Pictorial Guide to the Se/Si Distinction

[Jaguar]

Imagine that instead of album artworks you have snapshots of specific objects, shapes, sounds, colors, words, passages, concepts*, and/or whole experiences. And they're labeled just like the white line at the bottom. You don't actually see them like this via Si though, because it's an exercise in feeling (instinct, not necessarily emotion). Your memory is what will provide the images.

The snapshots evoke nuanced but strong and discernible feelings, and each evocation will be as unique as the different snapshots themselves. You can scroll through them just the same, too! But for the most part, the wheel will automatically change to a snapshot that is triggered by whatever you happen to be interacting with at the time. Sometimes more than one - and fast.

When you click, instead of tracks you will get lines of past thoughts or central keywords - maybe even more images.

In any case, your attention will have almost immediately been directed away from the trigger and onto your snapshots. What that snapshot evokes is how you will react to that trigger.

If you zoom out, it will start to look something like this:

But that's just Si undiluted. Si once it's with Ne means you also want all new things to connect to your core shots. As you're getting older, things start to look a little more like this:

The trunk is experience stacked upon experience stacked upon experience. The branches are newly introduced concepts, and they're stuck somewhere along that trunk of stacked experiences - wherever they happen to smoothly fit - along with all things that branch off from the branches' branches.

Actually, I'm almost certain that a Si dom will be flexible as long as what new concept you're introducing is similar to something that they've directly felt (experienced). At least, it would become "the same thing" in my mind, because "thing" (object) is not paramount as it is with Se - "internal experience" is what feels important.

You know how Ne will take a look at the world and see a stream of conceptual meanings in addition to 3-D objects? I feel that Si is like that too, except the meanings are not as free-flowing.

More like a pond than a stream.

And it is all completely personal, not built upon verifiable abstract qualities as it is with Ne. It is directly connected to whatever went on in you internally while that experience was being experienced.

Here's a crazy (and probably bad) example of wearing Si dom glasses!
A child is drowning for the first time ever. As he's going down, the sun's reflection is shimmering along the waves and he starts to see what looks like orbs of dancing light. Despite what else is going on, for some reason, this boy feels a strong internal peace and calm as he's watching the lights. The "dance" is mesmerizing. He begins to think of angels. To top it all off, when his rescuer reaches down to pull him up, his (rescuer's) hands came right through the center of the lights, solidifying this association in his mind.

Years later, the family is sitting around the fireplace where the fire is moving in a way that looks like it's "dancing". To the relatives, the whole fire is just a fire. But when the boy sees the fire, he focuses primarily on that "dancing" aspect and also "sees" and thinks of angels once more. Watching the fire now and thinking about the angels again, he starts to feel what he felt before, and he may begin to treasure the fire as a result. He may instinctively "just know" all the ways in which the fire's dancing is similar or different to the sun's dancing depending on what feelings he's getting. All this, while meanwhile, his family is simply enjoying the entire fire's warmth and glow.

In any case, fire, dancing lights, and so on will probably never again be just fire or just lights to this boy. At least, he won't react in that way. As a Si dom, he views things through his personal experiences and the unique meanings derived from them.

(Sorry for all this writing!)

I'll step over the bickering children in the thread to give credit where credit is due.
Your post is one of the best I have seen in ages.

I can't stand long posts, but yours was worth it.
Good job!

 

[Totenkindly]

I'll step over the bickering children in the thread to give credit where credit is due.
Your post is one of the best I have seen in ages.

I can't stand long posts, but yours was worth it.
Good job!

Agreed. That was a very informative post, and one of the best I've seen in terms of explaining the relevance of the internal subjective state tied to remembered experience/emotion.

*click of theoretical Thanks button*

 

[onemoretime]

You use those functions in the things that you, AKA FUNCTIONS your functioning a certain way. functioning requires using your brain to do something, whether it's thinking or sensing etc. The activities require using certain cognitive functions, that's why everybody uses all 8 functions and only a few are dom functions.

Yeah, not so much. They're functions insofar as they indicate a certain preference for a given area of cognition; they are not the cognitive activities themselves. Ti dominance means that you feel most at ease and comfortable (i.e. most ego-syntonic) when you can make a decision based on an internal judgment of impersonal logic, not that you will make judgments based upon this more often than not (though in healthy circumstances, this would be the case). For example, circumstances may require you to make most of your decisions based on a sense of external social norms and mores, and you will do so, but you will feel anxious and unsure (i.e. more ego-dystonic) of your decisions, more inclined toward reacting negatively to criticism and less toward standing one's ground, regardless of outside opinion.

Same with the other function archetypes. Taking in instantaneous information from the surrounding environment will make you feel like you've learned something important and profound, while considering the essence of things will evoke a childlike reaction, somewhat shallow yet unencumbered by adult complexity.

 

[jixmixfix]

Yeah, not so much. They're functions insofar as they indicate a certain preference for a given area of cognition; they are not the cognitive activities themselves. Ti dominance means that you feel most at ease and comfortable (i.e. most ego-syntonic) when you can make a decision based on an internal judgment of impersonal logic, not that you will make judgments based upon this more often than not (though in healthy circumstances, this would be the case). For example, circumstances may require you to make most of your decisions based on a sense of external social norms and mores, and you will do so, but you will feel anxious and unsure (i.e. more ego-dystonic) of your decisions, more inclined toward reacting negatively to criticism and less toward standing one's ground, regardless of outside opinion.

Same with the other function archetypes. Taking in instantaneous information from the surrounding environment will make you feel like you've learned something important and profound, while considering the essence of things will evoke a childlike reaction, somewhat shallow yet unencumbered by adult complexity.

The reason why I say the activities require the function is because certain activities have things to them that allow you to use your functions properly. A game like chess requires someone to use Ti or Te, while a game like soccer someone with Se would perform better at because it correlates to their strongest function. A game can have several different things to it that require you to use different aspect of your cognition. This is why people with Se or Si might be better at sports, although someone with Ne might still be good they don't gravitate towards it therefore it is not their most comfortable thing to do.

 

[onemoretime]

The reason why I say the activities require the function is because certain activities have things to them that allow you to use your functions properly.

Not so. The activity occurs independent of function attitude. The function attitude simply describes how you feel about your approach to that activity. That's it; nothing more. In every instance, you are expressing your function attitudes "properly"

A game like chess requires someone to use Ti or Te, while a game like soccer someone with Se would perform better at because it correlates to their strongest function.

Someone who uses logic and planning in their approach tends to do well at chess. All Ti or Te expresses is whether it makes you feel more comfortable for you to develop that logic and planning internally, or to follow externally-developed logical and planning schemes. However, that is not to say that Thinking is required to play chess; it may be more comfortable to regard the pieces as other people, and judge them according to social rules (Fe), or what feels right or wrong if you were the person (Fi). A person may not win by the rules of the game with that strategy, but if they enjoy it, who is to say that they are not successful at it? To say that chess requires a process of Thinking betrays your own dominant Thinking attitude, because it seems so right that how could you use any other approach when playing chess, and be successful (by terms that Thinking prefers; i.e. the Rules of the Game)?

Same with soccer and perceiving functions. Soccer does not require strength in extraverted Sensing to play, it's just that people who are strong in Se may particularly like playing soccer, because of the fast-paced action and high levels of sensation associated with the game. Meanwhile, people who are strong in Si may particularly like playing soccer because of the teamwork, skill and dedication it takes to perform at a high level, people who are strong in Ni may particularly like playing soccer because of the game's symbolic meaning, and people who are strong in Ne may particularly like playing soccer because they like the way the game provides opportunities for all sorts of other things, like meeting people or expressing oneself in a unique way.

A game can have several different things to it that require you to use different aspect of your cognition. This is why people with Se or Si might be better at sports, although someone with Ne might still be good they don't gravitate towards it therefore it is not their most comfortable thing to do.

The person who favors Sensing is not better at sports. The person who favors Sensing may like sports more because they appeal to personal sensory preferences. That person may also not like sports at all because they do not appeal to preferred types of sensation (like, for example, art, music, fashion etc. do). The person with Ne may be a better natural athlete, but not like sports because sports are unappealing, or that person might like them because of the pathways that sports opens up. Point is, it's not going to be because of a function attitude that a person is talented or skilled at something. The function attitude simply describes the manner of judging or perceiving that makes a person comfortable or uncomfortable. It does not describe for a second what the cognitive process a person uses is, nor does it describe how a given stimulus will be perceived or judged.

 

[jixmixfix]

Not so. The activity occurs independent of function attitude. The function attitude simply describes how you feel about your approach to that activity. That's it; nothing more. In every instance, you are expressing your function attitudes "properly"



Someone who uses logic and planning in their approach tends to do well at chess. All Ti or Te expresses is whether it makes you feel more comfortable for you to develop that logic and planning internally, or to follow externally-developed logical and planning schemes. However, that is not to say that Thinking is required to play chess; it may be more comfortable to regard the pieces as other people, and judge them according to social rules (Fe), or what feels right or wrong if you were the person (Fi). A person may not win by the rules of the game with that strategy, but if they enjoy it, who is to say that they are not successful at it? To say that chess requires a process of Thinking betrays your own dominant Thinking attitude, because it seems so right that how could you use any other approach when playing chess, and be successful (by terms that Thinking prefers; i.e. the Rules of the Game)?

Same with soccer and perceiving functions. Soccer does not require strength in extraverted Sensing to play, it's just that people who are strong in Se may particularly like playing soccer, because of the fast-paced action and high levels of sensation associated with the game. Meanwhile, people who are strong in Si may particularly like playing soccer because of the teamwork, skill and dedication it takes to perform at a high level, people who are strong in Ni may particularly like playing soccer because of the game's symbolic meaning, and people who are strong in Ne may particularly like playing soccer because they like the way the game provides opportunities for all sorts of other things, like meeting people or expressing oneself in a unique way.



The person who favors Sensing is not better at sports. The person who favors Sensing may like sports more because they appeal to personal sensory preferences. That person may also not like sports at all because they do not appeal to preferred types of sensation (like, for example, art, music, fashion etc. do). The person with Ne may be a better natural athlete, but not like sports because sports are unappealing, or that person might like them because of the pathways that sports opens up. Point is, it's not going to be because of a function attitude that a person is talented or skilled at something. The function attitude simply describes the manner of judging or perceiving that makes a person comfortable or uncomfortable. It does not describe for a second what the cognitive process a person uses is, nor does it describe how a given stimulus will be perceived or judged.

I understand what you are saying but there is a connection between functions and ability. People with Low "Se" aren't in tune with the sensations around them as much as someone who is Se dom therefore they may react slower to a certain stimuli and not preform well. The functions allow the person to enjoy what they are doing because it feeds internal fulfillment, sure Se isn't required to play soccer but soccer for fills Se in so many ways that someone who is Se dom will likely play better than someone who is Ni dom. Just like reading and writing and so forth for Ne doms. There is a connection between enjoyment and fulfillment of an activity and performance.

 

[Thalassa]

You use those functions in the things that you, AKA FUNCTIONS your functioning a certain way. functioning requires using your brain to do something, whether it's thinking or sensing etc. The activities require using certain cognitive functions, that's why everybody uses all 8 functions and only a few are dom functions.

The functions are mentalities/ways of viewing the world, or placing more importance on certain things.

Sports and aesthetics are not synonymous with Se, and it's a mistake to associate human activities with cognitive functioning. A person with Si could value aesthetics and sports just as much as a person with Se.

However, the way they view sports or the sports they prefer or the reasoning for why they play sports may differ.