# Sort of an Si question



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

I apologize in advance for this being such a limited and personal question. But it is a function question, and while it is personal I would be interested in the input of those with some mastery of the functions. 

The main reason I was typed as ENFJ is because I seem to have no Si. I cannot stand thinking about my inner body (the very thought of the thought makes me uncomfortable), I don't know what goes on inside me internally, I can't stand thinking about it, and my entire life I have felt a *disconnect* from my body where I often feel life would be easier if we were simply souls or something and didn't have to deal with these giant! useless physical forms. This... really isn't an Si type sentiment. 

At the same time I wonder if this isn't something to not do with functions. I have had a pretty severe fear of blood (hemophobia) throughout my life, and I wonder if my hatred of my body (not in a self esteem way but just in a frustration, why do I have this physical thing to work with, it's so annoying) is just an irrational, non-function related thing. If, in other words, I am an Si user who doesn't realize it because I have other things that interfere with the classic telltale signs of Si usage. 

In general I do relate pretty strongly to Ni, especially in Socionics (with the "intuition over time" thing, that describes my intuition almost perfectly, or at least a very strong tangible aspect of it). But sometimes I hear of telltale signs of Ne usage (such as jumping from topic to topic in conversation) and go "Oh, but I do that too!" 

I just don't want to be mistyping myself to be a special Ni user, essentially. I honestly don't relate much at all to any ESFJ or Si description, but ESFJ and Si are generally misunderstood and not described well so it does make sense for me to struggle with seeing myself in them. 

Thoughts? I appreciate any input. I'm wondering especially if any Ni users relate with my feelings about bodies and internal things, and if any Si users can relate as well. Thank you in advance for your responses and time ^^


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

Don't apologize making a personal question lol. Most ppl do anyway.


----------



## Dao (Sep 13, 2013)

This is a really interesting question. I make it a point to notice my bodily sensations as a way of practicing mindfulness, but that's an idea I inherited from a somatic therapist and my Buddhist friends.

My own opinion is that this isn't necessarily type-related. I recently picked up _Waking the Tiger: Healing Trauma_ by Peter Levine and the idea the book posits is that people store stress and trauma in their bodies, resulting in tight muscles and sensations of bodily discomfort. Understandably, sudden awareness that the discomfort is there is distressing. It's a fascinating concept and one I readily admit has me somewhat convinced.

I'm really eager to read what other users have to say about your question.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Oh, I should also add that I have a few neurological things that impact me as well. I've had dystonia since I was very young (three), and while it generally doesn't inhibit me, I think it does make me very "tense," as in my muscles can never, ever, ever relax. If I relax one part of my body I have to tense another part of my body. (It's really not that bad, it's just something that's constant for me like mediocre eyesight, but it makes me very uncomfortable to talk about.)

I also deal a lot with trauma and one of my therapists suggested something like that, like the idea was if I "shook" enough or something the thoughts of trauma would go away. We never even started it because the idea of "shaking" was so weird to me, every time we tried it was just upsetting to me because I hate thinking about moving my body (beyond big things, like I can run and jump and walk and stuff and don't mind those things but when I'm told to control a specific body part or tense a muscle... That's when I run into a problem.)

I think dystonia has made me resistant to my body as well, as when I was very small I had minimal control of my body so I just got used to it and stopped caring about controlling my physical self internally. 

I also have GAD along with the PTSD, if that matters in any way. I am prone to weird irrational anxieties about things, which could explain this weird body thing. I also have tourettes with the dystonia, but I don't think the tourettes has much to do with this. 
@hoopla I just got worried because a lot of the top topics in the forum are pretty... serious, and general. I've seen personal topics here before (usually about Ni, ironically enough), but I wanted to be sure that I wasn't going too much against the grain. 
@Shimmerleaf most of what I said above was in response to you, but thank you for your interest and your thoughts. Part of me doesn't think it's related to type, but my Si must be pretty weird given these things about my physical feelings.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Bump? I know it's a super personal question but it's something that'll help me a lot. Especially given how a considerable amount of people (not as many who have said ENFJ granted but still quite a few) have commented in passing that I seem Si, I want to know if I truly do use Si or if I use Si, or just... what. (Also sorry to bump this so soon, but this forum is kind of busy tonight while this thread... isn't keeping up.)


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

@alittlebear There's nothing wrong with going against the grain; just being rude/disrespectful.


Don't worry so much about your type lol. I did the same thing and it kinda fucked with me, made me lose sense of my identity. You'll figure it out later. Maybe not ever. Who cares lol


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

hoopla said:


> @alittlebear There's nothing wrong with going against the grain; just being rude/disrespectful.
> 
> 
> Don't worry so much about your type lol. I did the same thing and it kinda fucked with me, made me lose sense of my identity. You'll figure it out later. Maybe not ever. Who cares lol


I can understand that for some it's better not to focus on it, but... I've spent so much time trying to figure it out (three years) that I just... need it settled. Figuring out that I'm actually Fe-dom has helped me so much, but I think I would feel really at ease if I realized those other two functions too. It is silly in a sense, but... I need it. As silly as that is. 

Thank you for your advice though. It really is wise, but perhaps it's so wise that I'm not ready to accept it yet.


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> I can understand that for some it's better not to focus on it, but... I've spent so much time trying to figure it out (three years) that I just... need it settled. Figuring out that I'm actually Fe-dom has helped me so much, but I think I would feel really at ease if I realized those other two functions too. It is silly in a sense, but... I need it. As silly as that is.
> 
> Thank you for your advice though. It really is wise, but perhaps it's so wise that I'm not ready to accept it yet.


Why is it silly to identify your needs?

Accept it when you're ready.


----------



## tiredsighs (Aug 31, 2011)

Hmm... Is that an expression of Si? It sounds like inferior Se to me... I could be wrong though.

I thought Si was like, nostalgia, sentiment, remembering how things felt/tasted/smelled, "this reminds of that one time ____", reminiscing, for "old times' sake", etc.

But it also sounds like you have well-developed Ni, especially with the whole idea of us just being spirits. 

I think I experience Si quite often (I can find myself stuck in the past sometimes, or going back in time to remember things that were important to me) but I don't think I've ever experienced what you're going through. 

This is interesting. Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the functions can weigh in, because I'm curious to see what's causing this and if we can find a solution for you. Sorry I couldn't be of more help - I'm still learning.


----------



## Dao (Sep 13, 2013)

@alittlebear Thank you so much for sharing. You have been going through a lot. It's difficult to feel whole much less in a decent mood when the body feels bad.

Levine mentioned shaking in his book with regard to tigers discharging sympathetic arousal after a fight by shuddering their muscles. It is a shame your therapist fixated on this; you should never be repeatedly instructed to do something you are deeply uncomfortable with in therapy. My somatic therapist treated me with guided imagery and visualizations, but ultimately my healing was done by confronting emotions. I wish I knew more about dystonia to make a thoughtful comment. Truly.

There's a personality website insisting that awareness of bodily sensations is the purview of Si, but that's controversial. I tend to regard my body as part of the external world, so noticing sensations is something I consider to be Se—unless I'm recalling a sensation.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

tiredsighs said:


> Hmm... Is that an expression of Si? It sounds like inferior Se to me... I could be wrong though.
> 
> I thought Si was like, nostalgia, sentiment, remembering how things felt/tasted/smelled, "this reminds of that one time ____", reminiscing, for "old times' sake", etc.
> 
> ...


Thank you for that input. 

I've seen quite a few people say that part of Si is having an awareness for one's internal state. I think it might be mostly a Socionics thing (I've mostly heard it from people who subscribe to Socionics), but... If that's a main thing with Ni, I really don't think I have it (unless it's masked by my otherwise weird anxious and phobic things). 

Si _is_ what you described as well, but it also has to do with internal awareness or something (or so I've seen people refer to it as). 

As for the spirit thing... I've always seen people like that, even when I was younger? Like I knew their physical beings but I also saw their "souls," or at least my interpretation of their true selves. I can't really describe what those inner selves "look like," I more "feel" (in a non-MBTI feeling way) their essences. When I try to describe it I would say that people have this ball of... something inside of them, and while I would describe it as colors or traits I really can't, it's more indescribable how I sense them, and it gives me a "vibe" but more than that it gives me a sense of them as a person. 

It sounds really pretentious to think I can see the essence of someone, and I understand that yeah okay maybe I will never ever know the true essence of anyone, least of all myself (imo), but I still get these automatic perceptions about people and who they are which change over time. 

Maybe that's Ni. I used to think it was an Fi thing, but I'm so Fe that it's probably an intuitive or perceiving thing of so e sort. 

Having PTSD, I do get stuck in the past... but that's the only thing I get stuck in the past on. I hate looking at pictures. I get itchy when we talk about things of the past. And even with the PTSD, I think that I developed an actual severe form of the disorder as opposed to Acute Stress Disorder or something partially because I'm not good at dealing with bad things, for memories in general. I sort of dislike memories and being sentimental, and can't even deal with positive memories, so being drug back by negative memories for sometimes hours every day is extremely distressful to me. 

And I also have never been dragged back by memories before? I think I said this before but just to clarify - I don't do this. I have had so many of my family members die but I don't reminisce about the times we had together. Sometimes I think like "if my brother was alive he would be in 8th grade now, he would be playing with his toy, he would be running around..." but I hardly do this with real sadness so much as a quiet sadness, and I move on quickly from it. I never, like never have intense flashbacks of memories with my passed loved ones. Today is now. We are in the present moment, and we have to make new happy moments. 

But thank you so much for your help! I do consider your opinion valuable, and I appreciate your input. Thank you


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

Unless I misunderstand... Si doesn't have to do with your physical insides. It just has to do with taking in things you experience in a personal way, rather than an objective one.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> Unless I misunderstand... Si doesn't have to do with your physical insides. It just has to do with taking in things you experience in a personal way, rather than an objective one.


Alright... I've just heard a lot of people judge my lack of Si by my hatred for thinking about internal sensation things? It probably is a Socionics theory thing. 

That's still something to ponder though. I kind of don't know of I perceive things in a subjective way or not. Hmm. 

Thank you for your input though! I appreciate the clarification.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Alright... I've just heard a lot of people judge my lack of Si by my hatred for thinking about internal sensation things? It probably is a Socionics theory thing.
> 
> That's still something to ponder though. I kind of don't know of I perceive things in a subjective way or not. Hmm.
> 
> Thank you for your input though! I appreciate the clarification.


What, like when your tummy rumbles because of digestion/hunger you don't like that feeling? That's just a personal thing, not to do with functions or anything. 

It's like this. An Se and an Si looks at a drinking glass. 

Se: The glass is 6 inches tall, can probably fill 16 ounces of water, weighs .3 lbs.

Si: The glass glimmers in the light like the light on the ocean when I was at my grandmothers.

They both SENSE the same thing, but Se looks at the object just as the object, while Si interprets the object through the subject.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Shimmerleaf said:


> @alittlebear Thank you so much for sharing. You have been going through a lot. It's difficult to feel whole much less in a decent mood when the body feels bad.
> 
> Levine mentioned shaking in his book with regard to tigers discharging sympathetic arousal after a fight by shuddering their muscles. It is a shame your therapist fixated on this; you should never be repeatedly instructed to do something you are deeply uncomfortable with in therapy. My somatic therapist treated me with guided imagery and visualizations, but ultimately my healing was done by confronting emotions. I wish I knew more about dystonia to make a thoughtful comment. Truly.
> 
> There's a personality website insisting that awareness of bodily sensations is the purview of Si, but that's controversial. I tend to regard my body as part of the external world, so noticing sensations is something I consider to be Se—unless I'm recalling a sensation.


It's really not too bad, and I'm sorry if it struck you as sad. It tends to make people think that, but honestly it's not. A lot of people have dystonia worse than me, and my tourettes is really under control now. I still have trauma problems obviously, but... I don't know, it's not worth other people feeling bad over. (Sorry, I just feel so guilty when people feel sad over my things because it happens frequently and... It makes me sad.)

Oh yeah, that's probably the theory she worked on. And yeah, she... wasn't the best therapist for me, which is partially why I have a new one now. It seems like she'll work on some of those things that... actually help me, rather than forcing me to do a ton of things that make me uncomfortable. And don't feel bad about not knowing enough about dystonia! Few people do honestly, haha. I think they may have had like a Dr. Phil segment on it in the 2000s, but in general it's not a common thing to know about. All I really wanted people to get from that is I have a weird muscle tension thing going on, so that might mess with how I see my body. 

Maybe they're drawing from that theory too. Hmm. Honestly I'm not sure where the "bodily sensations" part of the theory came from, just that someone used it to decide I was ENFJ. Honestly Se and Si confuse me in specifics. In general I can easily spot the difference, but... just not in the general things. 

Thank you again for adding here! I really do appreciate it.


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

I have a really weird, private interest in movement disorders despite not having one lol. I've considered neurology.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> What, like when your tummy rumbles because of digestion/hunger you don't like that feeling? That's just a personal thing, not to do with functions or anything.
> 
> It's like this. An Se and an Si looks at a piece of glass.
> 
> ...


Um, no, not like that... Like how I described in my OP, like I just get frustrated with my body. I can't stand feeling my heartbeat or pulse, I hate it when I can feel my stomach, I hate being aware of any apart of my body, it just bothers me. But yeah, you are right that it's probably a very personal thing, outside of MBTI. 

But with that... Yeah, I'm definitely not very Si, at least in that example. I do compare things in an of way, but... never to my memories, unless it's trauma related.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

hoopla said:


> I have a really weird, private interest in movement disorders despite not having one lol. I've considered neurology.


Ah, so you know about dystonia? Regardless, neurology is cool. If I wasn't so freaked out by bodies I might've pursued it. As for being a neurologist, go for it - people like me need people interested in neurology.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I think sensors are more comfortable with the flesh. They are of the Earth. 

I don't like what I am made of either. This goo. It is nasty.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

If it were up to me, we would just be brains hooked into a giant computer living in a virtual world. Like the matrix, but we would know about it.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Um, no, not like that... Like how I described in my OP, like I just get frustrated with my body. I can't stand feeling my heartbeat or pulse, I hate it when I can feel my stomach, I hate being aware of any apart of my body, it just bothers me. But yeah, you are right that it's probably a very personal thing, outside of MBTI.
> 
> But with that... Yeah, I'm definitely not very Si, at least in that example. I do compare things in an of way, but... never to my memories, unless it's trauma related.


So you could be on the other axis, the Se-Ni axis. 
Personally, I like hearing girls tummies rumble, I find it attractive. Oh well.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think sensors are more comfortable with the flesh. They are of the Earth.
> 
> I don't like what I am made of either. This goo. It is nasty.


That last line is extremely relatable to me.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> So you could be on the other axis, the Se-Ni axis.
> Personally, I like hearing girls tummies rumble, I find it attractive. Oh well.


Ichkkk. I don't find anything good about bodies. They're really interesting to study objectively, like with biology, but I still don't like them... I don't like touch in general either, like sometimes I dislike hugging and holding hands (of course I do it because I'm an Fe-dom and sometimes people want to hold my hand or hug me, but I don't enjoy it at all). I mean I'm asexual, so I'm not a sensual person in any way to begin with, but I think that just a natural inclination away from... bodies might also have something to do with it. 

And yeah, that's what I'm thinking. I probably do use Ni/Se, but I want to double check a bit because I know that it's somewhat controversial whenever someone claims to have high Ni on this forum. I'm skeptical of it within me as well.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Ichkkk. I don't find anything good about bodies. They're really interesting to study objectively, like with biology, but I still don't like them... I don't like touch in general either, like sometimes I dislike hugging and holding hands (of course I do it because I'm an Fe-dom and sometimes people want to hold my hand or hug me, but I don't enjoy it at all). I mean I'm asexual, so I'm not a sensual person in any way to begin with, but I think that just a natural inclination away from... bodies might also have something to do with it.
> 
> And yeah, that's what I'm thinking. I probably do use Ni/Se, but I want to double check a bit because I know that it's somewhat controversial whenever someone claims to have high Ni on this forum. I'm skeptical of it within me as well.


Asexual? Really?


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> Asexual? Really?


Extremely. I, like, define the word "asexual". I'm not aromantic - I do have a crush from time to time - but I am... very much asexual. Not something I can really elaborate on for obvious reasons, but... asexual.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Extremely. I, like, define the word "asexual". I'm not aromantic - I do have a crush from time to time - but I am... very much asexual. Not something I can really elaborate on for obvious reasons, but... asexual.


I don't understand, but whatever. 

It's all about that Si, cutiepie.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> I don't understand, but whatever.
> 
> It's all about that Si, cutiepie.


Oh, if you aren't familiar with asexuality (most people think of like fungi) you can google it, it's a new thing that a lot of people aren't really familiar with. 

And you can't just say "it's all about that Si" on this thread. The entire thread is about Si  May I ask what the last line was in reference to? (Sorry for not following.)


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

alittlebear said:


> Thoughts? I appreciate any input. I'm wondering especially if any Ni users relate with my feelings about bodies and internal things, and if any Si users can relate as well. Thank you in advance for your responses and time ^^


Si is a lot more than sensing internal bodily sensations. It encompasses _so _much more than that.

Obviously, since Si is inferior in me, I'm not particularly skilled in it, but I understand its influence and I _think _I understand how it works in others.

It's a lot more whimsical than you'd think when you first hear 'introverted sensing'. It has a dreamy, distanced quality. 

Much of it has to do with the way the user responds to people, and things. It has a lot to do with attachments due to understanding their worth in one's memories. And though I don't think being good with your memory or being good with facts means strong Si usage, I think that seeing how things have changed from the past to the present does.

I quite liked Lenore Thompson's descriptions of Si:



> *Introverted Sensation (Si)* tunes you in to the chaos, unpredictability, and unknowability of the concrete world, leading you to value whatever few signs you can find that have stable meaning. For example, the stripes of tabby cats might hold a particular meaning for you, and you might come to treasure that. As an epistemological perspective, Si leads you to view anything from outside a familiar context as dangerous and untrustworthy. You are in tune with the fact that nearly all possibilities lead to destruction. For example, if you're designing an airplane, nearly all combinations of the variables fail. Of the possible combinations of wingspan, wing placement, wing shape, fuselage shape, and so on, there is only a tiny subset that make an aerodynamically workable plane--and then only if you get a whole lot of other things just right, too. All of life is like that, only much more complicated. We live only in the small islands of the world that we've grown up with and are suited to us. And we can't possibly know why these small islands are relatively safe. As an ethical perspective, Si leads you to protect the integrity of the things and signs that we depend on. This usually takes the form of setting up barriers against the unpredictable. For example, saving for a rainy day (hardships come at unpredictable times) or inspecting buildings for fire safety (so people can trust that "being inside a building" is a sign of safety against the elements). Within these barriers, where all is trustworthy and familiar, we can survive and enjoy what is precious to us--for a while.






> *Introverted Sensation​*
> 
> *Quasi-defining statements*
> 
> ...





And finally, from Socionics:




> Introverted Sensing (Si)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Word Dispenser said:


> Si is a lot more than sensing internal bodily sensations. It encompasses _so _much more than that.
> 
> Obviously, since Si is inferior in me, I'm not particularly skilled in it, but I understand its influence and I _think _I understand how it works in others.
> 
> ...




Thank you, Word Dispensor. 

I had a good idea that Si was more than being aware of internal body things, but that's just that decided my type originally - "you don't think about your internal sensations so you can't be Si so you're an ENFJ" essentially (not quite, but... yeah, basically) and I wanted to check, and make sure that Si wasn't the right function for me. 

Also I have been hearing from Si users more about the more beautiful and "whimsical" aspects of Si, so I was very interested to see if I didn't experience those things as well, to make sure I wasn't mischaracterization both myself and the function. 

I honestly don't think I relate much with those descriptions though... Especially the Socionics one with Si as a creative function - the Si I would use - I'm actually really bad at giving people physical gifts or experiences. It's a pitfall for me. I try it, and can do it to some extent, but I can't hit it just right like other people can. In the other descriptions.... That's still not really me, I _do_ believe the universe is governed by certain constant principles and while I'm still discerning those principles for myself, I do firmly believe that they're there. And I do little things that totally contradict this descriptions too, like I literally leave fifteen minutes before my class to get there because for me I _know_ how my walk will be, I know I can always make it to class in fifteen minutes even if the world is ending and I trust in my ability to physically get there in that space of time. (And this is very and almost comically different from my best ISFJ friend, who feels uncomfortable if she's not at class two hours before it starts.) I also just trust my ability to react in the moment to whatever happens? Like I don't make plans for what I would do if someone tried to abduct me, I just get this feeling that my instincts would kick in and I would end up hurting them more than me (which is extremely irrational given my size and physical capabilities, but lol it's what I do). 

So... Yeah that's a lot of babbling, but just in general I don't relate to those Si descriptions, even with the whimsical element in mind. I do find Si whimsical and beautiful - or I'm starting to - but I don't think that's something that has a huge impact on me. 

Thank you again though, I always appreciate your knowledge and such even though I understand that you're not much in the business of typing people anymore. Thank you for stopping by my thread regardless.

Edit: sorry, I'm looking at the rest of the socionics Si stuff now. Before I only read the Creative Function, but I just realized the stuff below it could help me as well.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

alittlebear said:


> So... Yeah that's a lot of babbling, but just in general I don't relate to those Si descriptions, even with the whimsical element in mind. I do find Si whimsical and beautiful - or I'm starting to - but I don't think that's something that has a huge impact on me.
> 
> Thank you again though, I always appreciate your knowledge and such even though I understand that you're not much in the business of typing people anymore. Thank you for stopping by my thread regardless.


If it helps any, I still think you're an ENFJ. I only brought the information to the table to inform and help educate. :kitteh:


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

alittlebear said:


> I apologize in advance for this being such a limited and personal question. But it is a function question, and while it is personal I would be interested in the input of those with some mastery of the functions.
> 
> The main reason I was typed as ENFJ is because I seem to have no Si. I cannot stand thinking about my inner body (the very thought of the thought makes me uncomfortable), I don't know what goes on inside me internally, I can't stand thinking about it, and my entire life I have felt a *disconnect* from my body where I often feel life would be easier if we were simply souls or something and didn't have to deal with these giant! useless physical forms. This... really isn't an Si type sentiment.
> 
> ...


It's interesting that an F dominant personality type thinks her body has no part in her cognitive processes. Feeling is a process where your brain communicates with other parts of your brain through your body.

Si is a function that focusses on raw data that came from the senses. Remembering exactly what information came in. Ni in contrast doesn't remember much of any of the raw information that came in through the senses. In stead Ni has processed the information, associated it with past experiences and remembers those things,.. not the original data it self.

So what you´re complaining about is more related to the standard 5 senses and not so much about your body itself.

The mere fact that you're thinking this way is already a sign that you´re not an S. S's tend to prefer to accept things as they are and not question them once they have accepted them as truths.

So don't think your body is useless. It's acually very important for your cognitive processes, especially being an F.


and "jumping from topic to topic",.... that's a female thing. It's got nothing to do with the functions. Women just do that a lot.


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Ichkkk. I don't find anything good about bodies. They're really interesting to study objectively, like with biology, but I still don't like them... I don't like touch in general either, like sometimes I dislike hugging and holding hands (of course I do it because I'm an Fe-dom and sometimes people want to hold my hand or hug me, but I don't enjoy it at all). I mean I'm asexual, so I'm not a sensual person in any way to begin with, but I think that just a natural inclination away from... bodies might also have something to do with it.
> 
> And yeah, that's what I'm thinking. I probably do use Ni/Se, but I want to double check a bit because I know that it's somewhat controversial whenever someone claims to have high Ni on this forum. I'm skeptical of it within me as well.


We're born without our bodies. Without a body, none of us would be here. We wouldn't be able to physical exist, and we wouldn't be alive.We wouldn't be typing on computers.

Bodies are fucking fantastic.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

> Individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function tend to be negligent to the effects of Si and have the view that Si aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if you don't have to deal with them particularly, and of your own physical sensations.
> A lack of concern for small aesthetic details is more visible in the LIE; in the case of the EIE, the low focus on Si is more noticeable as a dislike for low-level practical details, such as filling up forms, signing documents, or filling tax returns. Due to individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function believing that Si aspects are of less importance, they tend to be thrown off course by unthought of, new or neglected Si matters.


This is the one I'm supposed to relate to as an ENFJ, and it's honestly pretty fitting for me. I obviously hate practical things (... eww), and I think I neglect day-to-day things for longer-term things. I also relate heavily to literally everything in the first paragraph. (For me that's so natural though? It's irrational but I feel as if everyone feels that way, because it's just so human to me to see self care as a stupid and tedious task, not being aware of my physical surrounds and such.)

I guess in general it's still pointing towards ENFJ. I just hope I'm not deluding myself into thinking I'm intuitive? But honestly mostly everything people has said so far is pointing towards Ni usage as opposed to Si usage.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Oh, if you aren't familiar with asexuality (most people think of like fungi) you can google it, it's a new thing that a lot of people aren't really familiar with.
> 
> And you can't just say "it's all about that Si" on this thread. The entire thread is about Si  May I ask what the last line was in reference to? (Sorry for not following.)


I looked it up; You don't feel sexual attraction?

I was making a rhyme: Si (pronounced like the letters S and I) and cutipie rhyme. 

I'm dumb im sorry.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Word Dispenser said:


> If it helps any, I still think you're an ENFJ. I only brought the information to the table to inform and help educate. :kitteh:


Well, thank you  I must say that it did help. It reminded me that I really need to read some source material for myself and get to the core of these theories... but still, it helped, and definitely to see my own Ni (or lack of Si, that is).


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Cesspool said:


> I looked it up; You don't feel sexual attraction?
> 
> I was making a rhyme: Si (pronounced like the letters S and I) and cutipie rhyme.
> 
> I'm dumb im sorry.


You aren't dumb! That's cute lol I just didn't notice it. Makes a lot of sense now ^^

And yeah, that's it. Sorry, sometimes I just forget that everyone isn't familiar with terms like "asexual" in a human sense.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Peter said:


> It's interesting that an F dominant personality type thinks her body has no part in her cognitive processes. Feeling is a process where your brain communicates with other parts of your brain through your body.
> 
> Si is a function that focusses on raw data that came from the senses. Remembering exactly what information came in. Ni in contrast doesn't remember much of any of the raw information that came in through the senses. In stead Ni has processed the information, associated it with past experiences and remembers those things,.. not the original data it self.
> 
> ...


Just checking here - so you're of the opinion I use Ni as opposed to Si?

And yes... I am aware that the way in which I view my body is unhealthy, but it's something that'll take a while to work on. As I tried to mention, the things behind how I see my body are kind of irrational, like my fear of blood, and just... hard to pinpoint why I feel the ways I feel but regardless, I feel how I feel. I'm working on it though. Really learning biology helps, learning about how amazing my body apparently is from an objective standpoint. 

But just to be clear... It's not that I don't recognize that my body is important and that I should be more connected to it... just for whatever reasons being connected with my body is very difficult for me. I know it's not useless, but I still... don't want it because dealing with it is so bothersome to me. (Also to be clear I don't misuse my body - I still clean and do basic stuff with it, put on makeup, try to look nice, all those little things. It's just... weird to me, when I think about my body.) (it's so weird to talk about it like this, hmm)

And that's an interesting comment about jumping from topic to topic. My dad says my xSTJ mom and I both do that, so it's good to know it might not be function-related but rather a gender thing. 

Thank you so much for dropping by my thread though, it's nice to have a sprinkle of your expertise.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

hoopla said:


> We're born without our bodies. Without a body, none of us would be here. We wouldn't be able to physical exist, and we wouldn't be alive.We wouldn't be typing on computers.
> 
> Bodies are fucking fantastic.


Ick yeah, I get that bodies are fantastic from a wide sense, looking in at the universe and the world and stuff and thinking about humanity and species and things like that as a whole... but just in general I still can't help but be annoyed by them personally. Sorry, I know I sound stubborn but it's just hard for me to personally change my irrational feelings about my body so suddenly. You guys are helping me realize that I really need to work on it though. So thank you all for that.


----------



## Deadly Decorum (Feb 23, 2014)

alittlebear said:


> Ick yeah, I get that bodies are fantastic from a wide sense, looking in at the universe and the world and stuff and thinking about humanity and species and things like that as a whole... but just in general I still can't help but be annoyed by them personally. Sorry, I know I sound stubborn but it's just hard for me to personally change my irrational feelings about my body so suddenly. You guys are helping me realize that I really need to work on it though. So thank you all for that.


You don't need to work on it, and your feelings aren't irrational. All you need to work on is making asexuality socially accepted. Idk why people care so much; your sexual orientation is your business. And I also don't get why talking about your orientation is considered attention seeking or flaunting it; is it attention seeking to discuss sexual attraction or your sexual infatuation for the opposite sex?

I know you meant sexually, but I was speaking conceptually. I will never understand what's "taboo" about a naked body, and I aim to change that notion.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

hoopla said:


> You don't need to work on it, and your feelings aren't irrational. All you need to work on is making asexuality socially accepted. Idk why people care so much; your sexual orientation is your business. And I also don't get why talking about your orientation is considered attention seeking or flaunting it; is it attention seeking to discuss sexual attraction or your sexual infatuation for the opposite sex?
> 
> I know you meant sexually, but I was speaking conceptually. I will never understand what's "taboo" about a naked body, and I aim to change that notion.


Oh, okay. I thought you were talking in general about my problems with bodies in general. (I mean I understand that my fear of my own body essentially is irrational, but honestly and perhaps weirdly I'm really at ease with my sexuality, like that's just the way it is but it's not a problem atm because I'm not dating anyone and my religious beliefs wouldn't have me do anything differently anyway. I'm lucky that my sexuality isn't necessarily "deviant," like people might find asexuality weird but they wouldn't call it a sin or anything.)

Thank you for your support, though. It's very kind.


----------



## Frenetic Tranquility (Aug 5, 2011)

Keep in mind that the regions of the brain associated with each function exist in us all. It's what spots are most active and how they "fire" that distinguishes our perceptions and judgments.

If you had a specific childhood experience that took a relatively inactive region, and attached an emotional connection to it, then that region will become more active regardless of type. In this case, perhaps your Si was jumpstarted. Your description comes off more NFJ to me in a general sense, and definitely exhibiting Se.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

jcal said:


> Si-dom here. I don't think I have any special bodily awareness at all, except in this one specific case: If I've experienced a specific type of pain or internal sensation in the past, if it occurs again I am acutely aware of whether the recurrence is EXACTLY the same or not. If it is exactly as before, especially when the ultimate outcome was favorable, it becomes very easy for me to essentially ignore the sensations, reasonably certain things will work out as they had in the past. If the pain/sensation is even the slightest bit different, or one that has never been experienced before, I will pay more attention to it and be more likely to seek medical attention (or whatever is appropriate) rather than just ignoring it.
> 
> Si doesn't make me more aware of my body in a general sense, but it does give me a very good sense of whether my current sensation is the same or different than past experience... but this is no different than how Si works for me under any other circumstance. It's just Si being Si. Si tends to normalize... to the point of actually ignoring... things it has experienced previously, and focuses almost entirely on what has changed - something it is very good at identifying.


Hmm... Alright. I'm starting to realize that wherever I heard about Si connected to internal sensation (literally) is... probably not the best way about deciding that I'm not an Si aux. It's probably a good thing I have a typing topic again now, so we can sort this out without misunderstandings about Si. 

Thank you for giving me your input; it's especially useful with you being an Si-dom. 

I still don't think I do that really... but I don't know, I might. It's not something I really think much about though, the way I feel now compared to how I have felt in the past. When I'm super sick and just feeling icky inside I find myself thinking, "I'm going to be so grateful when I feel well again," but I actually never do feel grateful when I'm well again because I instantly forget what the pain felt like when I was sick. I'm not one to make internal comparisons like that, I don't think. But that's still an interesting addition to the conversation, and thank you for offering it.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Thaumaturgic Theorist said:


> Recently-retyped Si-dom with a crapload of bodily awareness. I think. If hating/being disgusted by your body makes you an iNtuitive then I may have my type nailed at last. At worst, my body is awkward, and I don't know what to do with it - it's just there and I'm indifferent to it. I'm quite attentive to my physical states, without even trying. I'm sensitive to safety and comfort and am pretty consciously pain-avoidant.
> 
> I freak out if I think there's something wrong, be it illness or injury. I'm not a hypochondriac at all, but I've enjoyed good health for most of my life so when something's out of whack I notice, and I want to get it fixed ASAP.


That sounds sort of like an Si thing, but, again, a lot of Si-users here have been saying that what I'm not describing Si at all, so it could have nothing at all to do with sensing and intuition. 

I hope you're able to find your true type soon though. Thank you for contributing to my thread.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

hoopla said:


> Why does feminism exist again





> *Feminism* is a collection of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment.


So to be clear, it doesn't say that the goal is that women and men *are* the same. It just says that men and women should have equal rights and oportunities. I agree 100% with that.

In fact, turning the differences between men and women into a taboo, is counter productive in the goals of feminism.

(Just to be clear, no need to continue this discussion, or start a separate thread and invite me. I don't want to turn this thread into a thread about feminism.)


----------



## Dao (Sep 13, 2013)

Talk about jumping topics.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

alittlebear said:


> Just checking here - so you're of the opinion I use Ni as opposed to Si?
> 
> And yes... I am aware that the way in which I view my body is unhealthy, but it's something that'll take a while to work on. As I tried to mention, the things behind how I see my body are kind of irrational, like my fear of blood, and just... hard to pinpoint why I feel the ways I feel but regardless, I feel how I feel. I'm working on it though. Really learning biology helps, learning about how amazing my body apparently is from an objective standpoint.
> 
> ...


You don't seem to be an S at all.

As to feeling connected to one's body,.... I can't relate to that. The idea of feeling connected to your body gives the impression of there being 2 entities,.... you,... and your body. Your body and your brain are what and who you are. I doubt many people feel a connection in the way you seem to think you should feel. Most people just see the whole without the idea of there being 2 separate parts, body and soul. If they are religious they may believe there is a soul that continues after the body has died, but I don't think they feel their body as a separate thing from who they are.

But I guess that once you´re convinced your body is like a separate thing it's difficult to get rid of that idea. Even when rationally you know one thing, it can still feel different. But knowledge does tend to have an effect on how you feel. So learning more about how the body is part of who you are will definitely help in reducing these doubts. It's not about trying to convince yourself of how great the body is, but about how your body is part of who you are,.. in all ways possible.


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

I don't know much about dystonia and can't access the issue from that perspective, but being an Si dom, have to say that I don't relate to Socionics body focus associated with introverted sensation at all. I don't track my physical inner states, don't have any special attunement to health and can't transfer any sort of comfort to anybody else (like understanding that somebody feels cold and giving them a blanket). I don't hate my body and don't like it, don't feel any connection or disconnection from it. I just don't even think in these terms. Body is like a given part of me to which I'm sort of indifferent until it gets out of control (gets sick or hurts). In that case I begin to pay attention wanting to fix the situation, as I highly dislike when something inside of me doesn't function well. It is an irritating feeling.

I have a habit to shy away from physical stuff, like accumulation of material possessions or having sensory pleasures in the form of enjoying food, relaxation or environment (except maybe taking a shower. Yeah, I like it. It cleans my mind.) I also don't always understand the signals of my body well. Sometimes I could not fall asleep because of a weird feeling I couldn't trace and it took time to learn that I've been simply cold. Socionics Si is too concrete to my taste and too tied up physically.

I also disagree with how MBTI explicitly connects Si to the past and nostalgia stuff. I never experienced the latter until I was 22 or something and in general these are very rare and brief moments. I barely ever turn to past or think of it and I don't find any pleasure in surrounding myself with things that remind me of some past events. I honestly don't understand this trend in people and why they do this. Memory-reliving things are good for museums and creepy old castles, but making one's home or room such a place is something beyond me. It's as though, if I don't put a photo of some grand-relative on my table I'll forget about them or something? I think nostalgia has nothing to do with type or functions. With age we simply accumulate more memories and experiences that chime into our consciousness from time to time.


----------



## malachi.holden.3 (Jul 2, 2014)

I think this entire website exists for personal reasons, so don't worry about posting personal questions. :tongue:

One of the problems I think on this topic is that Si and Ni are so damn similar, at least behaviorally. This is because Si always comes with Ne, and Ni always comes with Se. So let me go over how they work together:

In an Ni/Se user, information comes in from the outside in a direct, literal fashion, and everything is in the moment. The Ni/Se user has a direct relationship with the world, taking in experience vividly. Once Se has taken in its information, it delivers it over to Ni, which views it after it's been stored in the Ni/Se user's memory. Ni has an abstract view of this information, and it looks at how the information comes together rather than the information itself.

In an Si/Ne user, information comes in from the outside in an abstract, interpretive manner, and they see different angles and possibilities in the world around them. Once Ne gathers its information, it sends it to Si, which views it once it's been stored in the Si/Ne user's memory. Si has a vivid, realistic picture of this information.

The interesting thing is that Si and Ni see almost the exact same thing. Why is this? Because they are both seeing an interpretation combined with a literal picture. In the first case, Ni interprets what it gets from Se. In the second case, Si gets an interpretation from Ne. In both cases, the final result is an interpretation.

Here's a chart:









You'll notice that the result is exactly the same in both cases.



This is why it's virtually pointless to try and differentiate between Si and Ni. Everything gets muddled up by the extroverted functions. Instead, try to figure out whether you use Se or Ne.


Se and Ne are much more straightforward. Do you interpret your environment, or do you experience it? Are you more focused on how things _are_ in the moment, or do you care more about what things _mean_? Since we're talking about your tertiary function here, I can understand how this could be difficult, but think about your interactions with people (as an ExFJ, I'm sure you have plenty of that :happy.


A manifestation of Ne for me is that I'm always trying to catch different possible meanings in what people say. I like making jokes in this way. I'm not as much knowledgeable in Se, but I'm sure plenty of people here on Perc could give you their experiences.


----------



## malachi.holden.3 (Jul 2, 2014)

tiredsighs said:


> I thought Si was like, nostalgia, sentiment, remembering how things felt/tasted/smelled, "this reminds of that one time ____", reminiscing, for "old times' sake", etc.


I think this is a sad stereotype. Si often manifests in this way, true, but that's not what it really is at heart; it's been seen this way so much that many people mistype themselves as types other than Si, because the descriptions go along those lines: "nostalgia, sentiment, remembering how things felt/tasted/smelled".

Remember that Si is a perceiving function, so its purpose is to perceive, to gather information. It's also introverted, so it works in the mind. Altogether, it's a function that _perceives_ the _inner mind_, usually the memories, but not always. Si is not the same as memory -- Si is the mind's way of _seeing_ memory, as well as any thoughts and ideas you may have. So because Si users have such a strong, vivid picture of their inner mind, they are can be very in tune with the past, because they have such a vivid picture of their memories (hence the stereotypes). When they see a new experience, they compare it to this mental picture they've developed in their heads.


The thing is, many Si types _aren't_ reminiscing, for "old times' sake" Republicans who won't accept change. Often they'll be the one's out in front, changing the world themselves, because they have this inner vision that leads them to it.





(The Republican reference is a joke, to those who get offended. Nothing against Republicans. erc2


----------



## quaestio (Sep 24, 2014)

> And the weird thing is, I don't have a set routine or things about me that seem Si. I'm not super clean, but that's because I've never been super clean. I still shift my day naturally according to the needs of that day without the slightest problem, and I don't have a set things I have to do every day. I still dislike chores, I still don't do things in order all the time, and I still run out of my dorm ten minutes before class starts.


This describes me, an SJ. Actually I'm worse - slobby, perpetually late and so on. I make a few plans in my head to make sure I spend energy wisely, and can have some problems switching gears, but this increased a lot after I became chronically ill and is in some way a response to it. If I have the energy to deal with it, I don't mind so much. Where I create a routine for a task is where I want to get it done with as quickly as possible - again to save energy and do the boring thing as little as possible - but I don't necessarily remember to follow it exactly and I might change it.

I'm not saying you're an SJ, but that this info doesn't seem relevant? Or rather, all those criteria could indicate a Si preference but there's not any one defined set for how a function presents itself. That's surely moulded by the individual, it seems to me, especially for the introverted ones which Si is.

If confident of Fe-dom, perhaps focus on your tertiary function as a means of typing? Judging by this thread, the info you get here is important to your process of understanding functions? Ime, you probably won't find clear info for Si or Ni and may have better chance with Se/Ne. Feel free to disagree though, and good luck with typing yourself.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Frenetic Tranquility said:


> Keep in mind that the regions of the brain associated with each function exist in us all. It's what spots are most active and how they "fire" that distinguishes our perceptions and judgments.
> 
> If you had a specific childhood experience that took a relatively inactive region, and attached an emotional connection to it, then that region will become more active regardless of type. In this case, perhaps your Si was jumpstarted. Your description comes off more NFJ to me in a general sense, and definitely exhibiting Se.


Think you for your words, especially at the bottom about me seeming NFJ oveR SFJ (not necessarily for saying that type, but for being clear). I do very much appreciate that guess at my type. 

The only thing is... A lot of you seem to be misunderstanding what I was trying to say in my first post? I'm trying to say that maybe I use Si, but it might just not be outwardly apparent because I have these extra things about me that seem very non-sensing and, by default, "intuitive". If anything I am saying that my weird childhood experiences with bodily things, developing hemophobia and fearing my body, that these didn't jump start my Si but rather... counter jump started my Si. Stalled it. Made me repress it very much. 

Maybe you also picked up on that? But it seems a little like you misunderstood my first post and what I was trying to say about how it seems my Si *wasn't* encouraged or "jump started" in my childhood. 

I apologize for my tone, I just wanted to clear that up if there was a misunderstanding. Thank you again for your time, and I do appreciate the input.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Peter said:


> You don't seem to be an S at all.
> 
> As to feeling connected to one's body,.... I can't relate to that. The idea of feeling connected to your body gives the impression of there being 2 entities,.... you,... and your body. Your body and your brain are what and who you are. I doubt many people feel a connection in the way you seem to think you should feel. Most people just see the whole without the idea of there being 2 separate parts, body and soul. If they are religious they may believe there is a soul that continues after the body has died, but I don't think they feel their body as a separate thing from who they are.
> 
> But I guess that once you´re convinced your body is like a separate thing it's difficult to get rid of that idea. Even when rationally you know one thing, it can still feel different. But knowledge does tend to have an effect on how you feel. So learning more about how the body is part of who you are will definitely help in reducing these doubts. It's not about trying to convince yourself of how great the body is, but about how your body is part of who you are,.. in all ways possible.


I recognize that I have a problem with how I view my body. It's obviously not healthy, and I should probably work on it. But right now I'm honestly more interested in recovering from my trauma and working on my severe anxiety problems. Maybe when all that clears up I can come to terms with my body and mind as one or whatever, but until then I'm just dealing with this weird mass of icky that the world sees me as. (It's really not that weird as it seems, like I just don't think about my body much. It's not that drastic.)

I also was never trying to say that how I see my body is an Ni thing. Well, I did ask if Ni-users could relate (and a few have responded that they do), but really I'm trying to get the bottom of this, see if I'm not actually a Sensor in spite of my weirdness with sensing things. 

I'm actually realizing that I'm an intuitive, sort of as you've suggested with your posts, not through my strengths but through my weaknesses -- I am called unrealistic, people perceive me as not having a handle on life, I am too idealistic, I give this "head up in the clouds" impression even though to me I have a very distinct and complex understanding of the world that we live in. 

So essentially my question here has been sort of answered, or at least put inp the real question I've been wondering on my topic in the typing forum. 

Thank you for your input though. It is appreciated, especially as you are so experienced in these things.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

To_august said:


> I don't know much about dystonia and can't access the issue from that perspective, but being an Si dom, have to say that I don't relate to Socionics body focus associated with introverted sensation at all. I don't track my physical inner states, don't have any special attunement to health and can't transfer any sort of comfort to anybody else (like understanding that somebody feels cold and giving them a blanket). I don't hate my body and don't like it, don't feel any connection or disconnection from it. I just don't even think in these terms. Body is like a given part of me to which I'm sort of indifferent until it gets out of control (gets sick or hurts). In that case I begin to pay attention wanting to fix the situation, as I highly dislike when something inside of me doesn't function well. It is an irritating feeling.
> 
> I have a habit to shy away from physical stuff, like accumulation of material possessions or having sensory pleasures in the form of enjoying food, relaxation or environment (except maybe taking a shower. Yeah, I like it. It cleans my mind.) I also don't always understand the signals of my body well. Sometimes I could not fall asleep because of a weird feeling I couldn't trace and it took time to learn that I've been simply cold. Socionics Si is too concrete to my taste and too tied up physically.
> 
> I also disagree with how MBTI explicitly connects Si to the past and nostalgia stuff. I never experienced the latter until I was 22 or something and in general these are very rare and brief moments. I barely ever turn to past or think of it and I don't find any pleasure in surrounding myself with things that remind me of some past events. I honestly don't understand this trend in people and why they do this. Memory-reliving things are good for museums and creepy old castles, but making one's home or room such a place is something beyond me. It's as though, if I don't put a photo of some grand-relative on my table I'll forget about them or something? I think nostalgia has nothing to do with type or functions. With age we simply accumulate more memories and experiences that chime into our consciousness from time to time.


Thank you for those thoughts and additions to the conversation. 

It just brings me to wonder... how _do_ you relate to being an Si-dom, then? Here you stated what Si to you was not, but what is it to you then? (I'm just curious, although I understand if that's too loaded of a question to answer.)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

quaestio said:


> This describes me, an SJ. Actually I'm worse - slobby, perpetually late and so on. I make a few plans in my head to make sure I spend energy wisely, and can have some problems switching gears, but this increased a lot after I became chronically ill and is in some way a response to it. If I have the energy to deal with it, I don't mind so much. Where I create a routine for a task is where I want to get it done with as quickly as possible - again to save energy and do the boring thing as little as possible - but I don't necessarily remember to follow it exactly and I might change it.
> 
> I'm not saying you're an SJ, but that this info doesn't seem relevant? Or rather, all those criteria could indicate a Si preference but there's not any one defined set for how a function presents itself. That's surely moulded by the individual, it seems to me, especially for the introverted ones which Si is.
> 
> If confident of Fe-dom, perhaps focus on your tertiary function as a means of typing? Judging by this thread, the info you get here is important to your process of understanding functions? Ime, you probably won't find clear info for Si or Ni and may have better chance with Se/Ne. Feel free to disagree though, and good luck with typing yourself.


I'll respond to this one a bit out of turn because I see you lingering on the thread. 

Sorry for the mischaracterization is Si there. Honestly my topic is filled with those, and a large part of it is that I misunderstand the function. I think that in that quote I was trying to say that I don't meet _any_ Si stereotypes... but. Shouldn't have been using stereotypes to begin with. 

I actually relate a little bit to what you said in the first post (not that it particularly matters). The only thing is I don't work on conserving energy, but rather "brainpower" in a sense - the capacity of my thoughts to be good and worthy ones at a given time - which maybe counts as energy. 

And yeah, right now we're questioning Fe on my typing topic too, so I'm not even sure of that anymore :/ But I'll look into Ne vs. Se a bit more, as that has been advised by a few people now. 

Thank you for your thoughts, and I will definitely keep them in mind.


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

alittlebear said:


> Thank you for those thoughts and additions to the conversation.
> 
> It just brings me to wonder... how _do_ you relate to being an Si-dom, then? Here you stated what Si to you was not, but what is it to you then? (I'm just curious, although I understand if that's too loaded of a question to answer.)


Lol. After I wrote this I had the same thoughts. I put too many "don't's" and zero "do's" so, it's entirely reasonable to question.
The thing is, SiTe ego is the one that makes the most sense. It's far from being ideal and doubt is ever-persisting in me, but the other options are even worse and make even less sense. I'm sure that I'm not an intuitive. I don't see the world primarily as a place consisting of objects endowed with multiple potentials, neither do I see it through the lens of symbolic archetypes.
With dominant Si I pay attention to relationships going on between me and objects, not to the objects themselves. My focus is turned in the direction of impressions, vibes, meaningful sensory experience. It's hard to put it into words, because they are not concrete and are mixtures in themselves. I also tried to describe how it works for me here.


----------



## AdInfinitum (Oct 21, 2014)

I would give you an automatic clapping cookie monster for that description of Si and all the stack itself @To_august . I've always felt like Si doms/aux are being brutally judged (the irony is crossing dimensions right now), you really broke down some fantastic stereotypes right there.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

I know I use Si (not sure if it's in my top two) and I also feel pretty weird when I think about my body. Like . . . I hate it when people tell me to 'think about your breathing' or something, it's just gross and weird, and I really, really hate seeing diagrams of what we look like inside. I recently gained a little weight and so there's this unpleasant feeling because something changed so now I'm more aware of my stomach/thighs. I actually wear a corset so that this feeling is reduced (to be clear, it's not a problem with the fat persay, but rather just the extra...me that I find kinda disgusting. Whereas in the corset I feel more like a doll or a picture or something. It's difficult to explain actually). It's similar to like...watching people eating, or really thinking about eating that much. I like to eat, I like the taste, but when I think about the actual food it really repels me. (more than it seems to repel most people) I'm also kinda a hypochondriac so when I see things about some sort of medical thing, etc. I start to 'feel' that feeling and..yeah, I would not be a good doctor. 

So this was a super unhelpful comment, just some two cents. Not sure if your thing is at all similar, but that's my experience.


----------



## imaphoenix (Sep 11, 2012)

Si has nothing to do with internal sensations. What you are describing (your disconnect) are more likely linked to your other ailments that you described. Or you're just over thinking and making connections where there are none. But I can tell you this with 99% certainty your disconnect has nothing do to with MBTI.

Here's a few links to describe the Si function:
Introverted Sensing / Sensation (Si)
Introverted Sensing (Si)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

imaphoenix said:


> Si has nothing to do with internal sensations. What you are describing (your disconnect) are more likely linked to your other ailments that you described. Or you're just over thinking and making connections where there are none. But I can tell you this with 99% certainty your disconnect has nothing do to with MBTI.
> 
> Here's a few links to describe the Si function:
> Introverted Sensing / Sensation (Si)
> Introverted Sensing (Si)


I was thinking of the Socionics definition of Si, which actually has a lot to do with internal sensation. Some take that look more literally than others. I'm now recognizing that this has little to do with how most people view Si, but there are actual theories that do involve internal sensations and those were the ones I was drawing on (or rather, what others drew upon for me which influenced my being typed as Ni-aux). 

I won't agree that it has nothing to do with MBTI, as some theories would point to it having something to do with MBTI, but I do agree t might not be as connected to MBTI as I originally thought. 

Regardless, thank you for the links, and thank you for the input.


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

@To_august @Oswin @NobleRaven (also to the person on page 9 who I forgot to respond to) I will reply tomorrow, sorry for not going in order.


----------

