[Si] Let's Discuss Si, Shall We?

[IZthe411]

My fellow SJs,

How would you describe your primary perception function?


What is Si to you?

 

[EJCC]

It keeps me in line.

Seriously, without Si, I would constantly avoid work I need to do by tackling huge and pointless projects, and then feeling guilty afterwards. My Si helps me sort out my priorities, and reminds me what I really NEED to be doing. I dunno how I could live without it.

 

[tinker683]

My fellow SJs,

How would you describe your primary perception function?


What is Si to you?

For me, the primary useage for it is when I someone or deal with a situation, I compare it against every other situation, book, movie, song or person similar to it and react accordingly. The downside to this is that when I meet someone for the first time or run into a situation that's brand new to me.....I have no idea what to do. I clam up and I take an observer approach to the person: Analyze and record.

People don't realize it, but when I first meet them in person I am analyzing EVERYTHING about them and I do mean everything. I pay attention to the things the say, the way they say it, and the body language they put off. From that, I extrapolate a profile in my head about this person based on what I said above and once I have a full idea of who they are, then I start to really interact with this person. But until then...I am extremely quiet and to myself.

What was interesting to me, when I discovered MBTI, is how some people don't think like this. That just blew me away. I mean, that there are people who don't compare people or things to previous experiences? How the hell do you even get out the door?

Of course, they obviously do make it out the door so it's interesting to me to learn about how other people come to the conclusions they make and the means of which they go about doing it as this also helps me learn and understand people

 

[IZthe411]

It keeps me in line.

Seriously, without Si, I would constantly avoid work I need to do by tackling huge and pointless projects, and then feeling guilty afterwards. My Si helps me sort out my priorities, and reminds me what I really NEED to be doing. I dunno how I could live without it.

Si doesn't stop me from that LOL. Maybe mines is not strong enough. I tend to be drawn towards the pointless because I don't want to do whatever is in front of me.

 

[Giggly]

I don't understand it very well so I'm not entirely sure what it looks like and when I'm using it but apparently I have a lot of it.

 

[Habba]

I'm not sure where the line goes between Si and Te for me.

My head carries vast amount of information about everything. I usually cope well with matters requiring general knowledge.

I also like to keep tract of progress of all kind. For example, when walking in a city, I track my movements in a mental map, much like GPS navigator.
I often find myself tracking for simple patterns, such as straight lines, pairs and circles. For example, if there's a light post somewhere along the street, I might unintentionally check whether the rest light posts are in a straight line. Or if products are arrangedi in an alphabetical order at the grocery store.

I think, it's sort of function for ultimate data collection. And I have a thing for statistical phenomens. I keep checking statistics for all kinds of sports leagues, even thought I wouldn't follow the leagues themselves. For example, I know somewhat a lot about NHL's stats, even though I have never watched a whole match.

What I don't do is data processing. I usually just keep the data as it is, and rarely make much conclusions of it. I guess this is the reason why Si people might miss things said between the lines at times.

It's kinda hard to describe the way I think, because that's really the only way I know how to think.

 

[CrystalViolet]

Hmm, this is an interesting topic. Si and se don't get discussed often.
As a tert. user, I guess I use it to compare and contrast current situations, then extroplolate outwards when I get more input.

 

[miss fortune]

I tend to observe Si more from the outside, as a Se dom who lives with a Si dom... the similarities and differences are amusing

for instance... I cook without using recipes and by tasting the food until I decide it tastes good... he uses recipes more often and tastes the food to see if it tastes RIGHT... he's the one who realizes if I forget the oregano or something of that sort

he's also the one who reminds me, when I'm trying an unusual way of fixing a problem, what I did wrong last time... such as "if you're going to fix the garbage disposal, you might want to remember to turn it off... you DO remember what happened last time don't you?"

 

[skylights]

i'm glad someone made this thread! i was going to make one just like it myself because i am curious about Si

my ESFJ mom thinks she doesn't have an amazing memory, i think cause dad (INTP) is practically a medical encyclopedia, but holy crap. i swear my mom has a detailed map of our whole city in her mind. i have no idea how she does it. she's also really good at finding her way when on the streets without a map.

What was interesting to me, when I discovered MBTI, is how some people don't think like this. That just blew me away. I mean, that there are people who don't compare people or things to previous experiences? How the hell do you even get out the door?

agreed, about it blowing your mind to hear that other people think really, really differently than you. how the hell do you remember all that stuff?! my general process is so touch-and-go...

 

[Noon]

Reposting this…

I relate to Little Linguist's Ne perception in that my focus is often not exactly on the object. I can most certainly see a color as a color and an apple as an apple, but there is also a level of detachment. It can easily go from the color to my own thoughts regarding the things associated with it, things I've encountered in the past. Maybe a line from a book I've read some time ago will immediately pop up. Often, my head is then filled with thoughts and questions branching off from that line in that book. It can go on and on. I think that Si and Ne are more related in this way than is immediately apparent. In my mind, the difference is like this: Si associations are a chain of falling dominoes, though not always in a single line, while Ne associations are the billiard balls shooting off, I prefer to say 'outward' instead of 'future', after the white ball hits. In both cases, the object of perception is there primarily to provoke a set of unrelated mental "events". Maybe that's why Si-Ne works so well in tandem. Put together, the web just gets more and more infinite.

I'd also like to point out the emphasis I place on [subjective] meaning. The reason that I become so attached to things is because I am attached to what they represent. Each important object is embedded with meaning and viewed accordingly. Very often, the personal meaning trumps the object to the extent that even while consciously not valuing the object, I am compelled to preserve it. This is why I don't like constant dramatic change if it's not especially important. The new object is "empty", with no history and no meaning. I also don't "know" it or how much I can rely on it. So you see, to have all of my meanings uprooted again and again by change or discard, especially for no great reason in particular, would be akin to having my personal world destroyed [and to top it all off, replaced with basically nothing]. The worst thing about having prominent Si is feeling like I am in a constant battle against time's natural [and inevitable] erosion of my world.

So sometimes I find it's like... outside can feel surreal while I know that inside is what I can trust. Inside does not change so much as it expands.


Regarding memory, my Si "memory" process is in actuality maybe only about 50% conscious memory. I say that because I often don't consciously choose to remember something, I certainly don't remember everything, and sometimes, I don't even know where a memory is coming from. Information is grabbed from everything that I come into contact with, but often on a subconscious level. Later on, even years later on, it bubbles up into my conscious mind and that's when the "hey, this is familiar" moment happens. Sometimes it's very vague and I have to wait to discover the origin of it.

I am completely dreadful at remembering dry details if I'm not interested. I also don’t learn or remember things well if I am trying too much. It stays longer and is stored more deeply when I just let it swish around and “soak in” somehow, without too much conscious effort. The more I experience something, the more it naturally soaks in. Maybe that is why SJs are associated with learning through repetition?

But the storing isn’t limited to general detail. I can bring up past feelings, thoughts, and very often sensations as well. I think that Socionics' Si description is very appropriate when it states that Si users are also strongly attuned to what's going on inside of their bodies. I rarely try to maintain it as I would conscious memory. It’s just floating around -- like having a mini-world -- inside of my subconscious. And of course, I love visiting again and again.

Because the images, and sometimes sensations, are so “real” inside, I can fall into the trap of trusting and favoring my internal world over actual reality (along with not trusting new things immediately). I don't notice how amazing reality is as well until I'm confronted by it again.


Last, I think that most descriptions of Si are really Si-Te, so it was easy for me to think that routine, prioritization and organization were innate qualities of Si itself. But now I kind of disagree. I do feel my overpowering need to have things in the “right place”, but as for actual organization, it might come more from my relief process (Ti) than Si. I love learning about systems. I am very interested in how anything can be categorized, analyzed, and of course how it is internally structured or ordered. I often have more fun learning about something than simply enjoying it.

But I am messy, don't prioritize well, bad at making/following routines, can be *very* annoyed by undue repetition, bored with most stereotypical ISJ things (shadow Te, I suppose).

 

[Thalassa]

Reposting this…

I relate to Little Linguist's Ne perception in that my focus is often not exactly on the object. I can most certainly see a color as a color and an apple as an apple, but there is also a level of detachment. It can easily go from the color to my own thoughts regarding the things associated with it, things I've encountered in the past. Maybe a line from a book I've read some time ago will immediately pop up. Often, my head is then filled with thoughts and questions branching off from that line in that book. It can go on and on. I think that Si and Ne are more related in this way than is immediately apparent. In my mind, the difference is like this: Si associations are a chain of falling dominoes, though not always in a single line, while Ne associations are the billiard balls shooting off, I prefer to say 'outward' instead of 'future', after the white ball hits. In both cases, the object of perception is there primarily to provoke a set of unrelated mental "events". Maybe that's why Si-Ne works so well in tandem. Put together, the web just gets more and more infinite.

I'd also like to point out the emphasis I place on [subjective] meaning. The reason that I become so attached to things is because I am attached to what they represent. Each important object is embedded with meaning and viewed accordingly. Very often, the personal meaning trumps the object to the extent that even while consciously not valuing the object, I am compelled to preserve it. This is why I don't like constant dramatic change if it's not especially important. The new object is "empty", with no history and no meaning. I also don't "know" it or how much I can rely on it. So you see, to have all of my meanings uprooted again and again by change or discard, especially for no great reason in particular, would be akin to having my personal world destroyed [and to top it all off, replaced with basically nothing]. The worst thing about having prominent Si is feeling like I am in a constant battle against time's natural [and inevitable] erosion of my world.

So sometimes I find it's like... outside can feel surreal while I know that inside is what I can trust. Inside does not change so much as it expands.


Regarding memory, my Si "memory" process is in actuality maybe only about 50% conscious memory. I say that because I often don't consciously choose to remember something, I certainly don't remember everything, and sometimes, I don't even know where a memory is coming from. Information is grabbed from everything that I come into contact with, but often on a subconscious level. Later on, even years later on, it bubbles up into my conscious mind and that's when the "hey, this is familiar" moment happens. Sometimes it's very vague and I have to wait to discover the origin of it.

I am completely dreadful at remembering dry details if I'm not interested. I also don’t learn or remember things well if I am trying too much. It stays longer and is stored more deeply when I just let it swish around and “soak in” somehow, without too much conscious effort. The more I experience something, the more it naturally soaks in. Maybe that is why SJs are associated with learning through repetition?

But the storing isn’t limited to general detail. I can bring up past feelings, thoughts, and very often sensations as well. I think that Socionics' Si description is very appropriate when it states that Si users are also strongly attuned to what's going on inside of their bodies. I rarely try to maintain it as I would conscious memory. It’s just floating around -- like having a mini-world -- inside of my subconscious. And of course, I love visiting again and again.

Because the images, and sometimes sensations, are so “real” inside, I can fall into the trap of trusting and favoring my internal world over actual reality (along with not trusting new things immediately). I don't notice how amazing reality is as well until I'm confronted by it again.


Last, I think that most descriptions of Si are really Si-Te, so it was easy for me to think that routine, prioritization and organization were innate qualities of Si itself. But now I kind of disagree. I do feel my overpowering need to have things in the “right place”, but as for actual organization, it might come more from my relief process (Ti) than Si. I love learning about systems. I am very interested in how anything can be categorized, analyzed, and of course how it is internally structured or ordered. I often have more fun learning about something than simply enjoying it.

But I am messy, don't prioritize well, bad at making/following routines, can be *very* annoyed by undue repetition, bored with most stereotypical ISJ things (shadow Te, I suppose).

This post is extremely helpful and allows me to relate to an Ne-Si thinking pattern within myself.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Though I am an ENTP I consider myself to have a rather good Si. I talk to my brother by quotes we have heard. He is an ISTJ. I've had wonderful training. I think it's definitly an underrated function especially with the EXTREME amount of potiental you can have with it once it's refined.

 

[sculpting]

oh, I only figured out how strong Si can be for me fairly recently.

With respect to feelings and emotions, it can feel like be chained down to things that have happened previously. If a new situation arises, if it looks like the old situation via Ne, it will cause me to actually feel those emotions again and almost compel me to behave in the same way or be filled with internal angst and anxiety.

With respect to ideas or change...Si feels to me like stickpins/tacks stuck in a pinboard. Each tack is a generalized fact or rule or pattern I have seen many times. They are very concrete. I dont feel like i have a whole library of them, rather they sort of sit under shadow, sleeping. When presented with a new problem I start Ne-ing and coming up with new ideas or connections. People can see this externally and assume I am shooting off at the mouth or committing the fallacy of hasty generalization. They cant see all of the Si underneath everything...it is like a library of data points or rules about things-mostly people.

I feel like Ne is the tip of an island and Si is the mountain under the island, covered in water, that cannot be seen. When someone questions me, it takes me a few minutes to "load" all of the examples into "memory" about why a particular Ne leap was justified. When presented with a new idea, I can often seek a day or two to let search through my Si library to see if I have seen data to support it before responding. Sometimes people get annoyed as they will tell me about an idea, then I go, "oh, I knew that". They think i am being flippant or not really listening-but there words actually evokes the whole memory set for me.

The weird part is very often I forget how much I know about a topic, until it comes up in a conversation. Then the Si spotlight shifts to that set of data and I start to recall specific facts. Typically though I VERY much cheat and will have shorthand names that will serve to load a set of Si facts/rules into memory more quickly. The "name" spoken actually serves as an organizing categorical way to sort through the historical data?

(I also have these hysterical moments. Like it bugs me that apples are bumpy when you try and count apples. My brain says that "1" is a a set amount of something. So if I am counting apples, each apple is actually slightly different from the other apples, thus is each apple really one apple, or a little more or less than one apple? It is very weird.)

With ISTJs, I get along very, very well as I can Ne them out of their ruts sometimes and help them see alternatives. They think I am crazy, but trust me and agree with me for the most part.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Interesting thread....I find Jung's description of Si actually one of the most confusing to grasp. The easiest part is where he compares it to the subjective view displayed in a "realistic" painting. In a sense, Si-doms paints the world internally in terms of themselves, just as an artist is always painting themselves into their subject. Yet there will also be some universal aspect that goes beyond the literal landscape & the personal impression to the way people in general tend to view such landscapes. At worst, it can seem cliche at times, but often is comforting & relatable & promoted cohesion in viewpoints.

In the introverted attitude sensation is definitely based upon the subjective portion of perception. What is meant by this finds its best illustration in the reproduction of objects in art. When, for instance, several painters undertake to paint one and the same landscape, with a sincere attempt to reproduce it faithfully, each painting will none the less differ from the rest, not merely by virtue of a more or less developed ability, but chiefly because of a different vision; there will even appear in some of the paintings a decided psychic variation, both in general mood and in treatment of colour and form. Such qualities betray a more or less influential co-operation of the subjective factor.

It is concerned with presuppositions, or dispositions of the collective unconscious, with mythological images, with primal possibilities of ideas. The character of significance and meaning clings to subjective perception. It says more than the mere image of the object, though naturally only to him for whom the subjective factor has some meaning

Anyone one to comment on this? It seems to me it would be quite easy to confuse this with Ni... All of the introverted functions are focused on the inner world, of course, and they connect to the collective unconscious for their subjective view/judgment criteria, but being collective, there is some universal aspect to the concepts derived from it. It seems if Ti has an internal framework of logic, Fi an internal model of the ideal, Ni an internal vision of the likely future, then Si has an internal vision of the collective past of humanity. It's kind of an instinctual grasp of what has been proven to work through the ages, the natural tendencies that prevail, and thus these will continue in the future (of course, here Te or Fe are really stepping in to make judgment calls). So Si also devalues the object in that the implied connection to the past is exalted over the object itself, and Ni exalts the implied connection to the future over the object.

It also seems to me that tert & inferior Ne in SJs is what makes the connections between the stored impressions when necessary, just it's useful for me to have some impressions of what something was/is in order to create something new. In dealing with SJs, I notice any hesitancy on the part of some to try something new can be overcome by merely aiding that connection & comparing it something they do know; then it's given context & they know how to view it. With me, it can be quite the opposite; too familiar is dismissed as dull, and sometimes someone needs to point out the nuances that make it an individual experience in its own right.

 

[sculpting]

Can you clarify why Jung felt all introverted functions tapped into a "collective" unconscious? Oddly I totally get that Ni does this, although I dont understand it. You end up with repeated symbols. I sorta can poke around and understand perhaps how we might form Ti and Fi although I dont get how they connect to a collective unconscious. They seemed to be some sort of primordial glue that gets molded, but The Xi dom understanding is likely much more clear. So how does Si actually form and connect to a collective past?

I sometimes wonder, (prepare for blasphemy) since Jung was an INTJ, with Si as his own least understood function-would he be able to clearly explain what Si is without contaminating that understanding with his own understanding of Ni? I have no idea.

(I admit utter laziness, blatant speculation, and shall go wonder off and reread the Si section in PT now.)

 

[Gerbah]

With ISTJs, I get along very, very well as I can Ne them out of their ruts sometimes and help them see alternatives. They think I am crazy, but trust me and agree with me for the most part.

Haha, yes, my husband is an ENTP and his Ne and related optimism is so helpful to me because I can easily be overwhelmed by the present moment if I am experiencing it negatively. Si makes me rather sensitive in this regard. I think this can be the effect of the arbitrariness of Si - the things I like, I really like, while the things I don't like, I really don't like and can be emotionally very taxing for me.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Woah! Never been in this forum section before!

Anyway, as a teriary Si user, I find that Si is used mainly for 2 things.

1) Storing information! I like to know a lot of info, mostly random trivia and things that interest me. However, unlike an Si dom or aux, I do not remember many practical details.

2) Staying on the safe side. This and my Ti want to make sure I am prepared for situations and analyse the possiblities. I am always wary in new experiences. The downside is that sometimes I dislike discontinuing old habits or personal traditions (I could hardly care less about the traditions of society though) and habits and have a hard time lettihng go of things that are familiar and liked.

 

[Cimarron]

...The easiest part is where he compares it to the subjective view displayed in a "realistic" painting. In a sense, Si-doms paints the world internally in terms of themselves, just as an artist is always painting themselves into their subject. ...

Ah yes, I like that analogy and agree with seeing it that way. Like a landscape painting, for example.

 

[Walking Tourist]

I use Se far more than Si, but I can tell that my experiencing the sensory world is incomplete without some Si popping out. First I am aware of my environment. I look and touch and smell and hear everything in the environment. I just take it in as a whole in an unfiltered way. I am excited about the colors and the shapes and everything that is around me, either within touching distance or far away (the clouds, the distant trees, the water). Then I might touch something or I might see a flower and it will remind me of the flowers or other things that I had touched years ago. And I will remember where I was and what I was doing and what I was feeling at that very moment. One time, I was looking intently at trumpet flowers and this image of trumpet flowers curling around a trellis at my childhood home danced in my head. And then I remembered how much I loved the color and the firm consistency of the flowers. I could remember what I felt and what my house looked like and the smells of springtime then.
I was so happy that Si chose to visit me that day.

 

[Snuggletron]

I think, it's sort of function for ultimate data collection. And I have a thing for statistical phenomens. I keep checking statistics for all kinds of sports leagues, even thought I wouldn't follow the leagues themselves. For example, I know somewhat a lot about NHL's stats, even though I have never watched a whole match.

What I don't do is data processing. I usually just keep the data as it is, and rarely make much conclusions of it. I guess this is the reason why Si people might miss things said between the lines at times.

It's kinda hard to describe the way I think, because that's really the only way I know how to think.

We have this kind of behavior in common, then. I used to really be into video games and table-top RPGs, when it came to statistics, I paid extremely close attention to detail and if the stats were in the right places. Like if a game had a continuation or series where the player could make their own characters, I'd create a stable roster of characters with very similar attributes from game to game, without importing them. Like If the game had undergone structural changes I'd have to convert as best I could with the old data.

I see Si as the opposite of Ne in the sense it seeks continuity and stability. Si is very left-hemisphere and analytical, I think that gets overlooked sometimes as cheesy tradition or those halloween shirts your elementary teachers wore with all the stupid glitter pumpkins, black cats, and bats on them. You know what I mean? Si keeps things consistent and rooted and it makes your analytical and categorizing brain happy. I'm not an Si-dom, but people who suck at Si can't mess with the stuff my Si gets obsessed about. My ENFP friend is absolute shit at using his Si and it would sometimes annoy the hell out of me. lol