# Se Vs Si: The Barbie Dream House Analogy



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

You lost me at dream house barbie :/.... As my last function I have an Idea how , when and why I use Si, however not well enough to give any clear examples. I know how it works for ISTJ or as their primary function, however I'm not clear how that would manifest as my least function used.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Pilot said:


> Speaking as Si-aux:
> 
> One of the reasons Si users can be reluctant to adjust their model even when new information becomes available is that it means giving up the feelings associated with the old model. It means letting go of a particular feeling associated with a certain object/act/etc. and accepting it more as a memory than an experience.
> 
> ...


Are you sure you aren't ISTJ? That's why ISTJ and INFP should never be allowed near laws or congress. People generally accept this about INFP, that they make better activists, but it, what you describe, is precisely is what makes me wonder how some senators are still alive. Because they make laws on that. With Si/Fi. The spectacular values of the amazing past. That beautiful past that never was. The past ISFP like Lana del Rey can sell you ironically and I can enjoy with melancholy, but that Suspenders McFuckhead thinks is grounds for running a nation, so imposes it systemically on others with Te. The IFP makes it their own world. Maybe so does the ISFJ in a community sense. But the ISTJ says this is why marriage is only between a menz and a women.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Pilot said:


> I don't believe it's Fi related because there's no actual judgement involved. Si, for me, is largely an involuntary process. I have no role in choosing what my Si holds onto; I usually only find out after the fact when some new experience triggers memories of the old one.
> 
> It's when the triggering happens that my Fi comes in and morally re-evaluates the memory. Not so much on whether it was "good or bad" but on whether it was "right or wrong" and if the moral judgement lines up with the emotional one produced by Si.
> 
> ...


Oh what you describe is Si/Fi. This is why the ISFJ doesn't quite relate.


----------



## mikan (May 25, 2014)

hoopla said:


> I've recently been trying to grip my understanding of the functions under a tighter notch or belt. They were so lose before. They're still loose, but I think I may have nailed the difference between Si and Se. I hereby give you: The Barbie Dream House Analogy.
> 
> If Si saw it's beautiful dream house as a child in a Barbie catalog, that's Si's house. Si only wants to live in this beautiful Barbie Dream House in all it's 2 story, 6 roomed, pink furnished glory. Fuck other houses. Si sits in the back of it's mothers' car, staring out the window whilst viewing all these other houses. Sooo boring. "I hate all these houses," Si says. "I want a Barbie Dream House". All Si can see, whilst observing other houses, is Barbie Dream House. Eventually, day after day, week after week, month after month, Si sees these houses and actually starts enjoying their exterior designs. Maybe there's room for something other than just "Barbie Dream House". Who knows, eventually Barbie Dream House might just end up bland and tasteless in comparison.


Speaking of Se-

I thought this analogy will fit more. (copy and pasted) What if we put Se is Si's shoes?

"If Se saw a beautiful dream house as a child in a Barbie catalog, that's a house Se liked. Se wants to live in this beautiful Barbie Dream House in all it's 2 story, 6 roomed, pink furnished glory right now. Though Se will most likely want to live other houses later, and Se can't wait to live in the other ones. Se sits in the back of it's mothers' car, staring out the window whilst viewing all these other houses. Sooo beautiful. "I want to live in all these houses," Se says. "Oh, I forgot, I wanted a Barbie Dream House". Though, all Se can see, whilst observing other houses, are beautifully structured houses. Eventually, day after day, week after week, month after month, Se is still seeing their exterior designs, separately from the Barbie Dream House."


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Thalassa said:


> Are you sure you aren't ISTJ? That's why ISTJ and INFP should never be allowed near laws or congress. People generally accept this about INFP, that they make better activists, but it, what you describe, is precisely is what makes me wonder how some senators are still alive. Because they make laws on that. With Si/Fi. The spectacular values of the amazing past. That beautiful past that never was. The past ISFP like Lana del Rey can sell you ironically and I can enjoy with melancholy, but that Suspenders McFuckhead thinks is grounds for running a nation, so imposes it systemically on others with Te. The IFP makes it their own world. Maybe so does the ISFJ in a community sense. But the ISTJ says this is why marriage is only between a menz and a women.


1. I'm positive I'm ESTJ.

2. You must be joking.


----------



## jcal (Oct 31, 2013)

hoopla said:


> If Si saw it's beautiful dream house as a child in a Barbie catalog, that's Si's house. Si only wants to live in this beautiful Barbie Dream House in all it's 2 story, 6 roomed, pink furnished glory. Fuck other houses. Si sits in the back of it's mothers' car, staring out the window whilst viewing all these other houses. Sooo boring. "I hate all these houses," Si says. "I want a Barbie Dream House". All Si can see, whilst observing other houses, is Barbie Dream House. Eventually, day after day, week after week, month after month, Si sees these houses and actually starts enjoying their exterior designs. Maybe there's room for something other than just "Barbie Dream House". Who knows, eventually Barbie Dream House might just end up bland and tasteless in comparison.
> 
> Si takes in what it knows, and when it's crossed a new bridge, it's apprehensive because it hasn't been evaluated. Absolutely no prior sensory experiences can compare to this very bridge, which sends Si through a loop. Once properly evaluated, Si stores that bridge into it's database and finally crosses it.


I like the general analogy you've laid out. I think a difference for us ISTJs (or maybe just me?) is that there is probably less focus on aesthetics or feelings (e.g., "enjoyment") and more focus on whether something "works", in a practical sense. As I absorb "new" and compare it to existing, my focus is almost 100% on "will it work" and/or "will it kill us". But the process is similar to what you've described. Only the point of focus differs.



> It is a myth that Si is antagonistic towards change and trying new things. Well, maybe only a half myth. Si likes new things, but is much murkier in the process of enjoying them in comparison to the Se, who obsesses over the latest and greatest until it's become stale and moves on to the next thing (this is partly why Se and Ne get confused. Both are about possibilities; the difference is concrete versus abstract). Si eventually opens it's route to new houses, possibly disregarding the original house that started it all once that well has opened up, whereas Se abandons it's house after all of it's tangibility is captured in order to find a new house to play with. Both similar in their focus on the sensory, but reversed and flipped in their essence and motivations.


In my experience, Si not only likes new things, it is constantly driving me to seek them out... to investigate EVERYTHING around me to better understand it... how it can help me... how it could hurt me. Even those things that could hurt aren't flatly avoided, they are studied in detail in hopes of finding an alternative with similar positives and fewer negatives. In any case, we always need to understand exactly how the new will integrate into the existing framework... what will change and how do we adapt to it. This due diligence is what takes time and tests the patience of others and leads them to believe that we are antagonistic to change when we truly are not. We just have more patience and concern for safety/stability than some other types do. I love the latest and greatest as much as anyone else... but I don't buy into it until I completely understand it. ISTJ is the least likely to have to say, "Sorry, I never thought _*THAT*_ would happen".


----------



## jcal (Oct 31, 2013)

Thalassa said:


> Si and Fi both value personal memory with emotional meaning. In one example I saw, Fi actually has more emotional charge towards personal memory than Si. For Si it's actually REALITY. It's so deeply emotional that it's not even emotional anymore, it's just "common sense." Si serves a much more practical purpose in the SJ, it serves a template for perception, so they can contemplate and judge. I think people with Se and Si have more detailed memory than N types, and it affects their art, music and writing.


Agree... this is what I was referring to about ISTJ being less focused on emotion of prior experience and more on practical aspects, in comparison to ISFJ. 



> Are you sure you aren't ISTJ? That's why ISTJ and INFP should never be allowed near laws or congress. People generally accept this about INFP, that they make better activists, but it, what you describe, is precisely is what makes me wonder how some senators are still alive. Because they make laws on that. With Si/Fi. The spectacular values of the amazing past. That beautiful past that never was. The past ISFP like Lana del Rey can sell you ironically and I can enjoy with melancholy, but that Suspenders McFuckhead thinks is grounds for running a nation, so imposes it systemically on others with Te. The IFP makes it their own world. Maybe so does the ISFJ in a community sense. But the ISTJ says this is why marriage is only between a menz and a women.


Ummmm... NO. Just... NO. 

I'm absolutely an ISTJ and absolutely have no affinity for tradition or past methods. I only care that what we do now works in a safe and fair manner. Even more so, I have no desire to impose my values (whatever they may be... and you are wrong if you assume what they are) on ANYONE else. My Te has better things to do than systematically impose anything on anyone else. Do whatever the hell you want... I don't really care and won't judge you for it. To automatically assume that I would angers the hell out of me.


----------



## Verity3 (Nov 15, 2014)

Thalassa said:


> Are you sure you aren't ISTJ? That's why ISTJ and INFP should never be allowed near laws or congress. People generally accept this about INFP, that they make better activists, but it, what you describe, is precisely is what makes me wonder how some senators are still alive.


Actually, I always thought I'd make a better Supreme Court Justice, mwahaha...!

I love Lana Del Rey <3 Her aux Se does create rich sensory details in her songwriting that I find very compelling. Fi-Se ...so much like Fi-Ne, but from a new perspective! <3 <3 <3


----------



## Bathilda (Nov 4, 2014)

jcal said:


> In my experience, Si not only likes new things, it is constantly driving me to seek them out... to investigate EVERYTHING around me to better understand it... how it can help me... how it could hurt me. Even those things that could hurt aren't flatly avoided, they are studied in detail in hopes of finding an alternative with similar positives and fewer negatives. In any case, we always need to understand exactly how the new will integrate into the existing framework... what will change and how do we adapt to it. This due diligence is what takes time and tests the patience of others and leads them to believe that we are antagonistic to change when we truly are not. We just have more patience and concern for safety/stability than some other types do. I love the latest and greatest as much as anyone else... but I don't buy into it until I completely understand it. ISTJ is the least likely to have to say, "Sorry, I never thought _*THAT*_ would happen".


*Quietly tosses another dime into the Si-dom can.* This is one of the the most enlightening descriptions of Si I've read. Well said.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

jcal said:


> I like the general analogy you've laid out. I think a difference for us ISTJs (or maybe just me?) is that there is probably less focus on aesthetics or feelings (e.g., "enjoyment") and more focus on whether something "works", in a practical sense. As I absorb "new" and compare it to existing, my focus is almost 100% on "will it work" and/or "will it kill us". But the process is similar to what you've described. Only the point of focus differs.
> 
> 
> 
> In my experience, Si not only likes new things, it is constantly driving me to seek them out... to investigate EVERYTHING around me to better understand it... how it can help me... how it could hurt me. Even those things that could hurt aren't flatly avoided, they are studied in detail in hopes of finding an alternative with similar positives and fewer negatives. In any case, we always need to understand exactly how the new will integrate into the existing framework... what will change and how do we adapt to it. This due diligence is what takes time and tests the patience of others and leads them to believe that we are antagonistic to change when we truly are not. We just have more patience and concern for safety/stability than some other types do. I love the latest and greatest as much as anyone else... but I don't buy into it until I completely understand it. ISTJ is the least likely to have to say, "Sorry, I never thought _*THAT*_ would happen".


Thanks for posting. 

It's good to get a Si-dom perspective, as I think my examples are largely influenced by the Si stacking.


----------



## Superfluous (Jan 28, 2014)

Ne is about abstract possibilities and Si is about sentimental experience, if you're Si dom, I would assume an ISTJ would use Ne for a Si agenda? "How can we make this barbie dream house exactly how I remembered it as a kid?" but will does Si help the Ne agenda, for an ENFPs case, how would it influence?


----------



## jcal (Oct 31, 2013)

Bathilda said:


> *Quietly tosses another dime into the Si-dom can.* This is one of the the most enlightening descriptions of Si I've read. Well said.





Pilot said:


> Thanks for posting.
> 
> It's good to get a Si-dom perspective, as I think my examples are largely influenced by the Si stacking.


Thanks. I do want to be clear (and may not have been) that my descriptions usually describe Si-Te working in combination. Si itself, to me, is a very basic, primal and almost entirely subconscious function that either provides an alarm when something changes in the environment, or it provides "urges" to investigate/examine newly encountered objects (i.e., expand its experiential sensory database). It also urges to be conservative with existing resources. These alarms and urges are not conscious thought processes... they are more an awareness that certain conditions exist that Te needs to take action upon. Te does the conscious investigating, prioritizing and deciding. Te is certainly influenced by these Si alarms/urges, but there is no "conversation" between them and Si doesn't, by itself, judge the environmental changes it reports. 

Personally, I have an extraordinarily hard time reconciling my experience with Si descriptions that tie the past sensory impressions to the emotions/feelings experienced with them at the time. I have never had that experience... EVER. It just doesn't work that way, at least for me. I don't "get" the whole nostalgia thing and it's supposed tie to Si. Logically, it seems to me that nostalgia would be a Fi thing, not a Si thing, but since I haven't ever experienced it I can't really comment beyond that. The subjective nature of Si, for me, lies in what aspects of the object I deem to be important to me... but this is always from a practical perspective, not an emotional one. I suspect this could be vastly different for Si-Fe, or when Si is not dominant. However, for this Si-Te ISTJ, Si manifests as a very unemotional survival instinct more than anything.


----------

