# Am I Sensing or Intuitive?



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

So, a bit back I others determined I was ISTP. I stuck with it, but I have been reading up on INTP vs. ISTP a bit, and I'm very torn between which I am.

For example, I enjoy flying (flight lessons), riding my dirt bikes/ATV's, archery, shooting, airsoft... stuff like that.

But I dislike physical activity. I would rather be at my computer than doing anything physical. If I can't be at my computer, I'm usually on my phone. I don't care for the sports world, and when I do play sports, I try to add a sort of... tactical(maybe?) element to make it more enjoyable.


I also enjoy photography and art, I sketch a lot in my free time, and if I'm not too lazy to sit at my desk all day, I'll go outside and take some pictures.

And I'm a huge history buff, but at the same time a huge science buff.

On tests, I score both INTP and ISTP.


Oh, and I should mention, I'm woefully unaware of my surroundings, unless I need to be. (You know. Flying. 'Cause it helps to know where the planes nose is pointing. Otherwise it may go from flying to skydiving. I've never been skydiving though. I wonder if I'd like it. This is getting really off topic. Ending parenthesis please.)

Yeah so, apologies for the pretty awful post. I'm tired. I need coffee. But that involves standing up. First world problems, I say. (The best part is that I don't look like someone who sits inside all day. I'm surprisingly underweight. Probably 'cause I never eat unless I'm forced to... heh.)


Well thanks. Feel free to ask anything that may help.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

Ummm... you seem like an ISTP from the details you've given... or some kind of Sensor?


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

Eudaimonia said:


> Ummm... you seem like an ISTP from the details you've given... or some kind of Sensor?



I did make a what's my type post a bit back. It should have more details, but probably isn't perfect... http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/408466-whats-my-type.html


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

Well, the problem some people encounter is that they need the description to be perfect. It is possible that you need to settle into yourself more and not worry as much about the profile as much as just studying the cognitive functions. I will go on YouTube to get different ideas about different types and how to distinguish how a cog-func manifests. Take it in stride and it may come naturally.


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

Eudaimonia said:


> Well, the problem some people encounter is that they need the description to be perfect. It is possible that you need to settle into yourself more and not worry as much about the profile as much as just studying the cognitive functions. I will go on YouTube to get different ideas about different types and how to distinguish how a cog-func manifests. Take it in stride and it may come naturally.


Yeah, I'll do that. It's still hard to tell though. I rarely pay attention to what I'm doing and how I'm doing it, so it's difficult taking quizzes because I'm always like "... maybe I do that?" so I'll try to be more aware...

It's just odd. Because I definitely think about the future a lot, and I like to think about how conversations may play out and possibilities of what might be said before I have so said conversations; and I'm assuming that's more of an intuitive thing. 

It's confusing.


----------



## visionaryspirit (Nov 24, 2014)

Maybe you have an almost even balance of S and N.


----------



## The Exception (Oct 26, 2010)

It's hard to tell just going by your interests. Have you looked into cognitive functions? 
ISTP is dominant Ti, auxilary Se
INTP is dominant Ti, auxilary Ne

Which do you relate to more: Se or Ne?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

This is pretty tricky territory as there is a myrriad of interpretations possible.
Some have already been made.
You shouldn't just look at Se vs Ne as a Ti dom, but at the Se-Ni axis vs the Ne-Si axis.
This can be tricky buisness, but I'll do you the favour of skimming your type me thread for clues.

*Going to read....

To be honest what you wrote about wasn't all that helpful.
The picture interpretation was more revealing if anything, we are after all trying to pinpoint your perception.
I'd like you to post some images that you like and describe what you like about them.
Bring to light any aspect that seem important to you.


----------



## evaunit02 (Nov 26, 2014)

INTP is Ti-Ne-Si-Fe whereas ISTP is Ti-Se-Ni-Fe, so yes, like hornet said, you're going to have to differentiate between Ne-Si and Ni-Se.

Let me give you simple "general" rundowns of each cognitive function:
Ne: Very focused on several possibilities outwardly, looks at several what if's and could be's and is more "scatter-brained" and more surface-level. For example an Ne, lets say they want to be an actor, they research, but while researching they notice all the other professions in the acting business and start researching on these other professions and not quite having drawn out their want to be an actor, but jumping from the possibility of one profession to the other.
Ni: Very focused on select possibilities and draws at length these few possibilities and expands them on a deeper level. For example an Ni, lets say they want to be an actor, they research and stay on track for years and accomplish it, but come to realize that perhaps this just isn't the thing for them, but only after years and having become an actor.
Se: Focused on the present and what is actually tangible, what you taste, smell, touch, hear, see, those with Se are generally more aggressive and sporty and have an overall higher appreciation for aesthetic beauty. They look at a friend and are more likely to instantly think "Wow, she looks really pretty today" whereas an Si user would think "That outfit is a lot prettier than the one from yesterday" or something like "She didn't say she was going to wear that yesterday" and Se would be less concerned for safety and functionality where an Si would. Extroverted sensing is highly overrepresented in big time athletic sports.
Si: Focused on the past and inwardly sensations which can include memories/dreams with people, friends, remembering or seeing something and it taking you back, generally Si has a much more nostalgic attitude. Si tends to compare current moments to past moments and so is generally quite a bit more cautious. Si would more likely be the type to write memoirs or books in some way having to do with their past and be the ones to mention the 5 dollars you asked to borrow that you haven't given back. Si is generally more traditional and concerned with the holidays and what has occurred to them in the past.

Ne: several possibilities
Ni: select possibilities
Se: physical, is
Si: intangible, was

From what you posted, I'm going to have to say ISTP as it is all active and focused on what is actually able to be done in the moment. You mention sight, taste and feeling. Being on your computer is still an extroverted sensing trait. Extroverted sensing is not just physical in the general sense, being on your computer is still physical. Extroverted sensing is more over-indulgent of things, such as playing too much or going to sleep late to watch more of your favorite show or eating too much of that favorite snack, those things.


----------



## Acadia (Mar 20, 2014)

Hmmm. A thing to note is that everyone is capable of recalling information and juxtaposing it against something else. Anyone can make comparisons. Humans have memories; it happens. And everyone can get excited about something and ramble. Some people are less inclined to do so, but it is possible. But the key is, the way that people do this differs, and there are specific ways of noticing those trends. 

As an Se-Ni user, if I'm going to make a comparison, it's going to be a damn good one and it's going to have a boatload of meaning. My goals are fairly well established, and the only time I really ramble is when I'm trying to express how I feel about something to somebody else, to which I usually forfeit and end on a note like 'that's messed up'. I can let go of the past and move on, even if it makes me sad sometimes. I'm disorganized, but aware of my surroundings. I'm attentive and tend to turn toward noise when I hear it. I don't have good memory regarding things I _read_ unless they touch me personally--making book learning a difficult task. {most Ne-Si users are okay at learning from books} I am physically active, because if I'm not, it sends me into a loop. I need to be biking, running, climbing, fencing, skating--doing something, because as Se is an extroverted function, it snaps me back to reality and keeps my head in the game alongside Fi. in a way, it almost charges me. At some point, Si users must introvert their experiences. That's why Ne-Si users are frequently referred to as 'introverted extroverts', as their Ne is making connections from their Si, and eventually needs to rest. 

I'm not particularly close with any dom or aux Ne-users, but my ISFJ {Si-Fe-Ti-Ne} cousin and I treat the same traumatic experience very differently. I can separate the past from the present and my life from the lives of others. But I don't let the actions of somebody else dictate my life. And while I am tremendously saddened and will always remember the tragedy that struck our family a couple of years ago, I won't let it rule my life. My youngest cousin, an ESTP, acts similarly to me. That middle cousin, on the other hand, is quiet about these things. He internalizes them, and somehow acts as though if he takes so much as a sip of wine, the same things will happen to him. He unconsciously not just compares, but relives the past when it comes to those serious kinds of things; his Ne will kick in and he'll make connections about all the possible bad things that can happen; and he doesn't trust himself. All he wants is a stable life. All I want is an adventurous life. His younger brother wants a compromise. {Ti, very practical} 

*tldr*: making comparisons and being unaware of your surroundings tend to lie in the categories of Ne-Si but are a poor way of defining it. sensors, even Se-users, can do those things too, because we all have four functions. 

have you looked at function stacks? what makes you doubt Se-Ni?


----------



## Afterburner (Jan 8, 2013)

Your username fits this well.

I'd recommend Micheal Pierce's Jungian typology videos and then the series on each type (or at least your possible types). Best interpretation I've come across so far. 
This is a matter of what functions you prefer, so typing yourself requires reflection on your mental processes; juxtapose that knowledge with the functions, and you should be on your way.

If this is indeed down to ISTP and INTP, get to know what constitutes them.
Ti-Se-Ni-Fe for ISTP; Ti-Ne-Si-Fe for INTP.

They're both dominant introverted thinkers, meaning their priority is the logical structure of their own mental contents. Micheal Pierce compared it to an architect, and I think that's the perfect way to describe it. Ti wants to build a logical system with integrity, much like a tower from which to observe and understand the world. It examines the individual components of any object according to its own standards and then gives it a place inside the system. Another pillar or floor for the tower. Ti users are analytical to the fullest extent.

A big difference between the two is the second/auxiliary function. It can help you differentiate the types the most, I think.
Extroverted sensing (Se) is the intake of data directly from external objects. You see a tree and you see a tree, and every part of the tree. It's immersion in reality as it is (for that is all reality is). This is the reason for the practical and physical bent many ISTP descriptions have. But the important thing is to note what Se itself is and to place the emphasis there, not the manifesting behaviors, which can look quite similar across types.
Extroverted intuition (Ne) is the intake of the possibilities or ideas that we associate with objects. This is the abstract and theoretical bent you see in INTP descriptions. Ne filters away the data about tree and instead takes the multitude of ideas springing from the tree, and examines each of those with Ti.

Introverted intuition (Ni) in the ISTP (and in all cases) compliments Se. Ni takes in the impressions that ideas (the focus of Ne; the offshoots of actual objects) make on the mind. It provides unconscious associational thinking and pattern recognition. It's the third function here, so it takes time to develop, but isn't completely resisted. They can rely on it reasonably from a pretty early point, but not at full force.
Introverted Sensing (Si) is coupled with Ne in the INTP. Si focuses on the impressions left by the data from objects (the focus of Se). A common analogy is a sort of library or storehouse of experience. It's all of the marks left by information received by external objects. 

The fourth function and the one that requires the most developmentfor both is extroverted feeling (Fe). This is the active organization of the outside world according to value judgements (sentiments). This is obviously the opposite of Ti, hence its placement, and the reason that it is often resisted until the individual begins integrating it (as in every type). This is often marked by an ignorance or resistance to social expectations based on fostering harmony in maturing IxTPs. But it's important to note that it still plays a part, so the IxTP does still use Fe, especially when matured/developed (and when not, it is used rather "primitively").

I hope that helps. And @_hornet_'s suggestion might be helpful since it will help tell us how you perceive, and give you material to reflect on.


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

Sorry for not keeping up with this thread. I remembered to check it but never git around to doing it...

Anyways.


Lot of helpful info in here. Way to tired to read it all though. I'll do the picture thing someone mentioned tomorrow... thanks guys.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

@Afterburner, I have to correct your view on Se vs Ne. Both of them are the intake of data directly from external objects, but one focuses on the direct sensations while the other focuses on direct intuitions of the object. Both of them are also extraverted perceivers, meaning they both adjust to present moment data that is derived from external objects, so in each moment Se and Ne immediately start adjusting to all factors that are present in the external world. In order to truly understand Ne though, one needs to be able to differentiate the products of Ne from the products of other concepts/functions that are usually (falsely) associated with Ne.

Lets first take a look at what an Idea in Jungian terms:



> *23. Idea*: In this work the concept of idea is sometimes used to designate a certain psychological element intimately connected with what I term image (q.v.). The image may be either personal or impersonal in its origin. In the latter case, it is collective and is distinguished by mythological qualities. I then term it primordial image. *When, on the contrary, it has no mythological character, i.e. lacks the Intuitive qualities and is merely collective, I speak of an idea. Accordingly I employ the term idea as something which expresses the meaning of a primordial image that has been abstracted or detached from the concretism of the image. In so far as the idea is an abstraction, it has the appearance of something derived, or developed, from elementary factors, a product of thinking.* This is the sense, as something secondary and derived, in which it is regarded by Wundt [44] and many others. Since, however, the idea is merely the. formulated meaning of a primordial image in which it was already symbolically represented, the essence of the idea is not merely derived, or produced, but, considered psychologically, it has an a priori existence as a given possibility of thought-connections in general.





> Its secondary nature of an abstract and derived entity it receives from the rational elaboration to which the primordial image is subjected before it is made suitable for rational usage. Inasmuch as the primordial image is a constant autochthonic psychological factor repeating itself in all times and places, we might also, in a certain sense, say the same of the idea, although, on account of its rational nature, it is much more subject to modification. by rational elaboration, which in its turn is strongly influenced by time and circumstance. It is this rational elaboration which gives it formulations corresponding with the spirit of the time. A few philosophers, by virtue of its derivation from the primordial image, ascribe a transcendent quality to it; this does not really belong to the idea as I conceive it, but rather to the primordial image, about which a timeless quality clings, established as it is from all time as an integral and inherent constituent of the human mind. Its quality of independence is derived also from the primordial image which was never made and is constantly present, appearing so spontaneously in perception that we might also say it strives independently towards its own realization, since it is sensed by the mind as an actively determining power. Such a view, however, is not general, but presumably a question of attitude (v. Chap. vii). *The idea is a psychological factor which not only determines thought but, in the form of a practical idea, also conditions feeling. As a general rule, however, I only employ the term idea, either when I am speaking of the determination of thought in a thinking-type, or when denoting the determination of feeling in a feeling-type.*





> The dual nature of the idea, as something that is at the same time both primary and secondary, is responsible for the fact that the expression is occasionally used promiscuously with 'primordial image'. *For the introverted attitude the idea is the primum movens; for the extraverted, it is a product.*


So now that we have differentiated the concept of "idea" from extraverted intuition by illuminating that it is a property derived from rationality, therefore thinking and feeling are the ones which directly utilize ideas in the form that they are naturally conditioned to, either in thought or in feeling. This helps show that extraverted intuition has nothing to do with ideas, which leads to my next point, which is that Ne is focused on objective possibilities. It takes all the present moment data and focuses on all the objective possibilities in the moment, where all the present properties are directly perceived and the individual adjusts their intuition to the data as a whole, not excluding any property. So if a new property or object was to appear then the Ne user immediately without hesitation adjusts their intuition to perceive the new objective possibilities that the new object/property has to offer to the situation as a whole. The keyword is *objective*, the possibilities that Ne perceives are completely oriented objectively, meaning that all the possibilities that Ne perceives are externally oriented while the possibilities include all objective data, including the objective relations and conditions between all objects, and their potential interactions:



> . The intuitive function is represented in consciousness by an attitude of expectancy, by vision and penetration; but only from the subsequent result can it be established how much of what was “seen” was actually in the object, and how much was “read into” it. *Just as sensation, when it is the dominant function, is not a mere reactive process of no further significance for the object, but an activity that seizes and shapes its object, so intuition is not mere perception, or vision, but an active, creative process that puts into the object just as much as it takes out*. Since it does this unconsciously, it also has an unconscious effect on the object. [611] *The primary function of intuition, however, is simply to transmit images, or perceptions of relations between things, which could not be transmitted by the other functions or only in a very roundabout way. These images have the value of specific insights which have a decisive influence on action whenever intuition is given priority*.





> Intuition appears either in a subjective or an objective form: the former is a perception of unconscious psychic facts whose origin is essentially subjective; *the latter is a perception of facts which depend upon subliminal perceptions of the object and upon the thoughts and feelings occasioned thereby*.
> 
> Concrete and abstract forms of intuition may be distinguished according to the degree of participation on the part of sensation. *Concrete intuition carries perceptions which are concerned with the actuality of things, while abstract intuition transmits the perceptions of ideational associations. Concrete intuition is a reactive process, since it follows directly from the given circumstances*; whereas abstract intuition, like abstract sensation, necessitates a certain element of direction, an act of will or a purpose. In common with sensation, intuition is a characteristic of infantile and primitive psychology. As against the strength and sudden appearance of sense-impression it transmits the perception of mythological images, the precursors of ideas





> . Everyone whose general attitude (q.v.) is oriented by intuition belongs to the intuitive type (q.v.). *68 Introverted and extraverted intuitives may be distinguished according to whether intuition is directed inwards, to the inner vision, or outwards, to action and achievement.*





> *But since intuition, in the extraverted attitude, has a prevailingly objective orientation, it actually comes very near to sensation; indeed, the expectant attitude towards outer objects may, with almost equal probability, avail itself of sensation. Hence, for intuition really to become paramount, sensation must to a large extent be suppressed*. I am now speaking of sensation as the simple and direct sense-reaction, an almost definite physiological and psychic datum. This must be expressly established beforehand, because, if I ask the intuitive how he is [p. 463] orientated, he will speak of things which are quite indistinguishable from sense-perceptions. Frequently he will even make use of the term 'sensation'. *He actually has sensations, but he is not guided by them per se, merely using them as directing-points for his distant vision. They are selected by unconscious expectation. Not the strongest sensation, in the physiological sense, obtains the crucial value, but any sensation whatsoever whose value happens to become considerably enhanced by reason of the intuitive's unconscious attitude. In this way it may eventually attain the leading position, appearing to the intuitive's consciousness indistinguishable from a pure sensation. But actually it is not so.*





> Just as extraverted sensation strives to reach the highest pitch of actuality, because only thus can the appearance of a complete life be created, so intuition tries to encompass the greatest possibilities, since only through the awareness of possibilities is intuition fullysatisfied. *Intuition seeks to discover possibilities in the objective situation*; hence as a mere tributary function (viz. when not in the position of priority) it is also the instrument which, in the presence of a hopelessly blocked situation, works automatically towards the issue, which no other function could discover. *Where intuition has the priority, every ordinary situation in life seems like a closed room, which intuition has to open. It is constantly seeking outlets and fresh possibilities in external life. In a very short time every actual situation becomes a prison to the intuitive; it burdens him like a chain, prompting a compelling need for solution.* At times objects would seem to have an almost exaggerated value, should they chance to represent the idea of a severance or release that might lead to the discovery of a new possibility. Yet no sooner have they performed their office, serving intuition as a ladder or a bridge, than they [p. 464] appear to have no further value, and are discarded as mere burdensome appendages. A fact is acknowledged only in so far as it opens up fresh possibilities of advancing beyond it and of releasing the individual from its operation. Emerging possibilities are compelling motives from which intuition cannot escape and to which all else must be sacrificed.





> * Because intuition is orientated by the object, a decided dependence upon external situations is discernible*, but it has an altogether different character from the dependence of the sensational type. The intuitive is never to be found among the generally recognized reality values, *but he is always present where possibilities exist. He has a keen nose for things in the bud pregnant with future promise.* He can never exist in stable, long-established conditions of generally acknowledged though limited value: because his eye is constantly ranging for new possibilities, stable conditions have an air of impending suffocation.* He seizes hold of new objects and new ways with eager intensity*, sometimes with extraordinary enthusiasm, only to abandon them cold-bloodedly, without regard and apparently without remembrance, as soon as their range becomes clearly defined and a promise of any considerable future development no longer clings to them. *As long as a possibility exists, the intuitive is bound to it with thongs of fate.* It is as though his whole life went out into the new situation.


As said before, Ne and Se are both perceptive functions who are solely focused external/objective data, where each new data creates a change, an adjustment to both of the functions:



> * 10. Recapitulation of Extraverted Irrational Types*
> 
> *I call the two preceding types irrational for reasons already referred to; namely, because their commissions and omissions are based not upon reasoned judgment but upon the absolute intensity of perception. Their perception is concerned with simple happenings, where no selection has been exercised by the judgment. In this respect both the latter types have a considerable superiority over the two judging types.* The objective occurrence is both law-determined and accidental. In so far as it is law-determined, it is accessible to reason; in so far as it is accidental, it is not. One might reverse it and say that we apply the term law-determined to the occurrence appearing so to our reason, and where its regularity escapes us we call it accidental. The postulate of a universal lawfulness remains a postulate of reason only; in no sense is it a postulate of our functions of perception. Since these are in no way grounded upon the principle of reason and its postulates, they are, of their very nature, irrational. Hence my term 'irrational' corresponds with the nature of the perception-types. But merely because they subordinate judgment to perception, it would be quite incorrect to regard these types as unreasonable. *They are merely in a high degree empirical; they are grounded exclusively upon experience, so exclusively, in fact, that as a rule, their judgment cannot keep pace with their experience*.





> From the standpoint of the rational type, the irrational might easily be represented as a rational of inferior quality; namely, when he is apprehended in the light of what happens to him. For what happens to him is not the accidental-in that he is master-but, in its stead, he is overtaken by rational judgment and rational aims. This fact is hardly comprehensible to the rational mind, *but its unthinkableness merely equals the astonishment of the irrational, when he discovers someone who can set the ideas of reason above the living and actual event. Such a thing seems scarcely credible to him.* It is, as a rule, quite hopeless to look to him for any recognition of principles in this direction, since a rational understanding is just as unknown and, in fact, tiresome to him as the idea of making a contract, without mutual discussion and obligations, appears unthinkable to the rational type. [p. 470]





> This point brings me to the problem of the psychic relation between the representatives of the different types. Following the terminology of the French school of hypnotists, the psychic relation among the more modern psychiatrists is termed I 'rapport'. Rapport chiefly consists in a feeling of actual accord, in spite of recognised differences. In fact, the recognition of existing differences, in so far as they are common to both, is already a rapport, a feeling of accord. If we make this feeling conscious to a rather high degree in an actual case, we discover that it has not merely the quality of a feeling that cannot be analysed further, but it also has the nature of an insight or cognitional content, representing the point of agreement in a conceptual form. This rational presentation is exclusively valid for the rational types; *it by no means applies to the irrational, whose rapport is based not at all upon judgment but upon the parallelism of actual living events. His feeling of accord is the common perception of a sensation or intuition.* The rational would say that rapport with the irrational depends purely upon chance. If, by some accident, the objective situations are exactly in tune, something like a human relationship takes place, but nobody can tell what will be either its validity or its duration. *To the rational type it is often a very bitter thought that the relationship will last only just so long as external circumstances accidentally produce a mutual interest. This does not occur to him as being especially human, whereas it is precisely in this situation that the irrational sees a humanity of quite singular beauty. *


I also want to present Jungs definition of Irrational which also illuminates more aspects that define what sensation and intuition is, which presents to us a reference where we can analyze the relation of the two functions when applying them to introversion or extraversion:



> *36. IRRATIONAL. *
> 
> I use this term not as denoting something contrary to reason, but something beyond reason, something, therefore, not grounded on reason.
> 
> ...


Now that I have put all the facts and definitions that pertain to Ne down to be viewed, it is much easier to understand exactly what Ne is. *Extraverted Intuition is the Irrational function that perceives objective possibilities within the present moment, in the flux of events, by focusing on the potential interactions of all present objects and things, which compels the the Ne dom to adjust and act based on the objective possibilities present, in order to achieve while also bringing to fruit the possibility that has the most potential.* While Se on the other hand is the Irrational function that perceives objective sensations within the present moment, in te flux of events, by focusing on the actual interactions of all present objects and things, which compels the Se dom to adjust and act based on the objective sensations present, in order to achieve experiencing the greatest sensation present.


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

@i_really_hate_decisions, I hope the above helps you out in determining if you are either Ti-Se or Ti-Ne. To help, I'll post this short quote on how Ne works as an auxiliary function:



> .Just as extraverted sensation strives to reach the highest pitch of actuality, because this alone can give the appearance of a full life, so intuition tries to apprehend the widest range of possibilities, since only through envisioning possibilities is intuition fully satisfied. It seeks to discover what possibilities the objective situation holds in store; *hence, as a subordinate function (i.e., when not in the position of priority), it is the auxiliary that automatically comes into play when no other function can find a way out of a hopelessly blocked situation.* When it is the dominant function, every ordinary situation in life seems like a locked room which intuition has to open. It is constantly seeking fresh outlets and new possibilities in external life.


The question boils down to, would you rather seek objective sensations, or would you rather seek objective possibilities, to benefit your Ti? Another way to analyze yourself is to focus on the contents that you extravert naturally, are they predominately focused on external sensations, or external possibilities? Also keep in mind that Ne/Se are subordinate to your Ti, so they are subject to the reason modeled within Ti, therefore they are undifferentiated and aren't completely identical to the same functions within the dominate function spot.


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

Shadow Logic said:


> @i_really_hate_decisions, I hope the above helps you out in determining if you are either Ti-Se or Ti-Ne. To help, I'll post this short quote on how Ne works as an auxiliary function:
> 
> 
> 
> The question boils down to, would you rather seek objective sensations, or would you rather seek objective possibilities, to benefit your Ti? Another way to analyze yourself is to focus on the contents that you extravert naturally, are they predominately focused on external sensations, or external possibilities? Also keep in mind that Ne/Se are subordinate to your Ti, so they are subject to the reason modeled within Ti, therefore they are undifferentiated and aren't completely identical to the same functions within the dominate function spot.



This is all quite helpful, so thank you, however the main problem for me lies in the fact that I don't remember my own actions... so when you ask if I prefer objective sensations or possibilities, I honestly don't know. Maybe if you asked some example questions...? I'm not sure. I will do the picture thing the other user recommended when I get on my computer.


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

hornet said:


> This is pretty tricky territory as there is a myrriad of interpretations possible.
> Some have already been made.
> You shouldn't just look at Se vs Ne as a Ti dom, but at the Se-Ni axis vs the Ne-Si axis.
> This can be tricky buisness, but I'll do you the favour of skimming your type me thread for clues.
> ...



Alright, sorry for the late reply. Here I go.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cannon_s5_is/16042780560/in/explore-2015-01-08/

It's nice... I think it looks a bit... almost cartoony. Almost like a slight brushed filter was applied.

And I think the mountains closest to the camera are underexposed/bad lighting.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/leesjewel/16201785746/in/explore-2015-01-08/

This one's nice. It just "works". The colors work together... it all just sort of fits. Nothing to really complain about...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16225821161/in/explore-2015-01-08/

I'm posting this one because I don't really likes it.

The bright clear blue sky, and clean and bright green grass really clash, and don't make a nice blend of colors. And the runner and his bright red shirt sticks out like a sore thumb. The picture just doesn't appeal to me...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/droehrli/16045166297/in/explore-2015-01-08/

Well this is nice. Perfect blends of colors, and I really like the focus of the picture. And the sort of "hazy" tree line... and the way the wood reflects the light is cool. 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16044674379/in/explore-2015-01-08/

PLANES!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/hammermad/16046053717/in/explore-2015-01-08/

Pretty cool. Looks like something out of a fantasy or something. Colors are pretty nice.

The way that tree in the front is bent is killing me... I want to fix it...



Well hopefully that's enough. I didn't have much time so if more detail is needed let me know.

Thanks.


----------



## i_really_hate_decisions (Dec 7, 2014)

Ok so guys, here's the problem with me determining my type.


As I said earlier, I don't remember small things I do (I just have a bad memory in general, unless it's remembering something that matters to me.), and if you are going to ask if I prefer to see possibilities and whatnot, it would help a lot if you could provide a sort of example/questions.

Saying something like "If you were in this situation would you rather do this, or this, and then this..." and so forth.

Also, if you guys haven't noticed yet from my type me post, I'm only 14.

Sure, I'm damn smart for my age, and I can thoroughly understand most posts in here without trouble, some of the more in depth ones pose trouble to my, relatively (to all you guys) dumb self.


And if you guys are wondering why I'm having so much trouble determining, other than the fact stated above, is because sometimes I'll go through Se vs. Ne threads and others of the like, and I'll see maybe an Ne post and go "Oh, that's SO me."

And then 2 minutes later, do the exact same thing for an Se post.

I know everyone's not the same, but it really just jumbles it all up and makes it difficult to actually determine my type.

Tests can only go so far, so that's why I came here. I know people who can actually interact with me and get to know me more in depth then some automated test that scrunches some numbers together, is much more useful.

I'm also having trouble fully understanding abstract vs. concrete topics/thoughts... if someone could explain... thanks.

Currently, I'm leaning SLIGHTLY towards ISTP, but the fact that everyone says that they like to be all caught up the the latest whatever... I couldn't care less what the new "trends" are. (Honestly, at this age, it's probably best for my sanity.)

I talk about things that interest me, not what everyone else is. (Which is a shame. No one seems to care about my favorite topic; military history, technology, and tactics; specifically WW2. Luckily I do have a friend who is total ISTP, and we will build some stuff together (Usually involving pyrotechnics or something with a hint of danger... but let's not go there....).

And there are some other things, but they don't matter too much at the time...


Again, sorry for my ineptness, but I'm new to this. . I appreciate all the help I've gotten from you guys, it's been useful.


Oh also, I found it more common for Ne's to have a lot of tabs open. I have 17 open.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

i_really_hate_decisions said:


> Alright, sorry for the late reply. Here I go.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/cannon_s5_is/16042780560/in/explore-2015-01-08/
> 
> ...


All of these images points to *Se* IMO.
The fact that you choose so "sharp" images speaks for a familiarity with sensations as objects.
So ISTP seems quite correct from this stance.


----------



## originalsin (Sep 4, 2014)

From your other thread: 



> b) If you could change one thing about you personality, what would it be? Why?
> 
> I want to be more aware of things around me. For example, I come home at night, and our Christmas lights have been put up. I walk in and my dad goes "Do you like the lights?" I respond "Lights...?". It's hilarious but annoying at the same time. I managed to miss the fast that our house was covered in blinking lights!



Someone with Se in their dominant or auxiliary functions would probably not miss something like that, as they are very much in-tune with their physical surroundings. 

Also, 



> Well I'm only 14... (I'm mature, don't worry. I just want to learn things.) I'm male, I just recently got dumped ("But you're only 14! You can't have a SERIOUS relationship!" Ok, cool.) I just recently got out of moderate depression... ("Stupid teenager self diagnosing depression!" Ok, again, cool.) I feel great now though. State of mind? Um... decisions... well... just "fine" I guess. Pretty relaxed. Just overall fine


. 

The way you answered that kind of sounds like Ne. 

I'm going with INTP here.


----------

