# So settle this with me. Is this Ni or Si?



## Moya (May 22, 2012)

Velasquez said:


> ^ I only read this part of your post, and then I stopped reading. It's Si.


Are you serious?


----------



## Velasquez (Jul 3, 2012)

Let Down said:


> Are you serious?


Yes


----------



## Moya (May 22, 2012)

Velasquez said:


> Yes


Then don't be.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

Let Down said:


> Can you elaborate on that? I mean, Si is so closely linked with memory, but do you think the two are actually more exclusive than other people do?


Si, like all cognitive functions, is simply a way of understanding the world around us. It is a processing of stimuli.

Regardless of our preferred functions, all of us have detailed memories of events and use these memories to help us interpret whatever stimuli is before us. A Si user will place more emphasis on a past concrete influenced working knowledge of a concept being presented in order to process the new information before them. But that is a very different process than nostalgia or memory.

As a user of a concrete, sequential and linear thinking process, Si-doms will process information specific --> general, utilizing stored specific information to form a basic understanding which allows them to develop the bigger concept.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

Let Down said:


> Actually, it kind of does. A Fe user is going to pay attention to how their actions could affect the feelings of others more than a Fi user is. That's what I mean by observing what society expects. I will observe a situation, assess what would be the polite thing to do in said situation, and then do it. Even though I have a tendency to be brutally honest when people piss me off, I feel pretty awful when I genuinely hurt someone. When all my friends are miserable, so am I. I've actually gotten so perturbed by other people's pain, I've taken it on as my own (friend with a headache = me with a headache).
> 
> I thought I was an INTP because I relate a lot to Ti descriptions and somewhat to inferior Fe, too. INTP descriptions were pretty accurate...I'm an analytical person for sure, have a witty sense of humor, like to learn for the sake of knowledge, and so on and so on. Also, because I had asked about my type when I was newer to PerC and the consensus at the end was ENTP, until I realized I'm an introvert, so I switched it to INTP.


It's certainly possible an Fi user isn't going to pay attention to the feelings of others as much as an Fe user, but it could just as easily be the other way around. Consider this situation, an Fi user strongly values paying attention to the feelings of others. How would you then explain this? I think you're confusing having a Fe value system with being a good person. Having Fe isn't magic, if you got a headache when your friend got a headache either something was wrong with the air in the room or it was a coincidence.

Being analytical may be evidence of Ti but it depends how you're analytical, and its not about having a witty sense of humor as much as what type of witty. It depends what connections you're making and the purpose of the joke.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> Si, like all cognitive functions, is simply a way of understanding the world around us. It is a processing of stimuli.
> 
> Regardless of our preferred functions, all of us have detailed memories of events and use these memories to help us interpret whatever stimuli is before us. A Si user will place more emphasis on a past concrete influenced working knowledge of a concept being presented in order to process the new information before them. But that is a very different process than nostalgia or memory.
> 
> As a user of a concrete, sequential and linear thinking process, Si-doms will process information specific --> general, utilizing stored specific information to form a basic understanding which allows them to develop the bigger concept.


After all it is a function, and my impression is that the differentiation of Si seems to be different between Dom, Aux, Tert and Inf, but likely also different in relation to T/F. 

I'll quote Jung first



> "Sensation, or sensing, is that psychological function which transmits a physical stimulus to perception. It is, therefore, identical with perception. Sensation must be strictly distinguished from feeling, since the latter is an entirely different process, although it may, for instance, be associated with sensation as 'feeling-tone'. Sensation is related not only to the outer stimuli, but also to the inner, i.e. to changes in the internal organs.
> 
> Primarily; therefore, sensation is sense-perception, i.e. perception transmitted via the sense organs and 'bodily senses' (kinaesthetic, vaso-motor sensation, etc.). On the one hand, it is *an element of presentation*, since it *transmits *to the presenting function the perceived image of the outer object; on the other hand, it is *an element of feeling*, because through the perception of bodily changes it lends the character of affect to feeling, (v. Affect). Because sensation transmits physical changes to consciousness, it also represents the physiological impulse. But it is not identical with it, since it is merely a perceptive function.
> 
> ...


So, yes, I can see that Si for an ISTJ is more concrete sensation. Compared to Ni, Si also seems more personally attached, which may make it difficult to accept a different concept of Si than yours. (but mind you, same here  )

I can also understand you don't see the connection with nostalgia, because your Si seems to be much more differentiated for T use rather than F use. I wouldn't say you don't have feelings, the experience has a different significance for T than for F. 

As far as memory is concerned, I can understand you don't see this connection. But for a Ne user (other than inferior) this may be very different. Look at is this way. What's the hole bloody use of using Ne, providing alternative views? You think a Ne user just thinks 'hey why not randomly see it this way'? Perhaps for you it may seem random, but how on earth can you notice a behavior pattern without recollection of former behavior or impressions tagged with significant 'particularities' of that behavior? (*)

Alternative views need to be narrowed down in some way, it doesn't converge like Ni. And I think can Si play a role in this (aside from the judging functions), by looking for analogies (or relations) in past experience, for instance in order to 'reconstrue' a series of events. 

I don't say Si equals memory (like remembering a number of digits), but as a function it mediates, or selects, _transmits_, or whatever you want to call it, experiences, impressions for elements of presentation or elements of feeling. It's what triggers the memory or image, or idea, not the memory or image or idea itself, and neither the feeling or bodily response that might follow upon this (because as Jung states above, introverted feeling can also trigger bodily 'ennervations').

Also discussed in this thread, the recollection of aesthetic significance. For that I refer to the text above.

* (but from personal experience of INSFs under stress (inferior Ne running wild), I would say this works pretty much the same).


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Velasquez said:


> Yes


Don't try to be logical towards rationalization


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

mimesis said:


> After all it is a function, and my impression is that the differentiation of Si seems to be different between Dom, Aux, Tert and Inf, but likely also different in relation to T/F.
> 
> I'll quote Jung first
> 
> ...


A point and a question:

Any discussion must remain civil. Any concept or idea may be pummeled into oblivion, but in no way will I respond to any attempt at personal affront.

Concerning cognitive function theory, in your opinion is Si available to everyone?


----------



## Moya (May 22, 2012)

Honestly, this thread has gotten so damn convoluted for me - If any of you want to carry on your conversations with each other, feel free, but let's steer the main topic of the thread away from me. I'm done here, if you want to send me a friendly, helpful message on what you think my type is, go ahead. I might not agree with it. But go ahead -- just realize that ultimately I'm making the decision of whether I prefer Ni/Se or Ne/Si by _myself _and if you disagree, tough.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> A point and a question:
> 
> Any discussion must remain civil. Any concept or idea may be pummeled into oblivion, but in no way will I respond to any attempt at personal affront.
> 
> Concerning cognitive function theory, in your opinion is Si available to everyone?


It's not a personal affront. More a Si thing. Like I said, same here (INFP), albeit slightly different. INFPs are very attached to what 'feels' true in their perception, in case you didn't notice. I don't think it hurts me to be aware of that. 

About the functions, I tend to think all functions are available for (as good as) anyone. Just like every person has the abililty to learn meditation techniques. The world would perhaps look a lot better if everybody would. Unfortunately not everybody does, because it requires excercise and experience and elaboration, and you can only use your time once. 

So I'd say, not impossible, and possibly more likely in the same direction as your dominant, for instance for an INTP to develop Ni. But it requires more energy overall, and it needs to pay off. Usually people settle for what's good enough. In my case it is related with my education, profession and hobbies, so there was a strong incentive for a differentiation of Se. But I only differentiated it in certain contexts, and I mostly use it in certain contexts. 

This is actually more perceiving functions, I haven't looked at judging functions yet.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

mimesis said:


> It's not a personal affront. More a Si thing. Like I said, same here (INFP), albeit slightly different. INFPs are very attached to what 'feels' true in their perception,* in case you didn't notice.* I don't think it hurts me to be aware of that.


The text in bold reads as an attempt at a personal affront. This type of comment is what I was referencing earlier. It either stops or the conversation stops.



> About the functions, *I tend to think all functions are available for (as good as) anyone*. Just like every person has the abililty to learn meditation techniques. The world would perhaps look a lot better if everybody would. Unfortunately not everybody does, because it requires excercise and experience and elaboration, and you can only use your time once.
> 
> So I'd say, not impossible, and possibly *more likely in the same direction as your dominant*, for instance for an INTP to develop Ni. But it requires more energy overall, and it needs to pay off. Usually people settle for what's good enough. In my case it is related with my education, profession and hobbies, so there was a strong incentive for a differentiation of Se. But I only differentiated it in certain contexts, and I mostly use it in certain contexts.


What are you basing this on? A source or reference to which you could direct me or provide a link to?


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> The text in bold reads as an attempt at a personal affront. This type of comment is what I was referencing earlier. It either stops or the conversation stops.


No, it wasn't an attempt at a personal affront. I can't see why or how it could be perceived as such, but it seems it felt that way. 

I don't think it's so obvious to notice, really.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> What are you basing this on? A source or reference to which you could direct me or provide a link to?


Mainly observations of myself, introspection, reflection. Some debates on this forum, related theories, etc. I am still elaborating on it. I don't have a problem with my type, so it isn't an issue for me. It's just that the theory doesn't always match with my personal observations. 

You can read about Beebe, it's a sticky on this forum. I haven't gone into that much myself yet.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> What are you basing this on? A source or reference to which you could direct me or provide a link to?





mimesis said:


> Mainly observations of myself, introspection, reflection. Some debates on this forum, related theories, etc. I am still elaborating on it. I don't have a problem with my type, so it isn't an issue for me. It's just that the theory doesn't always match with my personal observations..


It's funny that I gave the comparison with the ability that basically every human being has to learn meditation techniques, because this might actually be the explanation why. 


*Transcendent function*
A psychic function that arises from the tension between consciousness and the unconscious and supports their union. 

When there is full parity of the opposites, attested by the ego’s absolute participation in both, this necessarily leads to a suspension of the will, for the will can no longer operate when every motive has an equally strong countermotive. Since life cannot tolerate a standstill, a damming up of vital energy results, and this would lead to an insupportable condition did not the tension of opposites produce a new, uniting function that transcends them. This function arises quite naturally from the regression of libido caused by the blockage.[Ibid., par. 824.]
The tendencies of the conscious and the unconscious are the two factors that together make up the transcendent function. It is called "transcendent" because it makes the transition from one attitude to another organically possible.["The Transcendent Function," CW 8, par. 145.]
The transcendent function is essentially an aspect of the self-regulation of the psyche. It typically manifests symbolically and is experienced as a new attitude toward oneself and life.


If the mediatory product remains intact, it forms the raw material for a process not of dissolution but of construction, in which thesis and antithesis both play their part. In this way it becomes a new content that governs the whole attitude, putting an end to the division and forcing the energy of the opposites into a common channel. The standstill is overcome and life can flow on with renewed power towards new goals.[Ibid., par. 827.]
Lexicon of Jungian Terms | New York Association for Analytical Psychology


CG Jung sychological Types II 1b

*CHAPTER 2. SCHILLER'S IDEAS UPON THE TYPE PROBLEM*
_2b Concerning the Basic Instincts

_(...) This expression clearly pictures the state of meditation without content in which the libido is supplied to the Self some~ what in the manner of incubating heat. As a result of the complete detachment of every function from the object, there necessarily arises in the inner man (the Self) an equivalent of objective reality, a state of complete identity of inner and outer which may be technically described as the tat twam asi (that art thou). 

(...) Parallel, in a certain sense, with tapas IS the concept yoga; by which, not so much a state of meditation as a conscious technique for the attainment of the tapas state, is to be' understood. Yoga is a method by which the libido is systematically 'drawn in' and thereby released from the bondage of the opposites. The aim of tapas and yoga is the establishing of a mediate condition from which the creative and redeeming element emerges, For the individual, the psychological result is the attainment of Brahman, the "supreme light," or "ananda" (bliss).

@Let Down Good luck with finding your type by yourself. I think that is the best thing to do anyway.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

mimesis said:


> (because as Jung states above, *introverted feeling* can also trigger bodily 'ennervations').


_correction:_

this should be, as stated above (introverted)* intuition 
*







scusi!


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

niss said:


> The text in bold reads as an attempt at a personal affront. This type of comment is what I was referencing earlier. It either stops or the conversation stops.


English is not my native language, and a friend explained to me why this -which was a literal translation from my own language- could be interpreted as an affront. So I apologize if this offended you, since this was not my intention.


----------



## Reicheru (Sep 24, 2011)

Let Down said:


> Honestly, this thread has gotten so damn convoluted for me - If any of you want to carry on your conversations with each other, feel free, but *let's steer the main topic of the thread away from me.* I'm done here, if you want to send me a friendly, helpful message on what you think my type is, go ahead. *I might not agree with it.* But go ahead -- just realize that ultimately* I'm making the decision of whether I prefer Ni/Se or Ne/Si by myself and if you disagree, tough*.


then why ask others for their opinions?



Let Down said:


> I appreciate it, but I'm kind of regretting posting this thread.


indeed. i get the _strong_ impression you did not want to hear anything but "yep, that's Ni - you're an INJ fo sho'."

sorry if this seems harsh, but if you aren't willing to really open yourself up fully and honestly explore all the possibilties, you aren't going to get anywhere with regard to self-discovery.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

SharkT00th said:


> Most Def, this is Si. Ni users don't remember details, they remember significance of events and the general flavor of them. They communicate the overall meaning behind an event, or something in the past, but Ni does not dwell on the past. Ni is always attempting to manifest it's symbolic vision in the real world.
> 
> Remember details, regardless of significance is what Si is doing, it is a storehouse of precise and concrete details.
> 
> You stated that you see an image, and then suddenly have a flash and view possibilities This is classic Ne/Si use, Ne uses Si as a springboard for imagination, but it starts with the concrete and creates the abstract.


Incorrect. Nostalgia isn't just Si. It's Ni too. 

The underlying problem with this thread is that people confuse the output of a function with its actual process - they think that how someone behaves is what is actually going through their mind. When one talks about the functions, it's important to describe them as a process, not as an output. Just like if you were to describe how to make a batch of chocolate chip cookies, you'd tell them the steps of the recipe - you wouldn't tell them "go make a crisp, chewy disk with flour and chocolate." Same thing with the functions. So, here goes:

Si is about being aware of your immediate physical surroundings, and comparing them to what you've sensed before - noticing similarities and differences in taste, appearance, smell, feel, comfort, etc. When you use Si, you can tell the physical difference between two things based on what you've sensed previously. Some Si friends of mine from college have told me they could literally "see" the page in their notes where a test question came from (though this is a bit extreme)

Ni is about always seeing further complexity "behind" something. Instead of dealing with the differences between physical surroundings like Si is, Ni is about _time_ - cause and effect over time, patterns over time, predictions based on past occurrences, merging of both nostalgia (as the OP mentioned) and the future as they relate. As an INTJ and IT consultant, I spend a lot of time noticing patterns in the management of our client companies that will predict/determine whether or not the systems we're working on now will be successful, or not. 

So, nostalgia for Si is about remembering the physical surroundings of a point in the past. Nostalgia for Ni is about remembering your conceptualizations and idealogizations of the past and comparing them to the present and future.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

LXPilot said:


> Incorrect. Nostalgia isn't just Si. It's Ni too.
> 
> *The underlying problem with this thread is that people confuse the output of a function with its actual process - they think that how someone behaves is what is actually going through their mind. When one talks about the functions, it's important to describe them as a process, not as an output. Just like if you were to describe how to make a batch of chocolate chip cookies, you'd tell them the steps of the recipe - you wouldn't tell them "go make a crisp, chewy disk with flour and chocolate." Same thing with the functions.* So, here goes:
> 
> ...


Thank you for this, especially the bolded part! You have to describe how your mind works and processes information not just specific behaviors or thoughts, which tend to vary more with each individual. It really has caused a lot of confusion and difficulty in finding my type from all the misleading information I've read about people describing their behavior and experiences and not how they process and interpret stimuli.


----------



## Moya (May 22, 2012)

Reicheru said:


> then why ask others for their opinions?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry, on my phone- can't give indepth responses to everything I would like to...

Saying "you use Ne/Si" and giving me a reason why was not the problem. Saying "you use Ne/Si, get over it" after I argue with the reasons they provided (bear in mind I know myself better than anyone on this thread, obviously) or accusing me of rationalization? Really not cool.


----------

