On perceiving functions..

I still can't get this function. I would, but there's so many commonly said things about it that I find it hard to get my own individual understanding of it. I want to edit my other thread, the one about projections, because I still feel like my description of Si isn't quite right---I slightly went off of what other people said about it, not my own personal understanding of it.

Like, you know, that Si is afraid of change. I don't think this always true, though. If it's a positive change, wouldn't it be irrational to be bothered by it?? It doesn't really make sense to always want stability, even if that stability is negative. I mean, isn't that like making the same mistake over and over again? It's good to improve it and change it if you keep on doing it.

The "inherently *good* thing" stems from a "feeling-tone" which is associated with bodily/gut level feelings of right/wrong, pleasant/unpleasant, same/different. No higher order rationalization is necessary here. e.g. A Si dom friend from mine had "comfort foods" and had physical reactions to certain types of movies. Another Si friend of mine would develop cravings for certain foods throughout each month and would immediately notice the changing of weather. Compared to a Se user as myself, I can't reproduce the experience of a single dish that my mother used to cook (and she cooked every day for nearly the first 18 years of my life).

You know, I think something that irks me about descriptions of Si is that they often focus on the emotional aspect of it, rather than how it can be used for tasks. But can it, really? I don't know. Is something like choosing your favorite food Si? It just doesn't sound very useful.

I got into a pretty heated debate on another thread about Si but I personally think the MBTI description of Si is BS and just confuses people with things that in reality are probably not related directly to that function. Jung's description basically speaks of subjective perception. Si being the world as I see it, and Se being the world as it is, essentially. Both are ways of processing via the five senses, its just that with Si everything gets turned inward to what you get out of that experience rather than the surface qualities of the experience itself.

The MBTI/JCF/Kiersey definitions sort of describe a type of person, generally conscientious, conservative, traditional, who likes to do things the same way over and over again and has a tendency to be past oriented. Unquestionably such people exist and are numerous but many of these things I don't think you could actually tie directly to input from the five senses (and that is after all what the Sensation function deals with). Conscientiousness is in fact a Five Factor Model trait, but I think it's one that shouldn't be tied necessarily to Si, just as Openness to experience shouldn't be tied to Ne. You can't always draw a direct line between the two. For example, Italian culture tends to be very traditional, past oriented, and you'll find a general tendency to favor the status quo, but it would be crazy to say the majority of Italians have a Si-preference. It's more likely cultural and not related to the person's actual personality but rather the influences of upbringing, environment, the person's ideas about themselves and life, etc. Same could be true with people who say things like "back in my day," or "it used to be back when" or "in the good old days,"--much of this people like Hillman would actually attach to the Feeling function and not Si (since what is really going on here is the association of a positive feeling-tone with the memory recall, not really anything related to sensory input). So I know I'm in the minority and undoubtedly someone will come along and tear me down, but I personally think that its inappropriate to tie all that other stuff like traditionalism and sticking to what you know and all that to Si. At best you might be able to link that to an out-of-balance Si-dom (under the grip of their Inferior Intuition) but I think its maybe an overstatement to attach that directly to Si itself. Myers basically saw a certain kind of person, and then made the Si-description fit that, because it barely resembles Jung's original description. (I think many of the people MBTI calls Si would probably be Fe or Te+S to Jung).

Oh, it has plenty of uses if correctly adapted with memory. The same friend my mine who already has a good memory can literally "feel" how he took notes and almost reproduce the experience of the day in class when he did so. When walking with him to a gym, he can replay the whole experience of walking out of the room/stairs/building along with the path we took and what we talked about a few days later. All I remember were vague contents of what I extracted from that conversation.

How to abuse Si?: It can be an additional dimension padded onto existing memory techniques. Imagine the "method of loci" with the extra Si sensory impressions. Or Si memory maps associated with whatever content of interest. I just saw the French movie "A Very Long Engagement" and there were plenty of memory hacks going on there.

Originally Posted by LiquidLight

I got into a pretty heated debate on another thread about Si but I personally think the MBTI description of Si is BS and just confuses people with things that in reality are probably not related directly to that function. Jung's description basically speaks of subjective perception. Si being the world as I see it, and Se being the world as it is, essentially. Both are ways of processing via the five senses, its just that with Si everything gets turned inward to what you get out of that experience rather than the surface qualities of the experience itself.

The MBTI/JCF/Kiersey definitions sort of describe a type of person, generally conscientious, conservative, traditional, who likes to do things the same way over and over again and has a tendency to be past oriented. Unquestionably such people exist and are numerous but many of these things I don't think you could actually tie directly to input from the five senses (and that is after all what the Sensation function deals with). Conscientiousness is in fact a Five Factor Model trait, but I think it's one that shouldn't be tied necessarily to Si, just as Openness to experience shouldn't be tied to Ne. You can't always draw a direct line between the two. For example, Italian culture tends to be very traditional, past oriented, and you'll find a general tendency to favor the status quo, but it would be crazy to say the majority of Italians have a Si-preference. It's more likely cultural and not related to the person's actual personality but rather the influences of upbringing, environment, the person's ideas about themselves and life, etc. Same could be true with people who say things like "back in my day," or "it used to be back when" or "in the good old days,"--much of this people like Hillman would actually attach to the Feeling function and not Si (since what is really going on here is the association of a positive feeling-tone with the memory recall, not really anything related to sensory input). So I know I'm in the minority and undoubtedly someone will come along and tear me down, but I personally think that its inappropriate to tie all that other stuff like traditionalism and sticking to what you know and all that to Si. At best you might be able to link that to an out-of-balance Si-dom (under the grip of their Inferior Intuition) but I think its maybe an overstatement to attach that directly to Si itself. Myers basically saw a certain kind of person, and then made the Si-description fit that, because it barely resembles Jung's original description. (I think many of the people MBTI calls Si would probably be Fe or Te+S to Jung).

I think I do understand that Si is subjective, because it is an introverted perception function..and that's why the traditionalist thing never made sense. Respecting other peoples' traditions sounds like Fe, or even Te.

Originally Posted by MilkyWay132

I think I do understand that Si is subjective, because it is an introverted perception function..and that's why the traditionalist thing never made sense. Respecting other peoples' traditions sounds like Fe, or even Te.

When they speak of traditionalism they mean sticking to certain principles, actions, or beliefs. It's not so much a respect of tradition as it is being in favor of tradition, and implementing or maintaining it.

Originally Posted by FacelessBeauty

When they speak of traditionalism they mean sticking to certain principles, actions, or beliefs. It's not so much a respect of tradition as it is being in favor of tradition, and implementing or maintaining it.

That's still extraversion.

Originally Posted by LiquidLight

That's still extraversion.

How so? Are you saying that introversion can't uphold traditionalism?

I can imagine the imprinting of traditions during early childhood as a set of experiences that Si can allude to later in life. As for

Originally Posted by FacelessBeauty

It's not so much a respect of tradition as it is being in favor of tradition, and implementing or maintaining it.

this is a conscious value-judgment with an external norm (Fe).