service of Fi? Your last two paragraphs sound remarkably like a preference for intuition, in addition to Fi.

And why is it only INFPs who don't insist on defining themselves heavily by our tertiary?

Why don't you tell me how it differs from Ne in service of Fi? I don't have Ne. This is my experience with Se. I think you struggle with my definition because you have a hard time accepting that ISFPs integrate and think critically about experiences.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Why don't you tell me how it differs from Ne in service of Fi? I don't have Ne. This is my experience with Se. I think you struggle with my definition because you have a hard time accepting that ISFPs integrate and think critically about experiences.

No, I never said anything of the sort.

I'm not sure why you're passive-aggressively throwing the question back at me. I don't know how it differs from your description, because your description sounds like a preference for intuition. An IxFP with a preference for intuition is INFP. Let me ask you this: how does your mentality demonstrate a preference for sensing?

 

[magpie]

No, I never said anything of the sort.

I'm not sure why you're passive-aggressively throwing the question back at me. I don't know how it differs from your description, because your description sounds like a preference for intuition. An IxFP with a preference for intuition is INFP. Let me ask you this: how does your mentality demonstrate a preference for sensing?

I sensed a lot of condescension in your post. I'm throwing the question back at you because I can't tell you about Ne, while you, as an INFP can. So I'm deferring to your expertise in that manner. While I am open to genuine suggestions of alternate types for me, I don't believe yours is genuine, and I find the fact that you see me as INFP over ISFP to be a result of the very stereotyping I'm trying to counter.

In what way does my description seem like a preference for intuition?

 

[Abendrot]

This is inspired both by [MENTION=23583]Yamato Nadeshiko[/MENTION]'s wonderful series on Si and on my growing frustration with the way Se types are perceived on this site. I can only really talk about the way Se functions for me, which is in the service of Fi. Please feel free to ask questions. I'll probably add more to this thread when I think of it.

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.

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.

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.

The world is constantly changing. Nothing is set in stone. No one point of view is right, and ISFPs have an inherent awareness of the way multiple seemingly contradictory concepts exist at once.

Fair enough. How about this? Se/Fi users are often concerned with meaning, however, the meaning is associated more with sensory experiences and the subjective meaning it holds to them, and less with abstract concepts, connections, and ideals? Also, your last two paragraphs do indeed sound more like Ne than Se.

 

[magpie]

Fair enough. How about this? Se/Fi users are often concerned with meaning, however, the meaning is associated more with sensory experiences and the subjective meaning it holds to them, and less with abstract concepts, connections, and ideals? Also, your last two paragraphs do indeed sound more like Ne than Se.

My last two paragraphs are the way meaning is made from with Fi-Se. ISFPs don't just experience, they integrate experiences. Experiences are their main source of outside info, but they use the experiences to add to their mental framework. So experiences result in understandings of perceptions, in understanding others, and in viewing multiple things from multiple points of view. Experiences are the jumping off points for building world views, and those world views are abstract and complicated. ISFPs exist in a land of ideas. For Fi-Se, sensory experiences are a means to an end. 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 think any Fi user is intensely connected to ideals. I think my last two paragraphs are not Ne, but are viewed that way from a lack of understanding regarding Fi-Se. From the assumption that ISFPs are less complex, less capable of thought, less able to conceptualize perspectives. From the stereotype that sensors somehow have a less complex, or inferior, view of the world.

 

[magpie]

I think this might clarify things. I need physical expression. I can't get myself out of a bad place mentally by thinking about it, I have to do something about it - express myself physically and emotionally or do some world testing. But that doesn't negate anything I've said above. Experiences and doing are a vital part of me, I need them to be a whole person, but that doesn't mean they're not in service to my Fi. They function to clarify my world view.

 

[magpie]

As a related topic, I don't see the point in discussing philosophy most of the time. You want to know if free will exists? How about you get yourself imprisoned and then you can find out. Think pain doesn't actually exist? Let me chop off your hand and then you'll know whether or not it does.

 

[violet_crown]

As a related topic, I don't see the point in discussing philosophy most of the time. You want to know if free will exists? How about you get yourself imprisoned and then you can find out. Think pain doesn't actually exist? Let me chop off your hand and then you'll know whether or not it does.

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.

 

[PeaceBaby]

My last two paragraphs are the way meaning is made from with Fi-Se. ISFPs don't just experience, they integrate experiences. Experiences are their main source of outside info, but they use the experiences to add to their mental framework. So experiences result in understandings of perceptions, in understanding others, and in viewing multiple things from multiple points of view. Experiences are the jumping off points for building world views, and those world views are abstract and complicated. ISFPs exist in a land of ideas. For Fi-Se, sensory experiences are a means to an end. 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 think any Fi user is intensely connected to ideals. I think my last two paragraphs are not Ne, but are viewed that way from a lack of understanding regarding Fi-Se. From the assumption that ISFPs are less complex, less capable of thought, less able to conceptualize perspectives. From the stereotype that sensors somehow have a less complex, or inferior, view of the world.

This post does not sound like Fi-Se to me, and certainly the last two paras of your first post don't either. Me saying this does not represent condescension, but rather it's a reflection of the people who I know and self-type as ISFP with a fair degree of certainty, and in no way do I view them as "less". Fi-Ni is not about multiple perspectives, it's about an eternal search for YOUR perspective, the one that fits you and makes sense of the world. It's about living that reality with a high level of focus, crystallizing your life to the most meaningful expression for you. It's about hard-boiling, it's about distilling, it is not about expansion. Fi-Se-Ni might try things on to see if they fit, but they are not clung to in any way if they fail to engage on an individual level. And they are not held in a way that speaks to "walk a mile in my shoes" and know my life - ideas are accepted or discarded, held to an Fi standard.

 

[Mole]

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.

Philosophy is interesting because it deals with the relationship between the general and the particular. It is a fruitful relationship.

Most here are very good at describing the particulars of their thoughts, feelings, and relationships, yet they have yet to develop a taste for the general. In fact the reject the general by repeating that's a generalisation or that's a stereotype. And so they miss out on the deeply fruitful relationship between the general and the particular.

And interestingly those who have yet to learn how to think in terms of the general and the particular, usually reject philosophy in favour of action, also tend to be anti-intellectual.

But if you are a man of action, or even a woman of action, we have just the device for you. It is called a GoPro and it will record all of your heroic actions in glorious colour.

 

[violet_crown]

Philosophy is interesting because it deals with the relationship between the general and the particular. It is a fruitful relationship.

Normatively, sure, yeah. Nonetheless, people who tend to get too enamored of philosophy don't usually seem to be as keen on the translation. They're more about what being able to say they read this person or that one happens to say about them.

People who are all theory and no action are bores just as surely as those who'd adhere to the opposite.

But if you are a man of action, or even a woman of action, we have just the device for you. It is called a GoPro and it will record all of your heroic actions in glorious colour.

Ten minutes of watching someone scale a cliff with a GoPro could tell me a lot more about who they actually are than listening to someone regurgitate McLuhan for any length of time. Would also be infinitely more engaging.

 

[cascadeco]

This post does not sound like Fi-Se to me either, and certainly the last two paras of your first post don't either. Me saying this does not represent condescension, but rather it's a reflection of the people who I know and self-type as ISFP with a fair degree of certainty, and in no way do I view them as "less". Fi-Ni is not about multiple perspectives, it's about an eternal search for YOUR perspective, the one that fits you and makes sense of the world. It's about living that reality with a high level of focus, crystallizing your life to the most meaningful expression for you. It's about hard-boiling, it's about distilling, it is not about expansion. Fi-Se-Ni might try things on to see if they fit, but they are not clung to in any way if they fail to engage on an individual level. And they are not held in a way that speaks to "walk a mile in my shoes" and know my life - ideas are accepted or discarded, held to an Fi standard.

This resonates with me. Multiple perspectives isn't natural to me, to be honest. If anything, multiple perspectives really bothers me, because I desperately WANT to hone in on one that I believe to be true and what I really really want / what fits me. When I get stuck in multiple perspectives I feel motionless, powerless, inert. Confused. Wishy washy and vacillating. I might use multiple perspectives or easily shift perspectives, but it isn't necessarily a helpful thing for me? Hmm. It just makes me feel I am forever drifting. So yeah, I do feel I very much want to hone in and feel really *solid* in something ---- though I 100% agree in my own life experience I rarely am or it possibly IS eternal / will be my life challenge. I feel I over time might steadily and gradually be chipping away at 'my truth' and what I really want, but I'm still 'bombarded' with other perspectives and possibilities which can confuse me. (Yes -- so right, I think confusion is the main thing I feel from multiple perspectives, I don't see it as a positive thing really for me -- certainly not something I want MORE of)

I however 100% agree with the comments / line of thought regarding DOING, rather than philosophizing. I very much get weary of talk / speculation -- I want to find out for myself and experience.

 

[magpie]

This post does not sound like Fi-Se to me, and certainly the last two paras of your first post don't either. Me saying this does not represent condescension, but rather it's a reflection of the people who I know and self-type as ISFP with a fair degree of certainty, and in no way do I view them as "less". Fi-Ni is not about multiple perspectives, it's about an eternal search for YOUR perspective, the one that fits you and makes sense of the world. It's about living that reality with a high level of focus, crystallizing your life to the most meaningful expression for you. It's about hard-boiling, it's about distilling, it is not about expansion. Fi-Se-Ni might try things on to see if they fit, but they are not clung to in any way if they fail to engage on an individual level. And they are not held in a way that speaks to "walk a mile in my shoes" and know my life - ideas are accepted or discarded, held to an Fi standard.

I relate to an eternal search for my perspective. I need to experience things to find that. The act of experiencing inherently opens you up to multiple perspectives. This informs my own. Integrating multiple perspectives mean weaving them into one - or crystalizing or condenscing as you said. I agree Fi-Ni is not about multiple perspectives, but when you add Se to the mix you're going to be exposed to them. Se goes outward by nature of being an extroverted function.

"Fi-Se-Ni might try things on to see if they fit, but they are not clung to in any way if they fail to engage on an individual level." - I agree with this and I'm not sure what makes you think I don't. In all my posts I've talked about how experiences leading to perspectives is neccessary for building my own, understanding myself, understanding others, and the world.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Integrating multiple perspectives mean weaving them into one - or crystalizing as you said.

The process of crystallizing into one perspective is not about an integration of multiple perspectives -- Fi - Ni already rules out vast swaths of data based in an internal dynamic not positioned in experiential Se as it sees no need to treat all perspectives as having merit. To me, Fi - Ni is like trying on clothes but already knowing not to pick anything in red, purple, blue, black, size 8 - 18, made of polyester or some other disagreeable fabric.

The way you are thinking about this and what you are describing is more in alignment with Ne as a slave to Fi.

What about this line of discussion is troubling to you? And what is objectionable to you about reconsidering INFP as your type? Your thinking patterns seem closer to the type.

 

[magpie]

The process of crystallizing into one perspective is not about an integration of multiple perspectives -- Fi - Ni already rules out vast swaths of data based in an internal dynamic not positioned in experiential Se as it sees no need to treat all perspectives as having merit. To me, Fi - Ni is like trying on clothes but already knowing not to pick anything in red, purple, blue, black, size 8 - 18, made of polyester or some other disagreeable fabric.

The way you are thinking about this and what you are describing is more in alignment with Ne as a slave to Fi.

What about this line of discussion is troubling to you? And what is objectionable to you about reconsidering INFP as your type? Your thinking patterns seem closer to the type.

I disagree with your definition of Fi-Se-Ni as you've written it above. You have the right to that opinion and I have the right to disagree with it. Your opinion of what Ne or Se is doesn't make reality. It doesn't define what I am or what I experience. I know my own thinking patterns. I'm comfortable typing as ISFP now. I never felt certain of my type when I was an INFP. A lot of things clicked when I typed as ISFP.

I think saying the way I'm thinking about it is more in alignment with Ne driven Fi is not something you can tell me with any degree of certainty, unless you view your view of typology as more correct than mine.

If you chose, you could learn a lot about ISFPs from what I've written in this thread. I'm glad I didn't call this thread "Breaking Stereotypes" - challenging them is hard enough.

 

[grey_beard]

The process of crystallizing into one perspective is not about an integration of multiple perspectives -- Fi - Ni already rules out vast swaths of data based in an internal dynamic not positioned in experiential Se as it sees no need to treat all perspectives as having merit. To me, Fi - Ni is like trying on clothes but already knowing not to pick anything in red, purple, blue, black, size 8 - 18, made of polyester or some other disagreeable fabric.

The way you are thinking about this and what you are describing is more in alignment with Ne as a slave to Fi.

What about this line of discussion is troubling to you? And what is objectionable to you about reconsidering INFP as your type? Your thinking patterns seem closer to the type.

Are you friends or married to an Ni-Fi user, by any chance? You've hit *half* of it spot-on; the other half, of course, is where instead of ruling out large swathes of category in your search, one instead knows 'by instinct' what domains of category to start in.

Again, INFP pawn riding drunken knight arrives at the same place as the INTJ rook. <-- not meant as flirtatious, just gratitude-filled sigh at someone other than an INTJ who 'gets it'.

 

[senza tema]

I commend the intention behind this thread but you seem to have run into the weeds a little bit here with defending your experiences to people who aren't ISFPs themselves and convincing them of their ISFPness. So I guess I'm curious to see what self-typed ISFPs make of your description. Might be worthwhile to invite them to share their opinions?

[MENTION=17945]Alaska[/MENTION] (this is bad but she's the only one I remember right now.)

I do think OrangeAppled's question of why ISFPs discuss their relief function more than INFPs discuss theirs is an interesting point to consider ... though maybe the answer is really disappointingly mundane in that ISFPs are trying to prove on internet forums that they aren't derpy caveman types with regard to their intellect and capacity for higher thought.

Thought when I self-typed as an INFP I did consider the role Si played in my function stack a lot, just because I had a lot of sensor-like preoccupations and felt my Ne was inadequate.

 

[cascadeco]

My last two paragraphs are the way meaning is made from with Fi-Se. ISFPs don't just experience, they integrate experiences. Experiences are their main source of outside info, but they use the experiences to add to their mental framework. So experiences result in understandings of perceptions, in understanding others, and in viewing multiple things from multiple points of view. Experiences are the jumping off points for building world views, and those world views are abstract and complicated. ISFPs exist in a land of ideas. For Fi-Se, sensory experiences are a means to an end. 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 think any Fi user is intensely connected to ideals. I think my last two paragraphs are not Ne, but are viewed that way from a lack of understanding regarding Fi-Se. From the assumption that ISFPs are less complex, less capable of thought, less able to conceptualize perspectives. From the stereotype that sensors somehow have a less complex, or inferior, view of the world.

I first of all want to preface this by saying that I'm in no way questioning how you think or process, as you in fact do think and process in a certain way and are explaining it here.

I am wondering though if I and others are misunderstanding what exactly you mean by certain things you're saying - ie there is a possibility I could do things similarly to you, it's just something is getting lost in translation and so I don't relate to the words you're using. I'm not sure.

I can relate to experiences being jumping off points, and being critical for finetuning self and ones own perceptions and thoughts and values, shifting and building and adjusting and sometimes reconstructing, but I don't view any of this as pulling together multiple perspectives or sensory experiences being a means to an end. Or even necessarily spiritual at all. For me, like I said earlier I may see many paths I can take in life (= multiple perspectives?) or value systems, but ultimately I am trying to define my own, and it's less about integrating a bunch as it is figuring out what exactly I believe in and need to prioritize and Live out. There's a lot I immediately write off as 'not me'. There's some I know is me. There's middle fuzzy zones where I may not be sure or I'm playing tug of war between two possibly opposing values. That's where experience is critical.

Regarding sensory alone, I think while in some areas (ie nature) there is a very deep meaning for me, there are many sensory things that just 'are', I am happy to be in that moment, and there's no deeper context, ie they aren't a means to anything, they simply are and don't need to be anything else.

Also I'm not sure I'd describe myself as being in a land of ideas. But maybe this too is me having a different notion of what that means than what you are thinking when you say that.

I hope you know I am not questioning your type, I am simply sharing my own experiences and how I view things. I also think I have never been great at breaking myself into functions (partly because I have some issues with function theory); thus that may be part of my not easily following your writing style or defining myself in that way.