# Si Vs Ni



## Tad Cooper (Apr 10, 2010)

What would show the difference if these were dom functions in two people?
How would they be similar/different?


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

tine said:


> What would show the difference if these were dom functions in two people?
> How would they be similar/different?


Then you need to compare Se and Si, Ne and Ni since the opposites are always there.
A Ni dom would most likely be very grounded in his/her own way due to Ni and the Si Dom would have a quite free imagination.
It seems as if sensors in general got a quite free imagination, my ESFP mother for example is 51 and she believes in seers and magic.

The Ni Dom would be more careful, to avoid accidents and not trust experience as canceling out the possibility of an accident... The Si Dom? Well... My ISTJ father likes to at certain times when I question the capabilities of Te car, to go from side to side on the road, or go as fast as he can and then pull the breaks when going downhill.
A Ni Dom that walks in the forest notices the different details but doesn't get any feelings or memories.
A Si Dom that walks in the forests starts to get feelings and/or memories from the past.

In short, Ni is everything that Si isn't and vice versa.


----------



## MissBlossom (Dec 22, 2010)

A person who is *Ni* dominated is getting to know things by getting a general impression about them. Such person categorizes things according to how they abstractly feel like. S/he perceives an object as a combination of certain traits. 
A person who is *Si* dominated is seeking for the familiar. This person is grounded in the past and is fighting for the things to stay the same. Tradition oriented. Nostalgic. Values their culture and continues its traditions.

We can say that *Si* is a conservative mind. *Ni* is a liberal mind.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

MissBlossom said:


> A person who is *Ni* dominated is getting to know things by getting a general impression about them. Such person categorizes things according to how they abstractly feel like. S/he perceives an object as a combination of certain traits.
> A person who is *Si* dominated is seeking for the familiar. This person is grounded in the past and is fighting for the things to stay the same. Tradition oriented. Nostalgic. Values their culture and continues its traditions.
> 
> We can say that *Si* is a conservative mind. *Ni* is a liberal mind.


No, Ni is right but people with Si are not traditionalists. Si is a perceptive function, it makes no decisions. Being a traditionalist is a decision. It is not bound to a function.


----------



## MissBlossom (Dec 22, 2010)

Acerbusvenator said:


> No, Ni is right but people with Si are not traditionalists. Si is a perceptive function, it makes no decisions. Being a traditionalist is a decision. It is not bound to a function.


You are right. I was just reading other posts and made a better vision of Si. Let's take the traditions out. Si is about preserving things. Being comfortable in the familiar. Wanting to keep the same atmosphere as it was in the past. Loving to experience the sensations of the past. Like "this apple pie is exactly the same as my grandmother's! ahhh... the cosy memories"...
And as a Ni user myself I don't notice the difference in the tastes or whatever. Apple pie is apple pie. It has no associations and they all taste the same.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

I think @stone100674 can explain Si better.


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

MissBlossom said:


> A person who is *Ni* dominated is getting to know things by getting a general impression about them. Such person categorizes things according to how they abstractly feel like. S/he perceives an object as a combination of certain traits.
> A person who is *Si* dominated is seeking for the familiar. This person is grounded in the past and is fighting for the things to stay the same. Tradition oriented. Nostalgic. Values their culture and continues its traditions.
> 
> We can say that *Si* is a conservative mind. *Ni* is a liberal mind.


Being Si or Ni doesn't mean being conservative- or liberal-minded, either.


----------



## MissBlossom (Dec 22, 2010)

Ellis Bell said:


> Being Si or Ni doesn't mean being conservative- or liberal-minded, either.


I didn't mean it in a political way. It is "reluctant of new ideas and changes" vs. "likes new understandings".


----------



## stone100674 (Jun 22, 2012)

Hello @tine , how are you feeling? I hope all is well and improving everyday. :happy:


MissBlossom said:


> It is "reluctant of new ideas and changes".


Change is fine as long as the reason for the change makes sense. Change for the sake of change itself is pointless, but improving a process through change is just fine. We don't get stuck into piss poor methods just because we always did something, or saw something done a particular way. For example when I cook I am always improving a recipe: I always consider what the addition of herb x etc would have on the recipe because I know what herb x tastes like and the effect it will have on the dish.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> A Ni dom would most likely be very grounded in his/her own way due to Ni and the Si Dom would have a quite free imagination.


The news that a typical IS_J has a notably free imagination as compared to the less imaginative, more down-to-earth IN_J will certainly come as a shock to many IN_Js who have known quite a few IS_Js (and vice versa). Where do you get this stuff?

MBTI S's and N's are people who tend to choose the S and N responses to the following questions (among other similar items from the official MBTI):


Do you usually get along better with imaginative people (N) or realistic people (S)?
Would you rather be considered a practical person (S) or an ingenious person (N)?
Which word appeals to you most: possibilities (N) or certainties (S)?



Acerbusvenator said:


> No, Ni is right but people with Si are not traditionalists. Si is a perceptive function, it makes no decisions. Being a traditionalist is a decision. It is not bound to a function.


As further discussed in this post, you really have to be in denial of the facts to claim that there's no significant correlation between being an MBTI S (and especially an SJ) and a tendency to be somewhat traditional. That's not just a Keirsey thing. Most of the well-known cognitive function theorists (e.g., Berens, Quenk and Thomson) acknowledge it as well.



Ellis Bell said:


> Being Si or Ni doesn't mean being conservative- or liberal-minded, either.


Similarly, as I noted in this post, it seems to me that, if you want to argue that there's no substantial correlation between S/N and conservative/liberal political leanings, it also helps to be _data-insensitive_.

=======================================

Also: It's worth noting that there's Big Five data showing that all of the foregoing S/N characteristics — practical/imaginative, traditional/unconventional and conservative/liberal — are also associated with the corresponding Big Five personality dimension. Here are the first two paragraphs of the Wikipedia article on Openness to Experience:



Wikipedia said:


> Openness to experience is one of the domains which are used to describe human personality in the Five Factor Model. Openness involves *active imagination*, aesthetic sensitivity, attentiveness to inner feelings, preference for variety, and intellectual curiosity. A great deal of psychometric research has demonstrated that these qualities are statistically correlated. Thus, openness can be viewed as a global personality trait consisting of a set of specific traits, habits, and tendencies that cluster together.
> 
> Openness tends to be normally distributed with a small number of individuals scoring extremely high or low on the trait, and most people scoring moderately. People who score low on openness are considered to be closed to experience. They *tend to be conventional and traditional* in their outlook and behavior. They prefer familiar routines to new experiences, and generally have a narrower range of interests. *People high in openness tend to have more liberal political views, whereas those who are low in openness tend to be more conservative*, and are more likely to endorse authoritarian, ethnocentric and prejudiced views.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

reckful said:


> The news that a typical IS_J has a notably free imagination as compared to the less imaginative, more down-to-earth IN_J will certainly come as a shock to many IN_Js who have known quite a few IS_Js (and vice versa). Where do you get this stuff?
> 
> MBTI S's and N's are people who tend to choose the S and N responses to the following questions (among other similar items from the official MBTI):
> 
> ...





Imagination is a subjective thing. I've personally been thought that people who are called "imaginative" are often unable to see the difference between dreams and reality, this is not a personality type. I've been thought that you should have realistic goals and thus be realistic.
Weak intuition often manifests itself as belief in the superstitious etc. People with strong intuition use it effectively to create progress that is intuitive, not superstitious.



> As further discussed in this post, you really have to be in denial of the facts to claim that there's no significant correlation between being an MBTI S (and especially an SJ) and a tendency to be somewhat traditional. That's not just a Keirsey thing. Most of the well-known cognitive function theorists (e.g., Berens, Quenk and Thomson) acknowledge it as well.


You should read more MBTI and get back to me when you know something.


----------



## DomNapoleon (Jan 21, 2012)

*Si (Introverted Sensing)**Ni (Introverted iNtuition)*PracticabilityJust know itRecall VisionaryRetaining ExcludingPastFutureAttention to detailBig picture, then core ideaPhotographic From the many to the oneKnowning by experienceFilling the blanksMemoryPredictionWhat I was toldPerspective shifting Dominant in ISxJDominant in INxJ


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> You should read more MBTI and get back to me when you know something.


As I noted in one of those previously-linked posts (which it sounds like you couldn't be bothered to read):

Most of the leading _function-centric_ MBTI theorists include the traditional streak in their descriptions of Si-doms. Naomi Quenk, for example, notes that Si-doms "are typically seen as ... dedicated to preserving traditional values and time-honored institutions." Linda Berens incorporates Keirsey's four temperament groups into her type analysis and notes that all the SJ types (introverted and extraverted alike) tend to be "traditional." And Lenore Thomson notes that ISFJs "can become overly dependent on others' ideas about what's appropriate in a situation, especially if those ideas coincide with their own ideas about integrity and commitment. For example, they may find it difficult to approve of those who don't behave or dress appropriately for their social position. Extreme types can place a great deal of weight on social signs and signals of all sorts. Like ISTJs, they may believe that men and women should comport themselves quite differently from each other."​
I'd say you're the one who could afford to do some more reading. You could start with the linked post, which has more discussion of the data supporting an S-traditional correlation, including the fact that — based on years of test results — "Traditional/Original" is one of the five subscales of S/N on the more recent "Step II" version of the MBTI.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

reckful said:


> As I noted in one of those previously-linked posts (which it sounds like you couldn't be bothered to read):
> Most of the leading _function-centric_ MBTI theorists include the traditional streak in their descriptions of Si-doms. Naomi Quenk, for example, notes that Si-doms "are typically seen as ... dedicated to preserving traditional values and time-honored institutions." Linda Berens incorporates Keirsey's four temperament groups into her type analysis and notes that all the SJ types (introverted and extraverted alike) tend to be "traditional." And Lenore Thomson notes that ISFJs "can become overly dependent on others' ideas about what's appropriate in a situation, especially if those ideas coincide with their own ideas about integrity and commitment. For example, they may find it difficult to approve of those who don't behave or dress appropriately for their social position. Extreme types can place a great deal of weight on social signs and signals of all sorts. Like ISTJs, they may believe that men and women should comport themselves quite differently from each other."​
> I'd say you're the one who could afford to do some more reading. You could start with the linked post, which has more discussion of the data supporting an S-traditional correlation, including the fact that — based on years of test results — "Traditional/Original" is one of the five subscales of S/N on the more recent "Step II" version of the MBTI.


haha, how many SJs do you know? When it comes to the MBTI step 2, give me a link.
Then it also has to do with how you define "traditional".
Truth is that S =/= traditional, at most they mean that a sensor is more likely to be traditional, tho not necessary.
My ESFP sister is politically active in a liberal party in Sweden and the only reason for her liking Christmas is because of presents and good food - not for any tradition.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Truth is that S =/= traditional, at most they mean that a sensor is more likely to be traditional, tho not necessary.


Neither the MBTI nor the Big Five nor any other respectable personality typology is about the relevant preferences _equalling_ anything. They're about tendencies and probabilities, and it's always understood (or should be) that, even for a person with a strong preference, there will always be other contributing influences as well. On top of that, the data suggests that the S/N dimension probably exhibits something like a normal distribution, with the result that, even with respect to correlations that are relatively dramatic, there will be many S's who, because of the mildness of their preference, don't experience much of a temperamental tug in the S direction.

In any case, now that you've conceded the possibility that "a sensor is more likely to be traditional," I feel my work is done here. :tongue:


----------



## Tad Cooper (Apr 10, 2010)

stone100674 said:


> Hello @_tine_ , how are you feeling? I hope all is well and improving everyday. :happy:
> Change is fine as long as the reason for the change makes sense. Change for the sake of change itself is pointless, but improving a process through change is just fine. We don't get stuck into piss poor methods just because we always did something, or saw something done a particular way. For example when I cook I am always improving a recipe: I always consider what the addition of herb x etc would have on the recipe because I know what herb x tastes like and the effect it will have on the dish.


Thanks, things are going quite well at the moment  Thanks for asking, how about you?
What sort of changes don't you like? I find some changes go down okay and others are big no-nos.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

reckful said:


> Neither the MBTI nor the Big Five nor any other respectable personality typology is about the relevant preferences _equalling_ anything. They're about tendencies and probabilities, and it's always understood (or should be) that, even for a person with a strong preference, there will always be other contributing influences as well. On top of that, the data suggests that the S/N dimension probably exhibits something like a normal distribution, with the result that, even with respect to correlations that are relatively dramatic, there will be many S's who, because of the mildness of their preference, don't experience much of a temperamental tug in the S direction.
> 
> In any case, now that you've conceded the possibility that "a sensor is more likely to be traditional," I feel my work is done here. :tongue:


You misunderstood my original point, I take no offense in that and I'm glad it was sorted out.


MissBlossom said:


> A person who is Si dominated is seeking for the familiar. This person is grounded in the past and is *fighting for the things to stay the same.* *Tradition oriented*. Nostalgic. *Values their culture and continues its traditions.*


This makes it sound like S = traditional and what I tried to make clear was that that isn't the case. I've met many intuitive traditionalists and many liberal sensors.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

reckful said:


> has more discussion of the data supporting an S-traditional correlation,




Perhaps even independent of the data, I can say that what is theoretically true is that the Si-dominant relying cognitively on a bank of the concrete bundled with subjective impressions in all aspects (Ne-ing, Ji-ing, Je-ing) would consider _what has worked_ greatly, since they experience decision-making, intuiting, etc through this Si function. 




> My ESFP sister




Well I agree S is not equal to traditional for sure. Probably no conflict with @reckful's posted link/data/studies here, because this is a case of Se and not Si, and at least the part he quoted is talking Si.


----------



## stone100674 (Jun 22, 2012)

tine said:


> Thanks, things are going quite well at the moment  Thanks for asking, how about you?


 Glad to read it  I am cold and just managed to dig out from the almost 2 feet of snow we just got here LOL, but the sun is shining today and that kinda makes it better.


> What sort of changes don't you like? I find some changes go down okay and others are big no-nos.


I don't like changes to well established and tested systems: I have worked in construction and been involved in safety for a long time and have seen far too many fatalities and injuries that have resulted from untested changes to safety protocols. Most times these changes were to save either time or money, (or both) and not intended to improve the system. Those are a definite no go and I have walked off jobsites as a result. If I believe a change will improve the system and exceed requirements, that is fine: I am not completely inflexible.
I don't like attempts to change my way of doing things: This tendency gets stronger as I get older, likely because my methods have not failed me. The method that is time proven only needs to be revised if a variable changes or if the method fails. Phrases like "but what if you tried this instead" or "this might work" etc kind of rub me the wrong way. Show me evidence that "might" will translate to a positive result or just hand me tools and let me show a positive result.
I don't like it when people reorganize my things: I think that explains itself LOL Here is an example. I keep coffee cups in a cabinet above the coffee maker along with the sugar bowl. This cabinet was right next to the fridge so everything I needed was right there first thing in the morning: perfect order for me. My ex girlfriend thought that the coffee mugs belonged elsewhere and moved them more than once and I never understood her reasoning: something about all dishes being on one side of the kitchen.
I don't like when people try to force me to revisit a decision that I have already made: I am not referring to all things but rather personal decisions like food tastes or whether or not a movie was terrible. There are two pizza places in my little village, although one just opened. I decided to try the new places product and it was the worst pizza I have ever had, (the sauce tasted like ketchup and the dough was not completely cooked), I tried them a second time because they had just opened and perhaps it had improved: uhmmm it hadn't. I will not get a pizza there again even if it is cheaper, even though some of my friends insist it has gotten better. If I make a personal decision based on my preferences I frankly don't the see the value in revisiting and I resent attempts to force me to revisit my personal taste based on what I regard as a hypothetical possibility. I am not saying that their opinion has no value, but rather that we don't share tastes and I am willing to accept it and move rather that push a point view.
I don't protect institutions or conservative ideology.


----------



## Tula13 (Dec 2, 2012)

Oversimplified, Si is examining what is and Ni is examining what could be. 

Si means learning from data, and all data comes from the past. It means taking facts and information to string together a picture of the present and build a plan for the future. It's all about memory and details. We don't enjoy lots of speculation of abstraction or open doors, just the cold hard facts and lots of them.

Si out of control can mean being overly-literal, only seeing what is visible and not being able to read between the lines or fill in the blanks. It can also mean being stuck in a rut of routine and repetition and fearing change. A well-developed SJ will see that change is not always so scary and can be helpful, and that structure and practicality work well for us but not for everyone.


----------

