# Si vs Se Explained!



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

*Si vs Se:*






Sixth video in my MBTI series! Hope you enjoy it, hope you learn something!

Let me know if I said anything you disagree with :wink: Or if you liked it!

What characteristics of Se or Si do you notice in yourself or others? Which do you prefer someone else having?

*OTHER MBTI VIDEOS:
*
*ENFP vs ENTP:*

* *











*Ti vs Te Explained:*

* *











*Ni vs Ne Explained:*

* *











*Fi vs Fe Explained:
*
* *


----------



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

The editing in your videos make it feel like you're reading bullets off a powerpoint slide. 
Oh, and if you're going to grab an info-graphic from someone else's video, don't copy it directly :|


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

Also, it would be nice to hear some feedback from some Se or Si doms.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Glad you asked!

What "characteristics" are more pronounced in SP and SJ types? Some negative characteristics of them are far more pronounced in INJs and ENPs. And that's another thing; Se and Si will NOT be as pronounced in types that have them as auxiliaries or tertiary as those who have them in the dominant and inferior, where its either a lifelong way of understanding things or a lifelong battle.

Your Se description was very good, especially how you described it "absorbing" details, which I will now contrast with Si...

*sigh* Si is not past oriented like you say. If you think about it logically, wouldn't comparing it with the past be rather extroverted, in that it is just describing external objects? Si is sensing introvertedly, meaning, it is much more concerned with how the individual sees something, their personal impression of it. Si considers an object big not because of anything about the object itself, but because they get a personal sensation of bigness from it. Van Gogh is a great example of a Si dominant, he saw all these colors in the sky but black, but objectively most of us would say no its not that way, but for Si, if it perceives it a certain way, that's what it is.

I'd be very careful describing ESFPs as trying to get "as many awesome experiences as possible" because that looks like they are junkies for the effect it has on them, which is actually in Si's domain. 

Suddenly when you move to tertiary Si you describe it as concerned with rules and regulations, which you didn't before. And even so, as you can see above from my Si explanation, it doesn't really follow from Si, and is, again, rather extroverted sounding.

I was dissapointed in the lack of the discussion on either function in the inferior, because the affects of it in the inferior are fascinating and important for understanding dominant intuitive blind spots.


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

@Owfin
It is really great to hear an Si-dom talk about Si! It really strengthens my understanding!



> I'd be very careful describing ESFPs as trying to get "as many awesome experiences as possible" because that looks like they are junkies for the effect it has on them, *which is actually in Si's domain.*


This is interesting, could you elaborate on this?



> Se and Si will NOT be as pronounced in types that have them as auxiliaries or tertiary as those who have them in the dominant and inferior


This is interesting, though I'm not sure if it's true. I see Ti, for instance, as more pronounced in INFJs and ISFJs than ESFJs and ENFJs. Also, I see a great deal of Si being used in INxP types.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Doctorjuice said:


> This is interesting, could you elaborate on this?


Si types are looking at their personal impressions of something, therefore I would stand to believe that we care more about our reaction to an experience. An awesome experience will certainly leave an intense impact, which would be a taste that more adrenaline fueled Si dominants would relish. The way an experience affects the Se dominant is likely not as important as the experience itself. So I suppose both types might enjoy awesome experiences, just in different ways.


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

Owfin said:


> Si types are looking at their personal impressions of something, therefore I would stand to believe that we care more about our reaction to an experience. An awesome experience will certainly leave an intense impact, which would be a taste that more adrenaline fueled Si dominants would relish. The way an experience affects the Se dominant is likely not as important as the experience itself. So I suppose both types might enjoy awesome experiences, just in different ways.


That makes sense.

I've always predicted that ESFPs would be most likely on average (based on type) to party (be there a subtle difference or a big one). Do you think that it would be Si-doms instead?


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Doctorjuice said:


> I've always predicted that ESFPs would be most likely on average (based on type) to party (be there a subtle difference or a big one). Do you think that it would be Si-doms instead?


Depends on what kind of party, for what reasons, and what the Si dominant likes. Note how I said "more adrenaline fueled", because individual aspects like preference for the rush of action will vary. The part that stays the same is how the Si dominant takes in a scene.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Doctorjuice said:


> @_Owfin_
> It is really great to hear an Si-dom talk about Si! It really strengthens my understanding!
> 
> 
> ...


I think you are right that (at least in the MBTI model) Si often very overlooked in IxxP types, people get far too caught up in Ne and Fi. But the reason that you don't see a lot of Ti in ExFJs is because they often don't see a lot of it in themselves (because it is their inferior function) but this does not mean that the function doesn't exert any influence over the person (also I've noticed a tendency for male ExFJs to be more attuned to their thinking simply because men are more often socialized to be intellectuals, conceptual or 'thinkers' and less likely to outwardly have their intelligence and thinking capacity questioned, so many of these people often think they are more 'thinkers' than they really are). To have Ti as an inferior function is to state that Introverted Thinking will be something of a slave to Feeling evaluations. Essentially whether or not you like something (based on already defined metrics) takes precedence over what you think about it personally. 

Because the inferior function is the nodal point of the conscious expression of the unconscious (meaning all things unconscious will center around the inferior function) the influence of the inferior function will be substantial, and often, moreso than even the dominant (despite the person not being really aware of it themselves). We see this clearly in the projections of people, and it also underscores why Jung really devotes his attention to the dominant/inferior function and leaves the auxiliaries open to interpretation. Remember MBTI's model is just an interpretation of his type theory (and though largely unquestioned perhaps not necessarily absolute) so it is quite possible that there are people who don't neatly fit the mold like INFJs with Fi/Te instead of Fe/Ti orderings (they of course are no longer INFJs at this point but we can't call them INFPs either). 

As @Owfin points out the simplest explanation of Se vs Si is what happens when we process the world through our five senses. Is there an appeal to the world as it is (Se) or the world as I see it (Si). In the latter the subjective interpretation of the sensual data becomes paramount, meaning that the actual physical stimulus itself is often downplayed in favor of the subjective effect of that stimulus (where with Se, its more about the strength of the stimulus itself). Subjective interpretation can mean memories (because once the sensation takes on a subjective form anything from within can be attached to it) or emotions or affects or any of the other things that we commonly associated with Si, but Si itself just refers to an appeal to subjective interpretation of sensory data over the raw physical data. Basically what you get out of an experience, and because of the subjective factor Si is a highly abstract function (often this gets associated with Ne, but its really Ne + Si that gives these people their specific character).


----------



## Doctorjuice (May 1, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> Because the inferior function is the nodal point of the conscious expression of the unconscious (meaning all things unconscious will center around the inferior function) the influence of the inferior function will be substantial, and often, moreso than even the dominant (despite the person not being really aware of it themselves). We see this clearly in the projections of people, and it also underscores why Jung really devotes his attention to the dominant/inferior function and leaves the auxiliaries open to interpretation.


I see this clearly in INxJs who, when under stress, may obsess over details that don't really matter to the big picture and in IXTPs who, when under stress, flare up with intense projective emotions. However, I struggle to see it in Se doms and Fe doms.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Well you will often have to infer the inferior in extraverts simply because the inferior function is introverted. So the Ni in and Ti you would sort of have to know what to look for.


----------



## AnnaKidd (Oct 29, 2020)

Here is a video by Encyclopedia Socionika on Si vs Se as part of their Bite-sized Socionics series:


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

AnnaKidd said:


> Here is a video by Encyclopedia Socionika on Si vs Se as part of their Bite-sized Socionics series:


FYI, this thread is 8 years old.


----------



## Purle (Aug 4, 2018)

I'd just like to clarify that Se plainly focuses on what physically exists around them. Se doesn't equate to being able to notice details. Rather, it's because of Se being able to focus on what exists physically, that they're able to further focus on details that interest them or catch their attention. I also wouldn't describe Se as high-energy. High-energy is something I'd correlate more with extroverted Judging functions. Instead, I would describe Se as being forward-moving/reactive energy. Other than that, thanks for another informative video!


----------

