# Do Ns (or any type) find Si to be selfish?



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

erasinglines said:


> Perhaps Ni and Ti would share a similar sort of internalization, it's just that the scope would be about patterns and logic rather than details and morals. At a glance, it seems like they wouldn't necessarily be that self-centered. but when you think about it... it could be. However, I think that introverted functions have just as much opportunity to be non-self-centered. Similarly, extroverted functions can be self-centered as well as not.
> 
> The nature of introverted functions (as well as I can understand) is that they're searching for a certain degree of validity within a specific context, removing that which does not support its endeavor. For Si, it's looking for validity within details; Ni is looking for validity within patterns; Fi validity within values which becomes morals; and Ti validity within thinking which becomes logic. These contexts are by nature specific and in-depth. Sometimes they may be based off of the self, for where else can one be so sure of the validity? (Personally, I love to use myself as examples or poke fun of myself since I'd likely know what's correct and what's taking it too far.) Other times, the context may be outside of the self.
> 
> ...



Yeah, that makes sense. I think the unique thing about Si is it's the only one of the four introverted functions that focuses specifically on physical stimuli (or at least our perception of them). So I think it may be the hardest one to convince of new ideas because it's not something that can really be explained...it has to be physically shown. Intuition can recognize abstract patterns, thinking can piece together things logically, and feeling can at least be convinced of a moral value of something. With sensing, it's tougher because you're trusting what you're taking in physically.


I agree with your comparison of introverted and extroverted, functions, though...I brought up some similar things in this thread:

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...nctions-deep-extroverted-functions-broad.html





Sepa said:


> Not selfish, but boring.





fishphlem said:


> No, just boring.



It's not surprising to hear Ns finding Si to be boring. The topic has come up some in the ISFJ forum, and in a few places I've described how this is the blessing and the curse of having dominant Si. The great part is that we Si users can get so much joy out of simple, everyday things....we can repeat a lot of the same things and still get satisfaction out of it. We can study the same topic in endless detail, or accumulate vast collections of one thing and not get tired of it. The bad part, though, is that other people often can't experience the same joy....they lose interest in it. So especially as an ISFJ, it can create a certain sense of loneliness...I get so much joy out of certain things, but I can't share that joy with others. ISTJs probably aren't as miffed about this, because they don't have the same Fe desire to share their experiences with others and connect with them.


----------



## erasinglines (Sep 1, 2010)

teddy564339 said:


> Yeah, that makes sense. I think the unique thing about Si is it's the only one of the four introverted functions that focuses specifically on physical stimuli (or at least our perception of them). So I think it may be the hardest one to convince of new ideas because it's not something that can really be explained...it has to be physically shown. Intuition can recognize abstract patterns, thinking can piece together things logically, and feeling can at least be convinced of a moral value of something. With sensing, it's tougher because you're trusting what you're taking in physically.
> 
> 
> I agree with your comparison of introverted and extroverted, functions, though...I brought up some similar things in this thread:
> ...


Well, that's interesting! Because I'd had a similar thread long about here. *high fives for coincidentally similar trains of thought!*  Now I'm all super interested and I have to read your thread after work and tutoring today. :3



> It's not surprising to hear Ns finding Si to be boring. The topic has come up some in the ISFJ forum, and in a few places I've described how this is the blessing and the curse of having dominant Si. The great part is that we Si users can get so much joy out of simple, everyday things....we can repeat a lot of the same things and still get satisfaction out of it. We can study the same topic in endless detail, or accumulate vast collections of one thing and not get tired of it. The bad part, though, is that other people often can't experience the same joy....they lose interest in it. So especially as an ISFJ, it can create a certain sense of loneliness...I get so much joy out of certain things, but I can't share that joy with others. ISTJs probably aren't as miffed about this, because they don't have the same Fe desire to share their experiences with others and connect with them.


I think my ISTJ friend gets sad when she wants to share something she loves but I'm just not interested at the time. She's a real bookworm and reads super fast, whereas I tend to read very slowly. And compounded with all of the other non-reading hobbies I keep bouncing around to, it takes me months to finish a book. I'd really love to keep up with her reading ability, but it's hard for me to do any one thing for a really long time. Though eventually when I get around to it (and even more eventually when I get to finishing a book XD), it's happy and we can share all kinds of ideas. :3


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

I think Si is actually a very interesting function; however, I get annoyed when individuals who are Si-dominant pressure me to think or feel a certain way. Being Ne, where Si is my inferior function, I am just a lot more open-minded and agreeable on many different outlooks of life and how people think. Unhealthy individuals who have Si in their top two primary functions just cannot fathom how I think, and it's irritating when they tell me I'm stupid for thinking/feeling the way I do. They dislike my disorganization and inability to make quick decisions on an issue, and freak out even more when I can see pros/cons from multiple sides.

Now don't get me wrong, I have no issues for what they think and how they get to that conclusion. But when they start stepping on my toes because I don't agree with them or finding positive attributes to the sides they don't agree with... I start having issues. Nobody should 'make' another person think or feel a certain way. If they want to provide information or even debate, that's totally cool. I'm all for hearing various viewpoints and gathering information!! But I do find it selfish that they will not even hear my side after they are trying to convince me of theirs.


----------



## Razorfield9 (Feb 14, 2012)

As Owfin pointed out- each type is looking into that pond of theirs, 'taking the limits of their vision to be the limits of the world' is that characteristic selfishness.

Now are some of these people more prone to seeing only their pond? Some types may 'metaphorically' be zoomed in closer on their pond, so that it may look a lot bigger by contrast. Si with its memory feedback may be more concerned with the things that it has a prior reference point for- or in other terms, something they can make sense of based on a prior sensation of something that 'somehow' connects to it (I guess based on the sensation it causes). 

Selfishness in the 'Si' world can be described differently than the 'selfishness' we criticize- that pond (I like that analogy) is in greater focus, so they tap into themselves in order to understand everything else. The other sort of selfishness is denying the existence of anything else, some types may find it easier to see the other ones of course.

This is all just faux-theorizing so bear (lol) with me.


----------



## 2ch (Feb 4, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> And I think the good thing is that I'm able to discuss these more "global issues" if I can see how it can be related to my own life...so I've had some decent conversations with an INFP friend about things like this. I guess it's just sometimes it feels like he's interested in some topics that I'm not because I can't relate them to my life, and sometimes I feel like I "should" be, just because he is. But he's never said this...I think he just accepts that we connect on certain things and on certain things we don't. I think he gets more frustrated when someone doesn't seem to care *at all* about any one of these abstract topics.


What seems to continue as a misconception about some abstract or theoretical topics is that "it does not relate in some way or in any way to real life". It can relate to others in terms of their lives and how it can help them understand themselves and their lives better as well, as some of these topics validate such concepts to be true. However, as it seems, the concepts mentioned in abstract and theoretical topics might not be well understood, perhaps due to its complexity?

Referring back to the actual topic and question at hand, I do not think that any functions are to be called 'selfish', but only to a certain extent if used to their own advantage that can harm others.


----------



## AbioticPrime (Sep 1, 2011)

I'll break it down like this,

Si only agitates me when:
-the person is stubbornly unwilling to change or explore new territories which would be more beneficial to them and others.
-the person disrupts the smooth flow of the moment by relentlessly connecting what they observe with something it reminds them of.
-the person is stingily uncompromising merely for the sake of their comfort (this mixes with point 1 and is closest to Si being selfish).
-the person piggy-backs off of dogmas without thinking them through, adopting them as truth and preaching them onto others.

Apart from that (might seem like a lot but it's not), I <3 Si.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Finaille said:


> I think Si is actually a very interesting function; however, I get annoyed when individuals who are Si-dominant pressure me to think or feel a certain way. Being Ne, where Si is my inferior function, I am just a lot more open-minded and agreeable on many different outlooks of life and how people think. Unhealthy individuals who have Si in their top two primary functions just cannot fathom how I think, and it's irritating when they tell me I'm stupid for thinking/feeling the way I do. They dislike my disorganization and inability to make quick decisions on an issue, and freak out even more when I can see pros/cons from multiple sides.
> 
> Now don't get me wrong, I have no issues for what they think and how they get to that conclusion. But when they start stepping on my toes because I don't agree with them or finding positive attributes to the sides they don't agree with... I start having issues. Nobody should 'make' another person think or feel a certain way. If they want to provide information or even debate, that's totally cool. I'm all for hearing various viewpoints and gathering information!! But I do find it selfish that they will not even hear my side after they are trying to convince me of theirs.



I think the difficult thing with Si users is that we get very comfortable with what's consistent and known for us that it can be difficult for things to be in flux and up in the air for us. When we don't know something is true for sure, it makes us restless and stressed out.

However, I think what usually helps an Si user to see and value a new approach is if they can directly and concretely be shown what that value is, particularly in their own lives. For an SFJ like me, usually this involves how it affects people, particularly those that are in my own life. For an STJ, I think it's more down to sensory logical procedures.

So I think usually an Si user can be convinced of a different perspective, but what it takes to convince them isn't just a possible theory that seems like it could make sense...there has to be concrete proof. I think that's there a lot of friction between Ns and SJs comes into play.





2ch said:


> What seems to continue as a misconception about some abstract or theoretical topics is that "it does not relate in some way or in any way to real life". It can relate to others in terms of their lives and how it can help them understand themselves and their lives better as well, as some of these topics validate such concepts to be true. However, as it seems, the concepts mentioned in abstract and theoretical topics might not be well understood, perhaps due to its complexity?
> 
> Referring back to the actual topic and question at hand, I do not think that any functions are to be called 'selfish', but only to a certain extent if used to their own advantage that can harm others.


Well, I think the thing is that for Si users, it's not just enough for it to relate to "real life"...it has to relate to the life of that particular Si user. I don't think there's any topic that can be discussed that is so abstract that it doesn't affect anyone. But it may not affect a particular person. Or, more likely, it affects them, but in a way that is so indirect that they can't see it, or not to an extent that it's going to stick out to them on a consistent basis.

For example, if we were to get into a discussion about abortion, it wouldn't have a huge impact on me because that topic doesn't really come into play in my life. Even though I can still have the conversation, it's not going to be something I'm passionate about because not only have I never gotten anyone pregnant, I've never known anyone who's going through the process of considering having an abortion. This would be different for me if I did have an experience with someone who did.

I've also noticed that's why sensory stimuli, such as movies, will often have an impact on how invested I get into a topic. If I can see the direct impact of a topic (particularly on the emotions of someone involved, since I have Fe as well), then the topic is going to resonate more with me. 


But if there's not that direct connection, even though I understand and appreciate that the topic affects millions of people, it's still not going to "stick" with me. For an N, they may have a strong interest in the subject based on all of the hypothetical situations that do affect all kinds of people they'll never meet (though this may be bigger in NFs...NTs may value it just for the actual theory of morality and freedom and whatnot).





Serial Hero said:


> I'll break it down like this,
> 
> Si only agitates me when:
> -the person is stubbornly unwilling to change or explore new territories which would be more beneficial to them and others.
> ...


There are times when I'm probably guilty of all of those. Though it's hard to say because I may be interpreting them differently than you are...it's hard to say without hearing more specific examples.

I think the tricky part is deciding what's actually beneficial for people....I think that's usually where the biggest disagreement occurs. I doubt even an Si user will continue in a known habit if they truly believe it is hurting them, and many do have the interests of those around them at heart. Of course, anyone of any type can make decisions that hurt themselves and others. It's possible in some ways that Si users are more apt to stick to some of the these habits out of the sake of comfort, though it's also possible that people of other types will do the same things for with different motives.




I do think there are things that can help Si doms avoid some of these behaviors. For the first one, for example...usually if a dom Si user can be slowly introduced to new experiences rather than have them thrust upon them, they'll be more likely to consider them and try them out. 

Disrupting the moment is tricky because I think it kind of depends on what you mean. I think this is naturally how a dom Si user's mind works...but at the same time, due to their introversion, they're not as likely to show it. 


I think I am oftentimes uncompromising for the sake of my own comfort, but I only do this is I feel strongly that it's not affecting others in any negative way. I'm very compromising when it comes to helping others...I think my Fe drives me a lot in that regard. And this helps balance out my Si.



I don't think most people actually believe in any sort of dogma without thinking them through...I think it's just how they think about it that's different. They may not think about every possible situation, only the particular ones that affect them in their own lives. This goes back to what I mentioned earlier in this post about direct, concrete evidence. In their minds they may believe that they've thought about them thoroughly because they may have investigated all of the possibilities that affect them and the people they know in their own lives. However, they may have not explored every avenue of the situation because they haven't seen the relevance of it in new situations.



So I do think there are reasons for all of the behaviors that you have mentioned, and I also think there are ways that Si users can grow in order to improve upon them. But I think it's helpful when others kind of adhere to the way in which Si users process things so that they can see the importance of considering new and different ideas.


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

@teddy564339-

I think I get where you're coming from and I'm starting to understand it myself... it's why it's stupid to say that Sensors in general can't like/comprehend theory. The problem is, Si doesn't find theory practical unless it can positively affect them in some way. I would say that's why there are some Sensors who are into MBTI/Enneagram/other personality theory... obviously you aren't going to as much response as compared to the Intuitive community... but still it's going to be something.

It's still challenging though because as an intuitive, I can still see possibilities that may be beneficial for a Si user; however, if they don't want to take in the information, it's pretty much pointless to even bring it up. How would you suggest communicating new information to a Si dom/aux if they don't find it practical?


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

teddy564339 said:


> IHowever, I think what usually helps an Si user to see and value a new approach is if they can directly and concretely be shown what that value is, particularly in their own lives. For an SFJ like me, usually this involves how it affects people, particularly those that are in my own life. *For an STJ, I think it's more down to sensory logical procedures.*


I'm swayed by proof and logical points. Not so much procedures, unless you mean line of reasoning. Although, the line itself doesn't really matter as long as the points are good (Te cares about if a theory _works_. Although I always try to understand how math fits together and how each part relates to one another and I do not like it being ugly, the fact is, if I discover a theory of mine does not work, the theory is wrong and worthless no matter how pretty it was).



Finaille said:


> @teddy564339I think I get where you're coming from and I'm starting to understand it myself... it's why it's stupid to say that Sensors in general can't like/comprehend theory. The problem is, Si doesn't find theory practical unless it can positively affect them in some way. I would say that's why there are some Sensors who are into MBTI/Enneagram/other personality theory... obviously you aren't going to as much response as compared to the Intuitive community... but still it's going to be something.


I don't think it's a Si thing, rather, it's an extroverted judging thing. But I don't think affects is the right word. I find theory practical when it _works_. That is, when it is fit to match the real world, instead of attempting to do the reverse, which I consider practically lying.



Finaille said:


> It's still challenging though because as an intuitive, I can still see possibilities that may be beneficial for a Si user; however, if they don't want to take in the information, it's pretty much pointless to even bring it up. How would you suggest communicating new information to a Si dom/aux if they don't find it practical?


I would just relate it to something they already know. That will at least get them to notice it. With Si dominants, you have to sort of "teach them to fish". It is ultimately our choice to consider something valuable enough to not get cut off on the chopping block of "what information is important". You give us stuff that makes us think it might be valuable, we chose to consider it.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Finaille said:


> It's still challenging though because as an intuitive, I can still see possibilities that may be beneficial for a Si user; however, if they don't want to take in the information, it's pretty much pointless to even bring it up. How would you suggest communicating new information to a Si dom/aux if they don't find it practical?



Well, I think you have to find a way that it is practical to them. You may have to dig deeper and study and research whatever it is more so that you increase the probability of it being beneficial to them. You may have to ask them questions about themselves and what's important to them...really listen and know what makes them tick. That way you'll have a stronger confidence that whatever it is will in fact be beneficial to them...not just having the potential.

If they don't find it practical, that means it either isn't or they don't just know that it is. If it's not, I think you have to find a way to make it practical. If they just don't know that it is, you have to find a clear example to prove to them that it is. Basically, I think it takes a fair bit of commitment, patience, retention, and attention to details (all of which may be a challenging area for Ne).


And this is the problem when dealing with Ne vs. Si...what works best for Si is going to be difficult for Ne, just like what works best for Ne is going to be difficult for Si. But if one side feels the need to instigate the change, I think there's more of an emphasis on that side making the first compromise...because otherwise, it may just not happen.


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

Owfin said:


> I would just relate it to something they already know. That will at least get them to notice it. With Si dominants, you have to sort of "teach them to fish". It is ultimately our choice to consider something valuable enough to not get cut off on the chopping block of "what information is important". You give us stuff that makes us think it might be valuable, we chose to consider it.


That part is truly legitimate, but what about if they are trying to convince me to see something their way? I am pleasant enough to sit down and listen to it, even if I don't agree... but if I try to do the same thing, they can't provide the same courtesy back. Is that a maturity thing, or an approach thing?


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

teddy564339 said:


> Well, I think you have to find a way that it is practical to them. You may have to dig deeper and study and research whatever it is more so that you increase the probability of it being beneficial to them. You may have to ask them questions about themselves and what's important to them...really listen and know what makes them tick. That way you'll have a stronger confidence that whatever it is will in fact be beneficial to them...not just having the potential.
> 
> If they don't find it practical, that means it either isn't or they don't just know that it is. If it's not, I think you have to find a way to make it practical. If they just don't know that it is, you have to find a clear example to prove to them that it is. Basically, I think it takes a fair bit of commitment, patience, retention, and attention to details (all of which may be a challenging area for Ne).
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think that is very true, especially the middle part. I honestly don't pay much attention to detail, it's more one of those things where I think 'Try it, if it doesn't work drop it... you never know what will happen'. I understand quite well that most of my ideas won't work, but it's pretty much bouncing around from one idea to the next until I hit what I consider 'gold'. I will have to think more about my approach and the practicality of the information I present to them and their situation. Good thoughts .


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

Finaille said:


> That part is truly legitimate, but what about if they are trying to convince me to see something their way? I am pleasant enough to sit down and listen to it, even if I don't agree... but if I try to do the same thing, they can't provide the same courtesy back. Is that a maturity thing, or an approach thing?


I think that might be a maturity thing. I'm working a lot on holding my tongue and letting other people not feel judged by me all the time when I'm in a discussion. I'm actually judging the arguments they are making and not them, but the point still stands, and either way it isn't very good. I'm working on stopping that compulsion to express my disagreement/opinion every time I have one. It's okay to keep some quibbles inside so that the discussion goes on. And believe me, it's hard, especially when I vehmently disagree or my urge to play devil's advocate springs up.

For me, it helps to remind myself of how much I like hearing opposing viewpoints. If I talk all the time others can't bring them up.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Finaille said:


> That part is truly legitimate, but what about if they are trying to convince me to see something their way? I am pleasant enough to sit down and listen to it, even if I don't agree... but if I try to do the same thing, they can't provide the same courtesy back. Is that a maturity thing, or an approach thing?



Sometimes I think it's a matter of patience. Si users aren't known to change their minds quickly. Sometimes they may have to listen to something, and then take a lot of time to think about it on their own. They may ever so slightly change their mind about one point if that makes sense to them. Over a long period of time they may slowly adapt and develop a new perspective on something. 

But it's really hard for me to say anything without a specific example.


Sometimes I think it's helpful to ask them why it's important for them to try to convince you of something. I think all people are guilty sometimes of thinking they know what's best for someone else. If you feel something is being pushed on you, you can ask them why they feel the need to convince you of it. For whatever reason they give, you can then ask them if you think it's fair for you to apply that same reasoning to them.


So sometimes just pointing out equity in a situation can be helpful too, because they may not even realize what they're doing. If they try to take something that they believe applies to you, you can say point out that what works for them may not work for you. To support that, you can then ask them how they would feel if you took something you believed and assumed it would work the best for them.




But like I said, it's hard for me to say without getting a better picture of what's going on.


I also think part of it depends on if we're talking about an SFJ or an STJ, because Te and Fe function in very different ways. Some of the things I mentioned may work better for me because I'm working at it through an Fe lens. An STJ might not have the same views as me.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Finaille said:


> Yeah, I think that is very true, especially the middle part. I honestly don't pay much attention to detail, it's more one of those things *where I think 'Try it, if it doesn't work drop it... you never know what will happen'. I understand quite well that most of my ideas won't work, but it's pretty much bouncing around from one idea to the next until I hit what I consider 'gold'.* I will have to think more about my approach and the practicality of the information I present to them and their situation. Good thoughts .



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I've heard similar things from ENTPs. This is exactly the kind of approach that gives Si users a lot of discomfort and stress. It really is stressful for us to bounce around back and forth. We're at our best when we can fully commit to something with all of our attention and effort.

And this is why it's so hard for us to adopt new ideas without having confidence in them. If we aren't sure it's going to work out, it feels like we're wasting our time and energy, which we value greatly. I don't think we get joy out of trying out new ideas just to try them, the way Ne users do. What we get joy out of is knowing something's going to work, and seeing the finished product. It gives us a certain deep sense of satisfaction out of knowing our time and efforts produced something, and that things went according to plan.


So I think you hit on a really big key point right there...the thing that gives ENP joy and satisfaction causes stress for an ISJ. I've heard ENPs say the same thing about what works for ISJs.

This of course isn't to say things are hopeless...it just means that sometimes the two types may have to do things that they're not comfortable with in order to work together in the best way.


----------



## Finaille (Aug 8, 2010)

teddy564339 said:


> I'm glad you mentioned that, because I've heard similar things from ENTPs. This is exactly the kind of approach that gives Si users a lot of discomfort and stress. It really is stressful for us to bounce around back and forth. We're at our best when we can fully commit to something with all of our attention and effort.
> 
> And this is why it's so hard for us to adopt new ideas without having confidence in them. If we aren't sure it's going to work out, it feels like we're wasting our time and energy, which we value greatly. I don't think we get joy out of trying out new ideas just to try them, the way Ne users do. What we get joy out of is knowing something's going to work, and seeing the finished product. It gives us a certain deep sense of satisfaction out of knowing our time and efforts produced something, and that things went according to plan.
> 
> ...


Yeah, right now I'm planning a wedding and periodically I hit walls of stress with my ISTJ dad because he wants 'exact answers' in answers that he likes, and I'm not nearly as picky. There are some things, like with our reception venue, cake, and flowers, he will just write a check with and be fine. But we've butted heads BADLY on issues such as photography (which is now solved, THANK GOD) and now its invitations. I wish he would just give me and my fiance a budget for us to work it out, but he's being a major control freak. There are some things he will spend extra and other things where we will have to be insanely frugal. I've found that his gifts always have weird strings attached... they seem to like to have control over what situations will occur. I wish I knew how to handle it better. That I definitely consider selfish.

I've found though that writing my thoughts down is a bit easier for him to process if we aren't agreeing, and I may have to do it for the invitation issue. For some reason we just cannot talk face-to-face if we don't agree without having screaming matches. I do understand his viewpoints, but I think he fails to recognize how challenging he is making some issues because of his control and hard-headedness. But I do appreciate his viewpoint, even if I don't agree.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Finaille said:


> Yeah, right now I'm planning a wedding and periodically I hit walls of stress with my ISTJ dad because he wants 'exact answers' in answers that he likes, and I'm not nearly as picky. There are some things, like with our reception venue, cake, and flowers, he will just write a check with and be fine. But we've butted heads BADLY on issues such as photography (which is now solved, THANK GOD) and now its invitations. I wish he would just give me and my fiance a budget for us to work it out, but he's being a major control freak. There are some things he will spend extra and other things where we will have to be insanely frugal. I've found that his gifts always have weird strings attached... they seem to like to have control over what situations will occur. I wish I knew how to handle it better. That I definitely consider selfish.
> 
> I've found though that writing my thoughts down is a bit easier for him to process if we aren't agreeing, and I may have to do it for the invitation issue. For some reason we just cannot talk face-to-face if we don't agree without having screaming matches. I do understand his viewpoints, but I think he fails to recognize how challenging he is making some issues because of his control and hard-headedness. But I do appreciate his viewpoint, even if I don't agree.



I think this is a situation where a lot of factors kind of compound the rigidness of Si. First off, since he's your dad, he automatically is going to feel a certain amount of a need for control...I think all parents feel that way to a degree, even when their children are adults. Some are better at letting go, and Si users probably have the hardest time with that.

(It's also hugest in a father/daughter relationship, I think, because fathers tend to be very overprotective of their daughters, even as adults).

Secondly, I think the older Si users get, the more set in their ways that they get.

And thirdly, it's the whole issue of finances. I think because Si users value security in the known so much, we tend to be pretty conservative when it comes to money.

Mix that in with the idea that it's a wedding, which is a huge monumental event in life that lakes lots of planning and involves lots of people...and I think it really magnifies the need for control that an Si user would have. 



But I think wedding planning is stressful for everyone, regardless of type. I think the type conflicts just make the whole thing even bigger.






I do think things are kind of different in a parent/child situation, though. Eve though parents can always learn fro their kids and need to learn to let their kids be who they are....I think most parents tend to feel like they do have a certain authority over their kids, and I think they usually tend to think they know best about a situation. Some parents do this more than others, but I also think that this is just as much of a contributing factor as the Si issues. It's basically a combination of both.


Basically, I'm saying that the whole situation isn't purely down Si.


----------



## Goooseeey (Feb 28, 2012)

To answer the original topic question, yes, sometimes I do.

Too often it seems like they're not considering the overall possibilities, or what somebody else may be saying, and although they may be reasonable, they are unable to be reasoned with. This is likely a result of a fundamental clash between my Ne and my girlfriend's Si, but this is what a large amount of our fights center around when discussing political, religious, or otherwise philosophical beliefs - she views me as much too impersonal, while I feel the opposite regarding her.


----------



## TiNeSi (Jan 10, 2011)

Finaille said:


> I think Si is actually a very interesting function; however, I get annoyed when individuals who are Si-dominant pressure me to think or feel a certain way. Being Ne, where Si is my inferior function, I am just a lot more open-minded and agreeable on many different outlooks of life and how people think. Unhealthy individuals who have Si in their top two primary functions just cannot fathom how I think, and it's irritating when they tell me I'm stupid for thinking/feeling the way I do.


I've been thinking hard about that one, because it didn't resonate with my experience at all and I just can't think of one instance when a Si dom has been trying to convince me of something or has belittled my view point. It's actually one thing that I appreciate about these types: they're very easy to agree to disagree with. Si doms around me usually stick to their opinions but don't mind if you think differently. On the other hand, I've had Ne dom either trying to convince me or changing their mndset to adopt my opinion, even though I wasn't trying to convince them at all! To me, that makes them both more AND less flexible, in that they are more likely to change their mind on an issue, but if they have a strong opinion about something, they will expect you to change your mind and get irritated if you need to think it through. 

It's really interesting reading this thread as an INTP in my thirties, because I relate to both Ne and Si and I value both functions.


----------



## FreeSpirit (Jun 1, 2011)

Si makes me think of a library. 

The people I know IRL who have identified as
Si users fit my thoughts on the matter.

It is as if their brains are very quiet, almost secret 
libraries where they have stored a record of, and
therefore a rich understanding of, their own values. 
I imagine that they have stored photo albums up there, 
because many of them seem to have taken so much from 
their real lives.

I'd say, except with one ISTJ I know (he is glaringly
obvious) that from the other Si users I know (thinking
of two ISFJs in particular), you wouldn't even notice 
this quality about them unless you were looking to learn 
about them. 

Mostly you just see Fe, and both of the 
ISFJs I know have a quirky, comical Fe, oftentimes 
playfully irreverent. (Even though they are not irreverent 
people, in reality, at all.)

Concerning the glaringly obvious ISTJ I know, however,
I'd say you can see some Si- and I think that is 
because he expresses his thoughts very often in order
to explain his actions when questioned. (He seems to 
be questioned more often than the Fe users, because
people find his more strict behavior confusing/threatening
sometimes). However, he is not aggressive or anything.
His 'strictness' applies to himself more than anyone else.
(And yet, people are still threatened. ha ha ha.)

Anyhoo, I've probably said on here a billion times:
ISFJs are my fav. type! 

*Si is romantic and intelligent to me!*


----------



## TiNeSi (Jan 10, 2011)

FreeSpirit said:


> Si makes me think of a library.


And there you have established the utter coolness of Si.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

I am an INxx with an ISFJ mother.

Growing up, I was mentally independent and relatively unexpressive, off in my own world, so she was constantly urging me to study, practice things, and care about the way I present myself, and giving me practical reasons I should do so, trying to use her own experience as a basis for guiding me. Her strong, well-formed judgements and the differing focus we had both turned me off to communication. 

Now that I'm more mature, and disconnected from home for awhile, I've come to better understand her way of doing things - the library was a perfect metaphor. I've built an understanding of a lot of different topics over the years. She will randomly ask me to explain things, and will listen patiently to what I have to say - but I gear it towards the concrete and technical if I can, since that is what she seems to appreciate. Sometimes she will give opinions, relate with experience, and ask more questions, but often she will just take in the information, which I think is because she exhausts herself in the outside world and needs to relax at home. 

To the original question: She is not selfish in the conventionally intended sense. She is habitually so invested in nurturing _others_ that she doesn't spare much thought for her own well-being, which has led her to serious health issues in the past.

She _is_ self-ish, maybe, in a more fundamental, less ill-connotated sense - she uses her internalized experience and information as a basis for shaping and handling things in the outside world. This might give her problems with situations too far outside of her experience, but her pattern generally meshes well with the world she lives in.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

A lot of interesting things to comment on here.



Goooseeey said:


> To answer the original topic question, yes, sometimes I do.
> 
> Too often it seems like they're not considering the overall possibilities, or what somebody else may be saying, and although they may be reasonable, they are unable to be reasoned with. This is likely a result of a fundamental clash between my Ne and my girlfriend's Si, but this is what a large amount of our fights center around when discussing political, religious, or otherwise philosophical beliefs - she views me as much too impersonal, while I feel the opposite regarding her.



Well, I think it's kind of like I said earlier...I don't think it's that Si can't be reasoned with, exactly...it's moreso that they type of reasoning that it takes to convince an Si user of something is going to be of a different type.

It's very hard to convince an Si user to change their mind just by offering a theory or an explanation that makes sense on strictly logical/theoretical grounds. Just because an idea seems to make sense when someone explains it isn't usually enough to convince me if it goes against my own personal experience. However, if I can concretely see an example of it happening, something that I can see with my own eyes or in a personal situation for me, then it will go a long way to convincing me of it.

This will vary among SFJs and STJs because Fe and Te will take different things to convince them. For me, I'm more likely to be convinced of something if I can see how it impacts people. That's why often personal stories from other people will "bring a theory to life" for me, and it will resonate a lot more in changing my mind. 


This is probably why it can be frustrating to have a conversation about religion or politics with an Si user...because strictly theoretical topics may not mean as much without physical experiences that go with them.


But as I said earlier, this does not mean that Si users refuse to change their minds or refuse to consider new ideas. We just need more proof to convince us of them. And this also makes us very committed and loyal to each idea we take a hold of. 




TiNeSi said:


> I've been thinking hard about that one, because it didn't resonate with my experience at all and I just can't think of one instance when a Si dom has been trying to convince me of something or has belittled my view point. It's actually one thing that I appreciate about these types: they're very easy to agree to disagree with. Si doms around me usually stick to their opinions but don't mind if you think differently. On the other hand, I've had Ne dom either trying to convince me or changing their mndset to adopt my opinion, even though I wasn't trying to convince them at all! To me, that makes them both more AND less flexible, in that they are more likely to change their mind on an issue, but if they have a strong opinion about something, they will expect you to change your mind and get irritated if you need to think it through.
> 
> It's really interesting reading this thread as an INTP in my thirties, because I relate to both Ne and Si and I value both functions.


That's an interesting point. It probably is related to the fact that you have Ne and Si as your middle two functions. For Si doms, you may be right...I know for me, I rarely try to convince anyone else to believe as I do (since it's so based on my own subjective experiences)...I just don't like them discounting or attacking them either. 

But some of this is an introverted/extroverted thing too. 





FreeSpirit said:


> Si makes me think of a library.
> 
> The people I know IRL who have identified as
> Si users fit my thoughts on the matter.
> ...


This is a fantastic point. I think it's why a number of MBTI books say that ISJs have a "rich, inner world". As Si doms, we soak up so much from our personal experiences and we retain a lot of it. 


Of course, this has its positives and negatives, as this thread has shown. But I do think it's easy as an Si dom to have trouble understanding how different we are from other people. I've read Si doms have a harder time seeing this than any other types.


I think this thread I made kind of diagrams some of what you said here.

http://personalitycafe.com/isfj-forum-nurturers/39496-si-ocd-am-i-just-completely-crazy.html






Flatlander said:


> I am an INxx with an ISFJ mother.
> 
> Growing up, I was mentally independent and relatively unexpressive, off in my own world, so she was constantly urging me to study, practice things, and care about the way I present myself, and giving me practical reasons I should do so, trying to use her own experience as a basis for guiding me. Her strong, well-formed judgements and the differing focus we had both turned me off to communication.
> 
> Now that I'm more mature, and disconnected from home for awhile, I've come to better understand her way of doing things - the library was a perfect metaphor. I've built an understanding of a lot of different topics over the years. She will randomly ask me to explain things, and will listen patiently to what I have to say - but I gear it towards the concrete and technical if I can, since that is what she seems to appreciate. Sometimes she will give opinions, relate with experience, and ask more questions, but often she will just take in the information, which I think is because she exhausts herself in the outside world and needs to relax at home.


Yeah, I think I'm like her in a lot of ways. As a parent especially, if an ISFJ has no knowledge of the MBTI, they're probably likely to assume that what worked for them and is best for them will be best for their children as well.

This is a difficult thing to keep track of for us...we know that all people are individuals, but we also know that people have things in common. It's easier for us to keep things straight if we know what people have in common, so I think sometimes we assume things because we don't know what else to put in the "blank spots".


The outside world is exhausting for me too. 

But I'm glad you've recognized all of these things about her. I'm sure it makes things easier for both of you. Hopefully she's learned things about you too and has adapted some of her mindsets to make things easier as well.






Flatlander said:


> To the original question: She is not selfish in the conventionally intended sense. She is habitually so invested in nurturing _others_ that she doesn't spare much thought for her own well-being, which has led her to serious health issues in the past.
> 
> She _is_ self-ish, maybe, in a more fundamental, less ill-connotated sense - she uses her internalized experience and information as a basis for shaping and handling things in the outside world. This might give her problems with situations too far outside of her experience, but her pattern generally meshes well with the world she lives in.



Right, that's the way it is for me too. That's why I think having children would be too taxing for me...I would get overburdened by it. (That's not to say all ISFJS do).

I do have trouble with things outside of my experience as well, especially if I have to think quickly or respond to things that are new without having time to process them. But the good thing is that if I can slowly add new ideas and experiences in, I can get very comfortable with them.


So I think you summed up things pretty nicely here.


----------



## Owfin (Oct 15, 2011)

teddy564339 said:


> This will vary among SFJs and STJs because Fe and Te will take different things to convince them. For me, I'm more likely to be convinced of something if I can see how it impacts people. That's why often personal stories from other people will "bring a theory to life" for me, and it will resonate a lot more in changing my mind.


And I'll embellish the STJ side of this:

Proof doesn't really seem to be valid unless it _exists_ and you can show so. I don't need a physical object; after all, otherwise I would deny all of history!- but your proof needs to be grounded in what works or exists. Make a theory to fit the world, I say. Making your perception of the world fit your theory feels like a dishonesty of some sort.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

I'm going to be very frank here...
From what I know of a few people who are Si dom, I think I find some of them a little too limited for me. My experience with them is such that many of my ideas and concepts are turned down for favor of something more practical, more familiar. If I ask them - hey, why don't you do this is this way instead of that? the response usually received is - no, I prefer this because I know it can succeed and I'm used to it. Now I know that's too narrow, because many people are like that, not just Si doms, but that's the image I get. They seem to be more concerned with what worked and what will work now, and the few I'm took as an example don't change their ways easily even when a new method is more interesting and a bit more rational.

On the other hand, I really admire their tenacity and that nurturing attitude, and the ability to stay grounded, something which is pretty hard for me. They're very practical people and get their work done quick. I find them calming.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Amaterasu said:


> I'm going to be very frank here...
> From what I know of a few people who are Si dom, I think I find some of them a little too limited for me. My experience with them is such that many of my ideas and concepts are turned down for favor of something more practical, more familiar. If I ask them - hey, why don't you do this is this way instead of that? the response usually received is - no, I prefer this because I know it can succeed and I'm used to it. Now I know that's too narrow, because many people are like that, not just Si doms, but that's the image I get. They seem to be more concerned with what worked and what will work now, and the few I'm took as an example don't change their ways easily even when a new method is more interesting and a bit more rational.



I think what you're describing is probably pretty typical of Si doms. I just think it's more stressful for us to stray from what we've known than it is for other types....some of this probably comes from our inferior Ne.

However, this doesn't mean that we can't be convinced to try new ideas or new ways of doing things. After all, it's not like we're the exact same people as we were years ago. 

Overall I think it's just that it takes longer to adopt new things. We like to very carefully test things out and weigh them against what we've already known and done. We like to have a very strong belief that the new way will be better than the old one.

So I think usually, if we can very clearly be shown why a new way is better...very concretely, that removes our doubts...then we're a lot more likely to give it a chance. 

I think it's a matter of appealing to our Fe for ISFJs, and Te for ISTJs. 

The "interesting" bit is a little more complex, because what's more interesting varies from person to person. I think Si doms are able to hold interest in something old much longer than most types, so while we still find it interesting, other types may have already moved on. So I think it's much tougher to convince someone that something is more interesting. But, if it is something they find more interesting, the key thing is showing them that so they're more likely to give it a chance.


Because that's part of the problem, at least for me....I remember all of the new things that I try that I hate often as much as the new things that I like. I think a lot of types, especially those that use Ne, will just move on and drop something that didn't work with no problem. For me, it feels like such a taxing waste of my time and energy, whereas I feel like I could have better spent it doing something I know was worth that time.


The good thing is that when an Si dom does finally adopt something they, they go at it full force with all of their will, and have a strong commitment to it.






Amaterasu said:


> On the other hand, I really admire their tenacity and that nurturing attitude, and the ability to stay grounded, something which is pretty hard for me. They're very practical people and get their work done quick. I find them calming.


Right, and that's the other side of the coin.

What I think it often boils down to is....if a known quality is good and needs to be seen all the way through, an Si dom is going to be the best. If it's something new that needs to be tried for improvement, an Si dom is going to be the worst.



In the end it's best for everyone to find a balance, I believe. Si doms should make an effort to give more new ideas a chance instead of always relying on the known or even concrete ways of convincing. But it's also good for other types to try to be patient with Si doms and understand that this is tougher for us than it is for many types.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> I think what you're describing is probably pretty typical of Si doms. I just think it's more stressful for us to stray from what we've known than it is for other types....some of this probably comes from our inferior Ne.
> 
> However, this doesn't mean that we can't be convinced to try new ideas or new ways of doing things. After all, it's not like we're the exact same people as we were years ago.
> 
> ...


Si gets too much unnecessary hate.

I too tend to find it a little too conventional for my liking (in some cases obviously), but someone with Si is very necessary in a group to keep people aware and take practical decisions. 

I like ISTJs because of that. They balance out the N in us intuitives, and that helps us stop flying off into space when we are clearly needed on earth.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Amaterasu said:


> Si gets too much unnecessary hate.
> 
> I too tend to find it a little too conventional for my liking (in some cases obviously), but someone with Si is very necessary in a group to keep people aware and take practical decisions.
> 
> I like ISTJs because of that. They balance out the N in us intuitives, and that helps us stop flying off into space when we are clearly needed on earth.



Well, I think it's likely because Ss in the majority more than Ns are (at least supposedly). I can see how it can be frustrating for any type to have to deal with a large number of people of another type, especially if they want to work with people that are more similar to themselves. 

What particularly compounds the problem is that from the Si standpoint, if Si users get used to being in the majority, they'll get more and more used to being around those that are like them. This will establish that comfort zone, as well as a perception of what they view to be "normal". This will make it even more difficult for them to adopt new ways of looking at things. This is particularly hard for ISFJs, since their Fe is telling them that social norms are good and can be fallen back on. With an Si/Fe combination like that, it can be hard to change an ISFJ's mind regarding certain issues.


That's why something like the MBTI is so helpful, especially if we can relate it to our own lives. We can trust that if these things are true for us, then what other types say must be true for them.


----------

