Owfin
New member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 261
- MBTI Type
- ISTJ
- Enneagram
- 6w7
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
From disscussions with Ni dominants on other forums, I have found out the difference between Si and Ni. It ain't tradition, or memories, or imagination. No, none of that. It is models vs systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, some definitions:
System: A set of interacting or interdependent components forming an integrated whole
Model: A description of a system using mathematical concepts and language (obviously, not using mathematics here, but you get the idea)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the difference is that Ni has faith in systems, while Si has faith in models. Say a judging function points out that Ni is wrong:
Ni: "Ok, I'll change the models to better fit the system." (trust that the system is accurate)
But if a judging function points out Si is wrong:
"Ok, I'll change the system to better fit the models." (trust that the models are accurate)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Ni puts so much faith in systems, if a system is proven wrong in even one aspect, the whole thing, says Ni, should be thrown out. Because Si puts so much faith in models, if a model is proven wrong in even one aspect, the whole thing, says Si, should be thrown out. It is like a broken foundation
To Ni, Si's approach might seem stubborn and unyielding-why not get better models? To Si, Ni's approach seems almost like moving the goalposts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, some definitions:
System: A set of interacting or interdependent components forming an integrated whole
Model: A description of a system using mathematical concepts and language (obviously, not using mathematics here, but you get the idea)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, the difference is that Ni has faith in systems, while Si has faith in models. Say a judging function points out that Ni is wrong:
Ni: "Ok, I'll change the models to better fit the system." (trust that the system is accurate)
But if a judging function points out Si is wrong:
"Ok, I'll change the system to better fit the models." (trust that the models are accurate)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Ni puts so much faith in systems, if a system is proven wrong in even one aspect, the whole thing, says Ni, should be thrown out. Because Si puts so much faith in models, if a model is proven wrong in even one aspect, the whole thing, says Si, should be thrown out. It is like a broken foundation
To Ni, Si's approach might seem stubborn and unyielding-why not get better models? To Si, Ni's approach seems almost like moving the goalposts.