You know, is it really accurate to say Ni is more similar to Si than it is to Ne?
How do you know that's not like saying an orange is more similar to a pumpkin than it is to a grapefruit, because of its color?
Who determines which criteria (shape vs. color; introverted attitude vs. functional purpose [in this case, making abstractions/connections]) is more relevant to whether two things are more or less similar?
Such thinking is problematic (not just imo).
Yeah I lost track of this thread when I left for a day and came back with practically a book to read, but thanks for resurfacing it via my wall.
Anyway, and this may seem really silly to an Ni-dom, but I believe that lemons (I'm changing the analogy from grapefruits to lemons, k?) are definitively more similar to oranges than are pumpkins.
Pumpkins and oranges may have the same color (ie share the same S/N orientation), but pumpkins and oranges have markedly different compositions, while lemons and oranges share markedly similar compositions (ie, share the same composition of functions, when the functions are viewed as Ne/Ni/Si/Se/Ti/Te/Fi/Fe rather than N/S/T/F).
You're right in implying that both Ni and Ne have some similarities about them that Si and Ni do not, though again, I'd say that their shared traits are more in line with the shared traits of a pumpkin and an orange, while the shared traits of Si/Ni are more in line with the shared traits of an orange and a lemon.
I'm attempting to quantify the subjective term "similar" by evaluating it in terms of more objective, mathematical standards (and math is never subjective, right?
). When I say that Si/Ni are more similar than Ne/Ni, I mean that possessing the former two causes more similar perspectives (from purely a functions standpoint) than does possessing the latter two:
All Pi doms will have Je/Ji as aux/tert while all Pe doms will have Ji/Je as aux/tert. Similarly, all Pi auxes will have Je-dom, Ji inf, while all Pe auxes will have Ji dom, Je inf. Definitively speaking, there is no Pi dom that will share judging function/order with a Pe dom. Likewise, there is no Pi aux that will share judging function/order with a Pe aux. Pi doms can only share judging functions/order with other Pi doms, while Pe doms can only share judging function/order with other Pe doms. There are no Pe-ers that will share functions with Pi-ers more than other Pi-ers share with Pi-ers. Likewise, there are no Pi-ers that will share functions with Pe-ers more than other Pe-ers share with Pe-ers.
Pe-ers can share T/F or N/S order with Pi-ers, but from a functions standpoint, it's not just the T/F that matters. Extroverted/introverted is just as important, and the interplay of the two is vastly more important than either one on its own.
Thus, from a functional standpoint, Pi-ers are more similar amongst each other than they are to Pe-ers, and Pe-ers are more similar amongst each other than they are to Pi-ers. From this, I extrapolate that Ni is more similar to Si (both being a part of Pi) than it is to Ne (being Pe).
In a more concrete example, if you look at the INTJ, ISTJ, and ENTP, (Ni, Si, and Ne dom respectively), you can see that INTJ and ISTJ share Te/Fi with each other, while neither share judging functions with the ENTP's Ti/Fe. There are no Ne doms that share the same judging function/order with any Ni doms, but there are Si doms that share judging function/order with Ni doms. It's this that helps me conclude that Si/Ni-ers will have more similar perspectives than Ne/Ni-ers (thus making Si/Ni more "similar).
Sure, you can find an Ni-er who shares judging functions with an Ne-er (INFJ and ENTP both have Fe and Ti), but the order will be reversed, and this order reversal causes less of a similarity than if the order is the same.
So again, from this functions standpoint, I conclude that Ni/Si are more similar.
Stepping away from solely looking at the functions and function order, I find that from a cognitive standpoint, the set of Pi-ers shares more traits with members of that set than it does with members of the Pe-er set:
Pi causes one to conceptualize external information in terms of some sort of internal framework (the flexibility of the framework is determined by the S/N), while accompanying Je allows one to use externally-defined standards to determine/interpret the relative values of information within the framework and apply the information outwardly.
On the other hand, Pe causes one to openly take in external information, without fitting it to an internal framework, for Ji to examine, conceptualize, analyze, and evaluate based on a set of internal criteria, independent of external standards.
I can't think of a way to relate Ne/Ni to each other (or Se/Si) in the way that I can relate Pe/Ji groups with each other and Pi/Je groups with each other. I can say that N is "more abstract" while S is "more concrete." But (back to your pumpkin/orange/lemon example now), I think the "more abstract" and the "more concrete" is analogous to sharing the color (in that it's superficial), while the introverted/extroverted is more analogous to sharing the flavor (what's underneath Si, Ni, and Ne when they are viewed holistically with the other functions).
This way of categorizing/evaluating similarity may seem rather arbitrary and trivial to you as an Ni dom. However, for me, as a Ti-er, I find that examining the way the variables relate in mathematical terms is the best way for quantifying subjective things like "similar" and "different."
