# Extraverted Sensing and the Artist



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

Hey Guys! I rarely go outside of the INFJ forum but as of lately I've been thinking about my cognitive functions, mainly Se which is my least developed function. 

I was curious about how Extraverted Sensing works for the artist/designer. How do I maximize my Se to make use of all that it has to offer me in an arts/design related field?

I've been watching and reading material on cognitive function and realize that my Se works in tandem with my Fe. So how would Extraverted Feeling and Extraverted Sensing work together to create works of art?

Also, how would someone go about developing their Se? Thanks!


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

"Deploy Fe and Se! Commence artistic creativity!"

I'm actually kind of curious about this one too as INFJs aren't necessarily artistic, not to say they don't value aesthetics, but they're not going to be as "good at it" as an SFP for example. By "good at it" I don't mean good at it, I mean it's going to come more naturally assuming you're producing art for art's sake. 

As apposed to an ISFP or ESFP artist who I think will be able to crank out a lot of art, and I think it'll be a longer process for an INFJ. I think this'll be the case because you're going to have this kind of thing happening in your mind: "We have to make something significant! What you're painting is shallow and too specific, make something that explains everything!"


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

I don't know why INFJ's wouldn't be artists especially since Jung speaks of Introverted Intuitives as often falling into the artist category.


> The peculiar nature of introverted intuition, when given the priority, also produces a peculiar type of man, viz. the mystical dreamer and seer on the one hand, or the fantastical crank and artist on the other. The latter might be regarded as the normal case, since there is a general tendency of this type to confine himself to the perceptive character of intuition.


That being said Se would behave just like it does for every other Se-type. Objective and focused on sensory stimuli as is without really projecting anything onto the sensation (any underlying notions or projection from within would largely come from intuition in this case as opposed to sense perception which would be Si). So I would just expect to see people whose work either tends to favor realism or a sort of abstraction that comes more from some meaning behind the image rather than inherent in the image itself. But again since INFJs are dominant perception types and dominant intuitives they might be fairly far out imaginatively anyway (as Jung was saying) so it might be kind of hard to judge which type is what based on what they create. It's easier to figure it out based on how people respond (Si-types tend to respond to imagery in a markedly different way -- much, much more impressionistic, much more focused on how it comes across to them, where the Se-types tend to focus on the raw details of the work itself like the lighting, composition, shadows, textures, etc). But again you really have to look at this on a case by case basis.

There is a thread on this forum where everyone reacts to pictures they post, and it becomes really quickly apparent who is a Se-type and who is a Si-type based on their reactions. You definitely see the difference between people who pay more attention to the impressions the image gives off (Si) versus those who simply experience it as is (Se).


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

Cellar Door said:


> "Deploy Fe and Se! Commence artistic creativity!"
> 
> I'm actually kind of curious about this one too as INFJs aren't necessarily artistic, not to say they don't value aesthetics, but they're not going to be as "good at it" as an SFP for example. By "good at it" I don't mean good at it, I mean it's going to come more naturally assuming you're producing art for art's sake.


Thanks for bumping this thread up. And yeah, I've been extremely curious about this as well. 

I'm a designer and you're right.. I don't produce as much work in terms of quantity. I started to do art to express my inner world but could never keep up with the pace of other artists who seem to produce massive quantity of works. This disparity and competition later resulted in me picking up creative writing being a 'faster' tool of expression - in the end I chose to be an artist though because it's my childhood dream.

However, having said that, I've made my own personal discoveries about art and design. Art and Design, although they overlap, have different purposes; art can be subjective, where as design must be as objective as possible. Art thrives in the variety of interpretation allowed, while design thrives in the expression of one singular goal/communication.



LiquidLight said:


> I don't know why INFJ's wouldn't be artists especially since Jung speaks of Introverted Intuitives as often falling into the artist category.


*hugs* 



> That being said Se would behave just like it does for every other Se-type. Objective and focused on sensory stimuli as is without really projecting anything onto the sensation (any underlying notions or projection from within would largely come from intuition in this case as opposed to sense perception which would be Si). So I would just expect to see people whose work either tends to favor realism or a sort of abstraction that comes more from some meaning behind the image rather than inherent in the image itself. But again since INFJs are dominant perception types and dominant intuitives they might be fairly far out imaginatively anyway (as Jung was saying) so it might be kind of hard to judge which type is what based on what they create. It's easier to figure it out based on how people respond (Si-types tend to respond to imagery in a markedly different way -- much, much more impressionistic, much more focused on how it comes across to them, where the Se-types tend to focus on the raw details of the work itself like the lighting, composition, shadows, textures, etc). But again you really have to look at this on a case by case basis.


Thanks for that information. So, how would a designer or artist strengthen their Se? Is it just by being even more objective and focused? I'm starting to wonder if Se is something you could technically strengthen, or if it's just a state of being.... it seems like the way to improve Se is just to 'get out there and observe'?


----------



## HarpFluffy (Feb 15, 2011)

Stop thinking and just feel things out. Hmmm ... this painting feels out of balance. I'm going to add more blue to the sky. When you're acting, feel what it's like to be the character you portray. If this happened to my character, how would it feel? The response will come naturally. When photographing, does your photo make you feel the same way the subject of the photo made you feel when you were really there taking the photo? If not, try again until it captures the feeling. This is not an emotional NF type of feeling, but a sensing feeling. Good luck.


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

HarpFluffy said:


> Stop thinking and just feel things out. Hmmm ... this painting feels out of balance. I'm going to add more blue to the sky. When you're acting, feel what it's like to be the character you portray. If this happened to my character, how would it feel? The response will come naturally. When photographing, does your photo make you feel the same way the subject of the photo made you feel when you were really there taking the photo? If not, try again until it captures the feeling. This is not an emotional NF type of feeling, but a sensing feeling. Good luck.


THANKS!

Wow, that makes so much sense. My best work comes when it's done with feeling... and becomes really stiff when I try to think it out too much. I never understood WHY that was at all, but you're the first person to have made that connection for me with MBTI, so thank you for that! I'm not that well versed in cognitive functions.

Do you think that going out and really experiencing life and allowing myself to 'feel' alot by being in the moment is a good way of strengthening Se as well? I suppose that having lots of different experiences and lots of different moments that you can recall the feelings of would be a good resource for an Fe-Se based artist?

Thoughts?

I'm not sure if this is correct.. but for an INFJ Ni works together with Ti. Ni searches for info and patterns, while Ti sorts those out. And Fe and Se works together by......... Se being in the moment, and Fe expressing how you feel? O__o. haha I've confused myself. 

EDIT: Oh wait, I get it now LOL Expressing how you feel in that moment. GOT IT! Thank you


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Ethanol said:


> Thanks for bumping this thread up. And yeah, I've been extremely curious about this as well.
> 
> I'm a designer and you're right.. I don't produce as much work in terms of quantity. I started to do art to express my inner world but could never keep up with the pace of other artists who seem to produce massive quantity of works. This disparity and competition later resulted in me picking up creative writing being a 'faster' tool of expression - in the end I chose to be an artist though because it's my childhood dream.
> 
> ...


I can only speak from my own experience. As an intuitive who works around a lot of sensation types (graphic designers, architects, filmmakers, musicians, etc) I have noticed that I tend to work more intuitively (sort of just figuring it out or going by feel) than paying attention to the details of something which has plusses and minuses. The plus is that I'm usually pretty good at nailing the intent of something and capturing its underlying meaning effectively. So if a client needs me to produce something and spells out of a list of things they're trying to accomplish I'm usually pretty good at understanding the underlying gist of what they're after. I've noticed with a lot of Sensation types they have a tendency to just follow the client's laundry list to a tee and then when something doesn't work just get tweaky within those parameters rather than ask, 'does this fundamentally meet the client's objective?' Sometimes when things don't work I've noticed sensation types will just try to tweak colors, or typography or some other practical thing whether than get down to the bottom of whether or not the concept itself is right. 

The negative is that I have a tendency to overlook, sometimes glaring things with the product. Because to me if it feels right then it is right (that's definitely an Intuitive+Feeling thing going on). Sensation types are typically much more focused on the details of the actual object itself. I've worked for some very famous designers and found that they often just see or notice things that I'm almost blind to (some of it is training, some of it is just having an eye or an ear for it). I've been around musicians who paid attention to every note in a drum fill or could tell on the recording if the drummer dropped his sticks, and I'm typically never paying attention to anything with that kind of detail. I've also noticed a tendency to be so focused on the feel or the intent of something that I ignore whether or not I've repeated something (like the same image too many times). I've gotten through a number of projects where the intent or the feel is right, but its visually messy because my focus is not really on the individual visuals themselves but more on the combined meaning of them (sensation types may, in contrast, overfocus on the visuals but they may lack a coherent meaning so they have the opposite issue).

So I don't know exactly what you are going for when you say 'strengthen' your Se because you are talking about a different way of going about business. For me that would mean (to me) overfocus on the raw sense stimuli, paying close attention to details and downplaying intent or the feel of something in favor of its practical or realistic nature, which, because I'm an intuitive doesn't seem right. So the trick I think is balance. Learning to pay better attention to the practical matters, while still maintaining the more natural bigger picture disposition. I remember one time I worked as a sound engineer (often a lot of sensation and thinking types in this field) who would obsess over gear or mic placement or digital vs. analog and stuff like that, and I just would not hear the difference. Yet people would always tell me my mixes sounded good because I had a good 'ear' for it (meaning I just sort of mixed intuitively based on what I felt sounded good - again intuition+feeling -- even if it didn't meet some technical spec or I was paying more attention to the overall effect or experience than any individual component). 

I think a lot of intuitives can relate to the idea of sort half-shutting your eyes or downplaying the details of the moment in favor of a bigger picture or underlying meaning, which can be a blessing and a curse.


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> So I don't know exactly what you are going for when you say 'strengthen' your Se because you are talking about a different way of going about business.


When I say strengthen my Se I don't mean to replace it and have it be my primary way of functioning. 

Se being our weakest function, we still have it and perhaps utilize it someway within the arts/design field.

My Ti is fairly developed (I think lol) but Se I had a vague idea of what or how it manifests itself within the designer/artist INFJ - and seeing MBTI sites linking S with being artistic... etc... there had to be some sort of connection and something happening.

I was watching a video on youtube regarding DaveSuperPower's Intuitive Time segments where an INFJ asked about how he could strengthen his weaker functions - not to be confused with replacing his biggest functions (Ni Fe). 

The video went on to talk about how Ni works in tandum with Ti, Ni to broadly sweep everything and Ti to focus specifically on one thing and breaking that understanding down. Fe and Se, he didn't quite explain how it works so I came here to figure out how INFJs weakest function (Se) would play itself out in the a creative field and how (if possible) you could strengthen it.




> The negative is that I have a tendency to overlook, sometimes glaring things with the product.



I have the same issue.

From what you've told me it seems like S types notice these details. So I hope I'm right in thinking that strengthening the INFJ's weakest function (Se) would help in that respect. 

Thanks for sharing your insights :3

Hey you're in films in So Cal? I'm in designer for the entertainment industry, maybe we'll pass by each other sometime in our future 

Edit: Actually, if you're up for it.. I'd like to PM you with some questions regarding the industry (no favors lol promise). Let me know if that's okay with ya :]


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

The problem is people misunderstand the inferior function. It's not about strengthening it. Its sort of like a liberal asking 'how can I strengthen my conservatism?' Its just a completely different way of looking at things that in some fundamental ways runs counter. That's why sensation is opposite intuition because they are opposing ways of perceiving (one focused on what is tangibly as perceived through the five senses and the other ignoring what is tangible and practical). So on the surface it would seem there is nothing but daylight between the two. That's why I said what you want is balance and not necessarily usefulness. Its more useful to think of the functions not as tools that you use in a given situation but more like perspectives, so just like the conservative must learn to recognize his own liberal tendencies, and vice versa for the liberal, the sensation type must learn to recognize and own his intuitive abilities (or just pay more attention to the fact that there might be more than meets the eye) and the intuitive must learn to take things at face value. But it's not a matter of strength or adaptability or anything like (that would actually be to go in the wrong direction because to make an inferior function more 'useful' would be to bring it under the control of the dominant function which defeats the purpose of the whole exercise. The point of the inferior is to pull you in a direction you would not otherwise go -- sort of like the liberal learning to recognize his own conservative tendencies). The inferior function may be plenty strong in terms of its influence, but completely unrecognized by the individual. 

Remember artistry doesn't just come from sensation or intuition or any one function. It comes from all four, plus your own complexes, archetypal influences, education, conditioning, culture and ideas that coalesce to inspire you or what you find interesting. This is why any type can be a profoundly good artist, all type sort of tells us is how the person would likely approach their process. The sensation type might approach it from the standpoint of the sensory details, the feeling type may pay more attention to evaluative qualities, the thinking type may use a logical or practical approach (think architect or video game programmer) the intuitive may look at underlying significance or intent, but all types might still end up with the same overall product. Steven Spielberg admittedly makes his movies on intuition and Michael Bay is clearly a Se-dom and yet both make beautiful looking movies (though Spielberg's have a little more depth).


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

I seeeeeeee.... so just learn to.. use my primary functions. Alright well, I guess this post was a useless exercise LOL I'm back at square one.

The more I try to understand cognative functions, the more I understand that I don't understand.

I keep trying to understand how I am processing information and how I am learning things in order to maximize the results.. and yet the more I dive into cognitive functions and try to dissect how it applies to me... can't help but feel a bit frustrated.

So the general advice being.. just utilize your biggest function and you'll be okay? All inferior functions are your opposites that pull you to do things you might not do in order to grow as a person?

Oi, I have a headache.

Thanks for the explanation though.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Ethanol said:


> I seeeeeeee.... so just learn to.. use my primary functions. Alright well, I guess this post was a useless exercise LOL I'm back at square one.
> 
> The more I try to understand cognative functions, the more I understand that I don't understand.
> 
> ...


No the exact opposite. Learn to understand that you have an inferior function and that it will pull you in directions that oppose how you will normally go about things. That's how you grow. If you just hang out on your dom function you'll never develop anything more than that perspective and just be egocentric and never recognize the totality of who you are. Everyone has a Jekyll side (dom) and a Hyde side (inferior) and both can serve a purpose if they are balanced.

If you've ever seen the movie Black Swan that is an archetypal representation of ego/shadow and dom/inferior. Natalie Portman's character, the virginal nice girl is very much like dom function. Her normal way of going about things and she keeps trying to repress her other side (represented by Mila Kunis). Until later we figure out both are representative of the same person and that she has within her the potential to be both pure and evil. But because she doesn't recognize it she is sort of being pulled by her dark side without even recognizing it (in much the same way a person would be influenced by their inferior function but project it on other people as stuff that bugs them about others, rather than owning it in themselves). The reason the inferior function is inferior is because your dominant represses it and tries to push it out of the way because it contradicts the dominant perspective (remember intuition is the opposite of sensation and thinking the opposite of feeling). And of course anything you repress or try to suppress is like kinking a water hose, it just builds and builds till it explodes and overtakes the person (just like in the movie). We've all seen people who all of a sudden become Mr. Hyde and are operating in a way that seems the opposite of who they normally are. People like Naomi Quenk call this being 'in the grip' of your inferior function and true to form people may say stuff like "I didn't know I would do that," or "was that really me?" 

But, if you recognized that you have this dual nature -- an intuitive side that is imaginative and ungrounded and a sensation side (that you've probably ignored largely or suppressed) that is practical, grounded and in the here and now then you can be more balanced and not be overwhelmed by it. You probably will never have the kind of adaptability of your sensation function that a Se-dom has because they have lived with it all their lives and you have probably tried to stuff it down in favor of intuition to a degree. But just understanding, almost in an empathetic sense, that perspective helps you balance yourself from being uber-intuitive and uber-introvert (remember the inferior function of an introvert is extraverted). So now you'd have balance between I/E and S/N (you'll still favor N but it won't be so lopsided). 

I think the easiest thing to do is find some sensation types and really try to understand how they see things (without judging it as wrong or weird). But just simply try to understand where they are coming from. That will help you begin to recognize those aspects in yourself.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Statistically speaking, and assuming you're distinguishing "art" from "crafts," an N is substantially more likely to be an artist than an S, Keirsey's famous goof notwithstanding. (And note that, in moving from Please Understand Me to Please Understand Me II, Keirsey changed the ISFP label from "artist" to "composer" — which I strongly suspect is also statistically unjustifiable, but at least significantly limited the scope of the goof.)

For more discussion (and statistics), see this post.


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

@_LiquidLight_; 
Okay I think I'm misunderstanding your posts.

Don't look to strengthen your Se, because your Se is the opposite of your Ni but strive instead for balance? Am I understanding this correctly? I'm confused because, in order to balance yourself wouldn't you have to strengthen your Se so that the Ni isn't so lopsided? Is there something I'm missing?

My mind is thinking of a scale... on one side is Ni, the other is Se. If I strengthen my Se, wouldn't it balance out my Ni so that the Ni isn't so tipped on the one side? 

Perhaps I'm just confused by what you mean @[email protected]
@_reckful_;
thanks for that post. I can verify your findings for you by saying that out of the people within my school... numerous amounts of artists I've met and made them take the MBTI type tests have tested to be INFPs and ENFPs. They occupy more of my classes than INFJs or INTJs. Out of my circle of classmates, only one is an SF - i thought this was surprising too. Many of the INFPs I know, are some of the top designers.

Thanks for the link *bookmarks*


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

reckful said:


> Statistically speaking, and assuming you're distinguishing "art" from "crafts," an N is substantially more likely to be an artist than an S, Keirsey's famous goof notwithstanding. (And note that, in moving from Please Understand Me to Please Understand Me II, Keirsey changed the ISFP label from "artist" to "composer" — which I strongly suspect is also statistically unjustifiable, but at least significantly limited the scope of the goof.)
> 
> For more discussion (and statistics), see this post.


Not necessarily in disagreement I just know from my own personal experience working in both the design and entertainment industries for years that there are ton of S types especially in the film and music businesses. Even Von Franz notes this in her Inferior Function lecture when she notes how many Sensation types live in Los Angeles. That being said Hollywood is a very craft-driven business (really only perhaps the screenwriters, actors and some of the directors and creative producers are N's). Most of the people who actually make films are very clearly sensation types especially the sound mixers, cinematographers, gaffers, production designers and art directors, visual effects people (though you get a lot of NT/ST here), camera operators, makeup artists, costume designers and graphic designers (I worked at one graphic design company that was almost obnoxiously S heavy). The difference is actually pretty striking in culture because the below the line types, usually sensation types, always feel that the above the line types like directors and producers never quite get where they are coming from. I would say the vast majority of people who work at a high level in TV are sensation types (with a handful of exceptions), but the big boy live TV directors like Hamish Hamilton and Lou Horvitz are Se-doms - it doesn't take more than a 5 minute conversation for it to be quickly apparent. 

Ad agencies on the other hand are have a tendency to be very Te-ish in their organizational structure and approach with a lot of N creative and art directors. 

I do know that Myers sort of famously equated N with creativity and its sort of a controversial point (people like Lynne Levesque and others take serious issue with this), but my own personal opinion is that its hard to sort of differentiate craftsmanship from artistry because by that standard someone like Ansel Adams might not be considered an artist despite the excellent craftsmanship of his work. In terms of how these things practically manifest themselves it's murky. I don't know that a sensation type interior designer or architect is any less creative in real life even if their approach is much more down to earth. I also suspect Myers' changing the definition of Si probably contributes to this as well, because I think many people who would otherwise fall into Jung's Si categories (like a lot of painters or photographers) would not be recognized as such.

@_Ethanol_
stop thinking of it in terms of a tool and more in terms of a perspective or way of looking at things. You keep looking at it like they're on a scale or something, where if the one goes down the other goes up and its not really like that. Strengthen is the wrong word because it may already be strong. Assimilation is a better term.


----------



## Ethanol (Jul 31, 2010)

@_LiquidLight_;
Ah hah. Alright now I see what you mean.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> Not necessarily in disagreement ...


Yes, I'd say I'd probably be inclined to put what most of those "below the line" Hollywood S's do more in the crafts category than the "creative artist" category that I think of as being likely to be N-dominated. You mentioned "live TV" directors, and I'd expect one of those to be a substantially different type of personality than most movie directors — or at least the directors of movies that film critics are likely to take seriously.

I also think there's probably a significant distinction to be made (in terms of probabilities) between _performers_ and _creators_ — e.g., between the guy in the rock band who writes the songs and the guy who just plays an instrument. I suspect the latter category may well have a higher proportion of N's than the general population, but I'd expect there to be a higher proportion of S's in that role than in the songwriter role.

The infamous stereotypical rock and roll drummer: one of Keirsey's SPs?


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

reckful said:


> Yes, I'd say I'd probably be inclined to put what most of those "below the line" Hollywood S's do more in the crafts category than the "creative artist" category that I think of as being likely to be N-dominated. You mentioned "live TV" directors, and I'd expect one of those to be a substantially different type of personality than most movie directors — or at least the directors of movies that film critics are likely to take seriously.
> 
> I also think there's probably a significant distinction to be made (in terms of probabilities) between _performers_ and _creators_ — e.g., between the guy in the rock band who writes the songs and the guy who just plays an instrument. I suspect the latter category may well have a higher proportion of N's than the general population, but I'd expect there to be a higher proportion of S's in that role than in the songwriter role.
> 
> The infamous stereotypical rock and roll drummer: one of Keirsey's SPs?


Yea almost certainly SP. 

I think you're right though that you sort of have to break it up into the different creative roles people play because a producer like Clive Davis or LA Reid would really benefit from having sharp intuitions about the potential of some artist they are trying to sign or how to market them, where a performer like say Justin Bieber or Britney Spears would probably benefit from being a sensation type. They're not really required to do anything but what they are asked to do tangibly and do it well and over and over and over again, almost like an athlete. Where it gets interesting is an area like choreography because they're doing something that is essentially interpretive but it would be sort of hard to say that intuition was motivating because for so many dancers it simply is a matter of body movement.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> I think you're right though that you sort of have to break it up into the different creative roles people play because a producer like Clive Davis or LA Reid would really benefit from having sharp intuitions about the potential of some artist they are trying to sign or how to market them, where a performer like say Justin Bieber or Britney Spears would probably benefit from being a sensation type. They're not really required to do anything but what they are asked to do tangibly and do it well and over and over and over again, almost like an athlete. Where it gets interesting is an area like choreography because they're doing something that is essentially interpretive but it would be sort of hard to say that intuition was motivating because for so many dancers it simply is a matter of body movement.


When I think of a "creative artist," I'm really thinking about someone who's the primary creator (in the authorial sense) of a "work" that becomes a part of the culture to an extent that you could imagine someone still paying attention to it in, say, 20 years, and pointing to that artist as the person responsible for the work being the way it was.

For a movie, for example, it's understood there are going to be several people who could meet that criterion (the screenwriter, the director and the person who writes the score come to mind) and that there are definitely people in a murky middle zone. I'm guessing, for example, that there are some cinematographers with a distinctive style/sensibility of their own who belong more in the creative artist category and others who are more like craftsmen just implementing the director's wishes in a way that makes their results relatively indistinguishable from what another cinematographer-craftsman would have done on the same movie. (But I don't know much about cinematographers.)

I don't disagree that a Clive Davis type might well benefit from an N preference, but that's not what I mean by a "creative artist."

And a generic pop singer barely qualifies by my standards if they don't write their own songs, so I wouldn't disagree that a Britney Spears or a Justin Bieber might be just as likely (or more likely) to be an S if that's true of them. Keirsey noted, as you did, that an S is a more likely candidate if what you're talking about is a performer (of other people's works) who basically just does the same thing over and over and over.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I know an ESTJ who writes his own music and has his own solo-band. I felt like tossing it out there. And oh, Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails is a defnite ISFP and I'd wager Kurt Cobain was as well, so that makes two more people S types but are highly original within their type art. And I think Britney Spears is some 8w7 ESxP type, leaning a bit more towards ESTP, which is obvious in songs such as Toxic or Gimme Gimme where she wrote the lyrics themselves. To me artistic endeavors doesn't just have to relate to the arts though, but as long as you create and want it to have an aesthetic impression it's artistic. 

And I am not sure how much my N plays a role in my artistic creations except when I write poetry which is obviously Ne-based. When it comes to visuals, I tend to be more about what feels right or what doesn't.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I know an ESTJ who writes his own music and has his own solo-band. I felt like tossing it out there. And oh, Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails is a defnite ISFP and I'd wager Kurt Cobain was as well, so that makes two more people S types but are highly original within their type art.


Reznor is "a definite ISFP" based on what?


----------

