• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[SJ] Can you explain your Dominant or Auxiliary Si?

InfernoToucan

New member
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
27
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
I keep being told that I'm probably an SJ of some type but...I just can't completely relate. Something is off.

From what I understand about Si is that it has a focus on our internal system of senses. It also focuses on past experiences- i.e., what you find in the past that, for you, has worked and has not worked...what terrible experiences would you like to avoid again, etc. Furthermore, it is "detail oriented". I get confused when people say that sharp memories =/= Si, but it seems that many of you can remember specifics about your past experiences. If something comes up that triggers a memory, Si is almost like a surgeon, slicing deeper and deeper into the layers of your brain to reconstruct that particular memory associated with the present in detail.

However, while I am sure I have Si somewhere in my stack, I am not sure what it looks like on the higher end of the spectrum vs the lower end. Do you care to share your day to day interactions with Si?
 

Yama

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
7,684
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Si is impressionism. It's extremely personal and will look completely different from person to person, so it's hard to give a definition that everyone can relate to. To put it as simply as possible, Si creates "archetypes" from its experiences and compares all future encounters to this archetype. The reputation of Si being stubborn or '''traditional''' comes from Si's refusal to budge once its archetypes are formed. Otherwise, what's even the point of having an archetype? Archetypes don't change because they're not supposed to.

If Si's idea/impression/archetype of a "cat" is a small furry creature that lives among humans, you might be reluctant to call a mountain lion a "cat" because it doesn't meet your internal/personal "rules/criteria" for what a "cat" is (obviously they're both felines but I'm just trying to think of a quick example here). So, someone calling a mountain lion a "cat" might confuse you, annoy you, make you want to correct them, or something else entirely. The reaction will be different. But Si would be very hesitant to alter its definition to fit the mountain lion into its personal idea of a "cat" because if you can just change definitions like that willy-nilly then definitions become meaningless. And Si hates that meaninglessness.
 

InfernoToucan

New member
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
27
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Si is impressionism. It's extremely personal and will look completely different from person to person, so it's hard to give a definition that everyone can relate to. To put it as simply as possible, Si creates "archetypes" from its experiences and compares all future encounters to this archetype. The reputation of Si being stubborn or '''traditional''' comes from Si's refusal to budge once its archetypes are formed. Otherwise, what's even the point of having an archetype? Archetypes don't change because they're not supposed to.

So how does this differ from Ni? Don't Ni users form "archetypes" instead of Si? I thought Si was more remembering specific details about past experiences but based on your own perception, while Ni = these very "breezy" archetypes which come in their hand and give them a blurry impression (or gut feeling rather) of what detail they are reminded of?

If Si's idea/impression/archetype of a "cat" is a small furry creature that lives among humans, you might be reluctant to call a mountain lion a "cat" because it doesn't meet your internal/personal "rules/criteria" for what a "cat" is (obviously they're both felines but I'm just trying to think of a quick example here). So, someone calling a mountain lion a "cat" might confuse you, annoy you, make you want to correct them, or something else entirely. The reaction will be different. But Si would be very hesitant to alter its definition to fit the mountain lion into its personal idea of a "cat" because if you can just change definitions like that willy-nilly then definitions become meaningless. And Si hates that meaninglessness.

How would this differ from, say, a Ti-user?
 

Yama

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
7,684
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
So how does this differ from Ni? Don't Ni users form "archetypes" instead of Si? I thought Si was more remembering specific details about past experiences but based on your own perception, while Ni = these very "breezy" archetypes which come in their hand and give them a blurry impression (or gut feeling rather) of what detail they are reminded of?



How would this differ from, say, a Ti-user?

Ni's archetypes are based on abstractions rather than personal experiences. But since Ni and Si are both Pi functions, they actuslly do have a lot of similarities. More so than Ni does to Ne or Si to Se.

Ti, while also personally based due to introversion, is more based in the logic of it than the archetype. Though as an SFJ myself I could see how my explanation of si has a Ti flavoring to it.
 

InfernoToucan

New member
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
27
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Ni's archetypes are based on abstractions rather than personal experiences. But since Ni and Si are both Pi functions, they actuslly do have a lot of similarities. More so than Ni does to Ne or Si to Se.

Ti, while also personally based due to introversion, is more based in the logic of it than the archetype. Though as an SFJ myself I could see how my explanation of si has a Ti flavoring to it.
How do you know that yours are based on personal experiences? Can you give me an example?

And so you're saying that Ti = categorizes based on what logically makes sense and Si based on personal experiences? I'm not sure what this is but I usually get annoyed when I understand something a certain way and get a new piece of information that directly goes against/confuses the original understanding. It's been happening a lot as I've read MBTI; i.e. I get a general picture of what the cognitive functions mean and what I might be, then new piece of information to alter that idea and question my processes.
 

Yama

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
7,684
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
How do you know that yours are based on personal experiences? Can you give me an example?

It's pretty clear to me, but hard to explain. Pi functions are hard to describe due to how little sense they really make outside of one's own mind. :shrug:
 
Top