# Perceiving unctions.



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

*The tittle is perceiving functions.

Hello everyone 

I’ve been having a lot of difficulties understanding the perceiving functions, especially the intuitive ones. I’ll try to explain what I think Si and Se are, I think I know these functions (correct me if I am wrong):

*Si*- Si is what can be called _abstract sensation_. It is related to the impression the object causes to the subject (person). An Si user collects data using Ne (which I don’t know what it is XD) and this data is stored in the person’s mind, but since Si is an introverted perceiving functions, the data will be changed according to the subject. So an Si user would not “remember” something in a concrete way, he would remember it’s impression, what did that object cause to him, how it made him feel or think etc. But Si is not related to good memory. Everyone can have a good memory, but no one recalls those memories in the form an Si user does. Those memories are really important, almost sacred, because those impressions are what guide their lives. That’s why they can sometimes become nostalgic about the past. They want to experience the same sensations they once did. I would like to add that Si has nothing to do with planning, it is just a passive effect of Si. Si users live for these impressions (which should not be confused with real memory, they are subjective memory) and they don’t like to experience something new that they haven’t experienced before, because it would feel unknown to them, that’s why they plan, so that they can be sure that everything will go according to the plan and no surprises will occur along the path. (I hope I have understood what Si is XD)
*Se*-Se on the other hand lives for what is happening right in front of your eyes. They pay attention to almost everything surrounding them. Just like Ne pays attention to the possibilities of a place, Se users pay attention to the objects of that place. They can be easily distracted because of this. They are very extroverted, impulsive, and are very good at noticing details in their environment . They can read body language pretty well, especially when paired with Fe. They can be materialistic because Se is the opposice of Ni, which wants to see the world beneath ours, and not the real one.


I hope I have explained these functions in a correct way. I would like someone to confirm this. Also, I would like to know what really is intuition? How does it differ from sensation and how does it change in it’s introverted and extroverted forms?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Socionics description of Se (i prefer them to mbti):


> Extroverted sensing is an extroverted, irrational, and static information element. It is also called Se, F, volitional sensing, or black sensing. Se includes the ability to know how much power, force, or influence is latent or required. Types that value Se are much more comfortable with direct behavior aimed at making an immediate impact. This may at times be perceived as abrasive, particularly by types who do not value Se. There is usually a competitive edge to this style of group interaction, resulting in a more intense atmosphere than that of introverted sensing (Si)-valuing quadras. They appreciate contemplating possibilities only if they feel like they stand to gain something from it, or it has a perceived potential impact on "the real world". Unlike Si, which is about one's subjective sensory experience (how intense or enjoyable it is), Se is about achieving an object of desire. It gives one the ability to influence, bend, and push situations and people in order to achieve such an object, rather than to enjoy the situation one is in.


Si:


> Introverted sensing is an irrational, introverted, and dynamic information element. It is also referred to as Si, S, experiential sensing, or white sensing. Si is associated with the ability to internalize sensations and to experience them in full detail. Si focuses on tangible, direct (external) connections (introverted) between processes (dynamic) happening in one time, i.e. the physical, sensual experience of interactions between objects. This leads to an awareness of internal tangible physical states and how various physical fluctuations or substances are directly transferred between objects, such as motion, temperature, or dirtiness. The awareness of these tangible physical processes consequently leads to an awareness of health, or an optimum balance with one's environment. The individual physical reaction to concrete surroundings is main way we perceive and define aesthetics, comfort, convenience, and pleasure.
> 
> In contrast to extroverted sensing (Se), is related to following one's own needs instead of focusing on some externally-driven conception of what is necessary to acquire or achieve. So, whereas Se ego types feel capable to evaluate how justified others' preferences are, Si ego types will try to adjust to them in any way possible (given that it does not extremely affect their own comfort), wishing to minimize conflict. In contrast to introverted intuition (Ni), Si is about direct interaction and unity (or discord) with one's surroundings, rather than abstract process and causal links.
> 
> Types that value Si prefer to spend their time doing enjoyable activities rather than straining themselves to achieve goals. They like to believe that if activities are done with enjoyment, people will give them more effort and time, and also becoming more skilled at what they are doing in the long run. They believe that goals should suit people's intrinsic needs rather than shaped by the demands and constraints of the external world, and so do not try to force others into doing things they don't want to do. They also try to be easygoing and pleasant, preferring peaceful coexistence to conflict, except when their personal well-being or comfort is directly at stake.


How Si comes off in SEI(mbti ISFJ):


> SEIs are naturally attuned to the nature of the physical stimuli around them. They are often aptly aware of whether they are comfortable or relaxed in a given environment and they often take spontaneous action to make their living environment more comfortable. They often make effective hosts, as they may spontaneously exhibit great attention to ensure that friends and family around them are comfortable and that their physical needs are well satisfied. They often have a natural level of attentiveness to the signals of the human body, and may make instinctive responses to adapt their environment to their comfort.
> 
> SEIs are usually unconcerned with the external demands around them, and may feel as though the world around them is overly hectic or frenetic, and unable to stop and smell the roses. SEIs may disdain the hustle and bustle of the world around them, and instead display a relaxed and convivial demeanor. They may be inclined to dismiss the productive demands placed on them and instead focus their energy on maintaining a comfortable, familiar, recreational, and nonthreatening environment. At times when they have to present themselves or their work to others, however, they may be overly socially anxious and afraid of disappointing others, and they may tend to overwork themselves or give extra effort. In this way, they may be highly industrious and dutiful workers.
> 
> SEIs often exhibit a down-to-earth quality and often focus their attention on events, affects, or relationships relevant to their physical environment or personal experience; for this reason, their style of conversation may at times come across as somewhat mundane or unimportant. SEIs may focus much of their energy towards processes oriented with bettering sensory experiences, including visual art, fashion, food preparation, dance, or other physical aspects. Their affective responses to situations are often intertwined with their level of physical comfort.


----------



## OtterSocks (Sep 24, 2015)

@Eluide Sade Those seem pretty good to me. You understand that Si != memory. The couple things I would nitpick are "abstract sensation", which depending on how you're defining it is a very odd thing to say, and "collects data using Ne". IMO, it's not exclusively Pe functions that "collect data". Does that mean Pi does not perceive?

Anyway, it's also important to realize that the S is more important than the i/e when describing function-attitudes. What I mean is that they're both the same function, Sensing, but with different foci: objective reality or the subjective impression. You seem to have a good grasp on this, but remember, _four_ functions.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

I understand intuition being more about a connection/summation than pieces of information. 

Ni is a bit like the conceptualization of something in your mind based on.. something like sensorimotor integration of outer surroundings. (This is the subconscious feed from Se in Ni-doms.) Ni is aware of the final product of the integration, but not necessarily the parts that it is built on; it is connecting "pieces" of Se data in a holistic way. I think knowing how to ride a bike with basically 0 conscious effort of how to do it, is a good analogy for Ni. (Ni in isolation would be more like sitting on a mountain top imagining riding a bike :laughing

Ne doms are also about connections, but in objective reality. So Ne connects dots between external data points (feeding from Si), and it is expansive (extroverted), meaning it looks beyond the objects that are in front of it to make connections. So unlike Ni, it may use data beyond currently available objective reality. 

^I am not an Ne user but this is my understanding.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

@karmachameleon @OtterSocks @ninjahitsawall

Would you mind to clarify something to me? I would appreciate it 
It is something that happens to me. Most of the time I live inside of my head (as most introverts do). Very often, my mind creates ideas that come out of nowhere. It is very strange. Most of the time I imagine myself, but not like it is me, but separated from me, talking with some imaginary other person. I start to witness my self as it tells that other person the solution or idea of something that i had been thinking before. It is like a piece of a puzzle that myself, by talking to that imaginary other person, gives to me (I hope I'm not crazy XD). I start to collect these ideas, and they start to form a structure, which is my worldview. This worldview is what actually is the most important thing in my life, my meaning. The ideas forming this structure all point to a single, absolute worldview. If one of these ideas which I know is right doesn't fit, I become really frustrated, and then I start to rearrange the components of that structure. I start to see them in a new perspective, hoping to find a perfect solution. In fact, I've been obsessed with things that have to do with perfection for a long time, and I try to find the most perfect solution for almost everything. Is what I wrote related to a specific function?


----------



## OtterSocks (Sep 24, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> @karmachameleon @OtterSocks @ninjahitsawall
> 
> Would you mind to clarify something to me? I would appreciate it
> It is something that happens to me. Most of the time I live inside of my head (as most introverts do). Very often, my mind creates ideas that come out of nowhere. It is very strange. Most of the time I imagine myself, but not like it is me, but separated from me, talking with some imaginary other person. I start to witness my self as it tells that other person the solution or idea of something that i had been thinking before. It is like a piece of a puzzle that myself, by talking to that imaginary other person, gives to me (I hope I'm not crazy XD). I start to collect these ideas, and they start to form a structure, which is my worldview. This worldview is what actually is the most important thing in my life, my meaning. The ideas forming this structure all point to a single, absolute worldview. If one of these ideas which I know is right doesn't fit, I become really frustrated, and then I start to rearrange the components of that structure. I start to see them in a new perspective, hoping to find a perfect solution. In fact, I've been obsessed with things that have to do with perfection for a long time, and I try to find the most perfect solution for almost everything. Is what I wrote related to a specific function?


I actually won't try to relate this to functions, but I'll tell you what I experience, as an INTP...

I hold conversations with people in my head, but I am not dissociated. I feel like myself. The other person is _almost_ always defined; someone I know IRL. It's the same for me as it is for you, it brings solutions and puzzle pieces to consciousness. I think of it as a way of translating nebulous thoughts that are always circulating in my head into clear language. This happens literally almost every waking moment that I'm alone. The worldview structure is something I relate to strongly.

I hesitate to call this an SiTi / TiSi dynamic until we get some more perspectives. Anyone?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

OtterSocks said:


> I actually won't try to relate this to functions, but I'll tell you what I experience, as an INTP...
> 
> I hold conversations with people in my head, but I am not dissociated. I feel like myself. The other person is _almost_ always defined; someone I know IRL. It's the same for me as it is for you, it brings solutions and puzzle pieces to consciousness. I think of it as a way of translating nebulous thoughts that are always circulating in my head into clear language. This happens literally almost every waking moment that I'm alone. The worldview structure is something I relate to strongly.
> 
> I hesitate to call this an SiTi / TiSi dynamic until we get some more perspectives. Anyone?


Yes, I was thinking it might be Ti too, but I was not sure. I've read that Ni works in a similar way too, but it is more unconscious. I would like to add that when I am with other people, this kind of thing never happens and when I am alone, all of the time. The only difference from you is that I am apart from myself.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

OtterSocks said:


> I actually won't try to relate this to functions, but I'll tell you what I experience, as an INTP...
> 
> I hold conversations with people in my head, but I am not dissociated. I feel like myself. The other person is _almost_ always defined; someone I know IRL. It's the same for me as it is for you, it brings solutions and puzzle pieces to consciousness. I think of it as a way of translating nebulous thoughts that are always circulating in my head into clear language. This happens literally almost every waking moment that I'm alone. The worldview structure is something I relate to strongly.
> 
> I hesitate to call this an SiTi / TiSi dynamic until we get some more perspectives. Anyone?


I do the same thing and Im certain I use Ti/Se  I don't think it's a type thing


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> I do the same thing and Im certain I use Ti/Se  I don't think it's a type thing


Maybe it's an Ti thing?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> Maybe it's an Ti thing?


If youre talking about having imaginary conversations in your head with people than Ive never met someone who didn't do that


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> If youre talking about having imaginary conversations in your head with people than Ive never met someone who didn't do that


Lol, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about finding new ideas from your unconsciousness, which takes the form of yourself while you are a witnesser of what is being said. You are not directly aware of what you're thinking, you're just letting them flow, you can't control it.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> Lol, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about finding new ideas from your unconsciousness, which takes the form of yourself while you are a witnesser of what is being said. You are not directly aware of what you're thinking, you're just letting them flow, you can't control it.


Give me an example?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Give me an example?


I was expecting you would say that XD Anyway ,here's an example I remember.
Some days ago I was thinking to myself about time. Time has always been something really fascinating to me. Anyway, I was thinking:"What is time really? It is what gives meaning to our lives. It is motion. It is the past,present, and future. But aren't all of these the same thing? Just an infinite amount of nonexistence that makes up our lives?" Then, myself said something (which was not with my own free will, it came out of nowhere"Then God is time." I didn't get it at first, but then I started to analyse it, it made sense :"God is perfect, and to be perfect something must be everything, including nothingness. Time is the only thing both existent and nonexistent. It is the only thing found everywhere and nowhere at the same time. It has always existed and yet it is just a moment, just something that can not be felt. This is what makes time so special. Time is both an idea and a concrete thing. That's why it can be called God". By using this I linked some ideas I had with each other. This is also what made me write that quote with all of those "everythings" and "nothings" in my sig. Almost everything I write starts like this.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

Eluid Sade said:


> I start to collect these ideas, and they start to form a structure, which is my worldview. This worldview is what actually is the most important thing in my life, my meaning. The ideas forming this structure all point to a single, absolute worldview. If one of these ideas which I know is right doesn't fit, I become really frustrated, and then I start to rearrange the components of that structure. I start to see them in a new perspective, hoping to find a perfect solution. In fact, I've been obsessed with things that have to do with perfection for a long time, and I try to find the most perfect solution for almost everything. Is what I wrote related to a specific function?





Eluid Sade said:


> Yes, I was thinking it might be Ti too, but I was not sure. I've read that Ni works in a similar way too, but it is more unconscious. I would like to add that when I am with other people, this kind of thing never happens and when I am alone, all of the time. The only difference from you is that I am apart from myself.



I was thinking either Ti or Fi, but the example in your last post sounds more like Ti. The fact you see things converging onto a worldview, and become frustrated with inconsistency then try to rearrange things to be coherent with the worldview, sounds more like a judging function than a perceiving function. 

Ni is similar but does not have that need for structure, because Fe/Te seeks that externally instead.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

@Eluid Sade —

It sounds to me like you're most likely an MBTI N who's managed to mistype himself based on bad cognitive function analysis, and who doesn't understand that Isabel Myers put Jung's original concepts to the test, and made lots of needed corrections and improvements, large and small, on her way to creating the MBTI.

The way you've described Si is very Jungian, buuut when it comes to Si (especially), that really doesn't make any sense (no pun intended).

As discussed at length in this post, most modern Si descriptions — including the ones you'll find in more _function-centric_ MBTI theorists like Thomson, Berens, Nardi and Quenk — bear little resemblance to Jung's Si descriptions, and are more like the _opposite_ of Jung's descriptions in many respects. Virtually _nobody respectable_ really subscribes to Jung's original conception of Si anymore, and I think it's fair to say that Jung's Si-dom description does a poor job of capturing the personality of any reasonably large group of non-disordered people who have ever walked the Earth, today or in 1921 or at any time. And in any case, it certainly does a lousy job of describing most of the people (extraverts and introverts both) whose preferences pretty clearly put them on the S and J sides of those two MBTI dimensions.

Jung broke with Freud in large part because he thought Freud wanted him (and others) to treat Freud's theories as a kind of religion, rather than having an appropriately sceptical and open-minded scientific attitude toward them. If Jung was still around and became aware that, 95 years after Psychological Types was published, somebody was inclined to ignore all the improvements that had been made to his original ideas by Myers and others and was telling people they should be typing themselves based on his original Si description (for example), I really don't think he'd approve.

You should really give that long linked post a slow read before you spend any more time racking your brain about how sensation can be abstract and concrete at the same time, and other such holy mysteries.

And just in case you want to see whether you come out S or N on the official MBTI, you can find a link to that here.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

reckful said:


> @Eluid Sade —
> 
> It sound to me like you're most likely an MBTI N who's managed to mistype himself based on bad cognitive function analysis, and who doesn't understand that Isabel Myers put Jung's original concepts to the test, and made lots of needed corrections and improvements, large and small, on her way to creating the MBTI.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much  I read what you had written and I don't relate to the Si description at all. Here are the results of the test.
Clear Introversion: 19/21
Clear Intuition: 24/26
Slight Feeling: 13/24
Slight Judging: 13/22
That would make me an INFJ I guess.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> Thank you so much  I read what you had written and I don't relate to the Si description at all. Here are the results of the test.
> Clear Introversion: 19/21
> Clear Intuition: 24/26
> Slight Feeling: 13/24
> ...


Well, I wouldn't take those two borderline scores as very significant F and J indicators, and you've mentioned in the past that you tend to come out near the middle on T/F and J/P.

On the other hand, I think it's not uncommon for INFs to test as INTs, at least partly because many of the F choices on typical MBTI tests (including the official test) are choices that are more likely to appeal to SFs and EFs than INFs, so when a pretty clear IN (like you) gets a mild F score, I'm inclined to take that as a more likely F indicator than I would if I didn't think the test had that T-skew for INs.

If you're interested — and _only_ if you're interested — you can find quite a bit of T/F input from me in this post, and a l-o-n-g explanation for why I think "T/F's a mess" in this post.

And if you're interested — but again, _only_ if you're interested — in quite a lot of input from me on J/P, see the spoiler in this post.

And if you've let anybody bamboozle you into thinking that INFJs and INFPs (or INTJs and INTPs) are waaay different (_because functions_!) or that you can't possibly be an INFx or INTx (_because functions_!), you may want to look at this post.

As you may know, there's a well-established fifth temperament dimension that isn't included in the Myers-Briggs typology and is often referred to as "neuroticism" (although it isn't a psychological disorder). The Big Five/SLOAN typology labels it Emotional Stability and refers to the two poles as Calm and Limbic. Being Limbic on that dimension tends to be associated with, among other things, anxiety/worry-proneness; emotional sensitivity/volatility; proneness to annoyance/irritation; self-consciousness; and (sometimes) depression. I'm Limbic, and it makes me less of a cucumber than some of my fellow INTJs — and I get the impression you may be Limbic as well.

For more on that issue (including links to a couple tests), see this post.

In the next spoiler is a bit of commentary on the dichotomies-vs.-functions issue.


* *




As more of a meta-issue, I suspect you've probably been exposed to a boatload of forum posts (not to mention other illustrious internet sources) who've told you that Jungian/MBTI type is basically _all about the functions_, and that the dichotomies mostly just deal with superficial stuff, and that you should think of them primarily as "letter codes" that need to be _decoded_ to lead you to the deeper stuff.

But I'm here to tell you that those posters have been taken for a ride. Not even Jung himself prioritized the so-called "cognitive functions" in the way that a lot of forumites do. In fact, Jung spent more of Psychological Types talking about the things he thought extraverts had in common and introverts had in common than he spent talking about all eight of the functions put together; and in the Foreword to a 1934 edition of the book, he bemoaned the fact that too many people were inclined to view Chapter 10 (his function descriptions) as the essence of the book, while noting that he'd stuck those at the back of the book for a reason.

And in any event, and regardless of what Jung's perspective was, it's been close to 100 years since Psychological Types was published, and a lot of studies have been done since then — and as I already mentioned, the modern MBTI reflects countless adjustments and improvements to Jung's original concepts.

As further discussed in this post and the posts it links to, the current _reality-based_ take on the situation is that the so-called "cognitive functions" have turned out to be what James Reynierse has called a "category mistake."



And finally, just in case you find them useful, I've put profile roundups for the four IN types in the last spoiler.


* *




_INTJ Profiles_
MBTI Manual (2nd Ed.)
MBTI Manual (3rd Ed.)
Keirsey (Please Understand Me)
Kroeger & Thuesen (Type Talk)
Hirsh & Kummerow (Lifetypes [abridged])
Berens & Nardi
personalitypage: Portrait
personalitypage: Personal Growth
personalitypage: Relationships
personalitypage: Careers

_INTP Profiles_
MBTI Manual (2nd Ed.)
MBTI Manual (3rd Ed.)
Keirsey (Please Understand Me)
Kroeger & Thuesen (Type Talk)
Hirsh & Kummerow (Lifetypes [abridged])
Berens & Nardi
personalitypage: Portrait
personalitypage: Personal Growth
personalitypage: Relationships
personalitypage: Careers

_INFJ Profiles_
MBTI Manual (2nd Ed.)
MBTI Manual (3rd Ed.)
Keirsey (Please Understand Me)
Kroeger & Thuesen (Type Talk)
Hirsh & Kummerow (Lifetypes [abridged])
Berens & Nardi
personalitypage: Portrait
personalitypage: Personal Growth
personalitypage: Relationships
personalitypage: Careers

_INFP Profiles_
MBTI Manual (2nd Ed.)
MBTI Manual (3rd Ed.)
Keirsey (Please Understand Me)
Kroeger & Thuesen (Type Talk)
Hirsh & Kummerow (Lifetypes [abridged])
Berens & Nardi
personalitypage: Portrait
personalitypage: Personal Growth
personalitypage: Relationships
personalitypage: Careers


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

@Eluid Sade do you want to find out your cognitive type or mbti dichotomy type like that guy^is trying to do?
How do you relate to extroverted sensing?
Do you avoid conflict?


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

karmachameleon said:


> @Eluid Sade do you want to find out your cognitive type or mbti dichotomy type like that guy^is trying to do?
> How do you relate to extroverted sensing?
> Do you avoid conflict?


 @Eluid Sade —

As explained in those _dichotomies-vs.-functions_ posts I've already linked you to, whenever you encounter an internet forumite who tells you that you've got a "cognitive type" (based on, e.g., INFJ=Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) that's different from your "dichotomy type," you should be aware that, to the extent that the more function-centric models _depart_ from what I call the Real MBTI Model (the one with 50 years of psychometric support behind it), those models have no more _validity_ — as they say in the respectable districts of the personality psychology field — than the zodiac.


----------



## KalimofDaybreak (Aug 6, 2015)

OtterSocks said:


> I actually won't try to relate this to functions, but I'll tell you what I experience, as an INTP...
> 
> I hold conversations with people in my head, but I am not dissociated. I feel like myself. The other person is _almost_ always defined; someone I know IRL. It's the same for me as it is for you, it brings solutions and puzzle pieces to consciousness. I think of it as a way of translating nebulous thoughts that are always circulating in my head into clear language. This happens literally almost every waking moment that I'm alone. The worldview structure is something I relate to strongly.
> 
> I hesitate to call this an SiTi / TiSi dynamic until we get some more perspectives. Anyone?


I think it's just an introvert thing, although I can see it as Ti (definitely some Fe in there). I know I do this a lot, and another INFJ I know does it a lot as well. I see it as a strong introversion trying to relate to the external reality without compromising its introvertedness.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

@KalimofDaybreak @mistakenforstranger @karmachameleon I asked my sister on what she thinks about me and here's what she said:
You are very disconnected from the world.
You open to only a few people, and you don't tell your secrets even to them.
You trust no one but yourself.
You are perfectionist, wanting things to be like you want to.
You don't like making lots of friends, and you don't like to go out but stay with yourself.
You love studying people, learning why they do the things they do.
You like intelligent people, since they are the only ones you can speak to freely.
You are not interested in material things.
You love science.
You use irony a lot.
You are mysterious, no one knows your inner self.
You are very kind with people.
You are always right (lol, when I make a mistake people celebrate, literally )
You are a good adviser.
You get to know people really fast, in just like 2 minutes conversation with them.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> @_KalimofDaybreak_ @_mistakenforstranger_ @_karmachameleon_ I asked my sister on what she thinks about me and here's what she said:
> You are very disconnected from the world.
> You open to only a few people, and you don't tell your secrets even to them.
> You trust no one but yourself.
> ...


She forgot one: You are an INFJ. 

(Well, at least to me I think so, especially after reading your last post)


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> She forgot one: You are an INFJ.
> 
> (Well, at least to me I think so, especially after reading your last post)


Lol, she's doesn't like MBTI. She has no time for these kind of things. She's too obsessed with buying clothes or taking photos  She's an xSFP, probably an ESFP. Thanks to her I understood I don't use Fi. Btw, are what she mentioned about me traits of an INFJ?


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> Lol, she's doesn't like MBTI. She has no time for these kind of things. She's too obsessed with buying clothes or taking photos  She's an xSFP, probably an ESFP. Thanks to her I understood I don't use Fi. Btw, are what she mentioned about me traits of an INFJ?


Yes, I wouldn't say they're limited to an INFJ, but one would most likely associate those with INFJ (and from everything else you've said so far). Did you see my post about how Ni is the perspective that there is more than meets the eye, wanting to know the WHY? I found it funny that you described it that way almost right after I posted it, like we were on the same wavelength, or something. It seems you have a similar understanding about it.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Yes, I wouldn't say they're limited to an INFJ, but one would most likely associate those with INFJ (and from everything else you've said so far). Did you see my post about how Ni is the perspective that there is more than meets the eye, wanting to know the WHY? I found it funny that you described it that way almost right after I posted it, like we were on the same wavelength, or something. It seems you have a similar understanding about it.


I just posted it one minute later. Really strange. How huge is the power of probability :laughing:


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> No, this is an Se-dom perspective:
> 
> "If two groups that are in no way related to an INFJ are having a conflict, *he sees it purely as it is.* Say one group is spreading lies about the other in an attempt to hurt their reputation or foment a conflict. *An INFJ would see precisely that, nothing more.*"
> 
> Ni, most simply says, there's more than meets the eye. Ni wants to know the WHY, the essence of things. A truth that isn't observable on the surface. Why are they having a dispute? What's really going on here? I would say Ni almost never "sees it purely as it is," which is why they need to develop their extraverted functions in order to get a better grasp on the reality of the situation. Information is filtered through their subjective perception almost always. And when stuck in an Ni-Ti loop their individual perspective is practically inescapable.


-_- He means in the context of taking sides etc.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> The sensory world has always been one of the most difficult things to deal with. I am much more better in my mind. To be honest, I can only see the material world through the lens of science, nothing more. But surprisingly, my inner self doesn't seem very disconnected from reality. In fact, even though I fail to understand it, it still has a big impact in my self. It is where I get my meaning from. After all, without reality everyone would be like a tree in the middle of a desert. But the opposite happens with my ideas. I don't need the real world to have them. It's not like someone taught me what is life, death, existence. My mind did it. Another thing is that I don't care about material things. I see people wanting money, cars, phones and I fail to understand them. Why do they need such things? Just to make themselves feel better? That's all they care about, themselves, and that's what makes me angry, all of these people wanting attention, wanting to be unique, and willing to do anything for it. They only care about the material world. I've always thought to myself:"Why do they think what they are doing is the most important thing? Don't they know that there is more in this world than meets the eye?" It really made me sick. It was because of this, this obsession of people for the material things that made me lose my faith on most people, and not trust them. (But this was a long time ago, I am much more tolerant now. I have developed A LOT the ability to see the world through other people's eyes, changing my perspective). If I want something material (like money for example) is because of other people. Honestly, the only thing that makes me to want to earn money is my family. They have done so much for me, I can't disappoint them. It is one of my responsibilities to make my family proud and happy.
> Another thing is that I am really bad with details. For example, If I see someone for the first time, It is 100% sure that I will forget his/her face. Also, working on details stresses me, but if I have to do it I will. My memories are also very vague.
> Another thing is that I remove my attention from the real world very frequently. I start thinking in the middle of a conversation.
> That's all I guess. And thank you for your help


You are what's technically known as a _screaming N_. :tongue:

Just in case you want to read an "Introduction to S and N" I put together a while back (with quotes from Myers and Keirsey), see the first sub-spoiler in the main spoiler (if that's not too confusing) in this post.

David Keirsey, as you may know, is probably most famous for his view that splitting Myers' 16 types into NFs, NTs, SJs and SPs creates four groups that each has characteristics in common (and differs from the other three groups) to an extent that significantly exceeds the other possible two-letter groupings. And I think he has a lot of interesting (although not always correct) things to say about each of those groups, but I also think he stresses that particular foursome too much, at the expense of the things that INs and NJs and STs and etc. have in common. And in any case, Keirsey never said there weren't interesting things that could be said about the other combinations — and for what it's worth, Myers' favored foursome was NT, NF, ST and SF.

As for me, although I agree that I have some significant things in common with my fellow NTs, I've increasingly come around to the view that, if I had to pick a group of four MBTI types to really be my "kindred spirits" group, it would be the INs rather than the NTs, and if you want to read a bit of "reckful on INs" — to maybe help you decide if we're your peeps — you can find it in the spoiler at the end of this post.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

karmachameleon said:


> -_- He means in the context of taking sides etc.


In the context of taking sides, an INFJ would evaluate where their loyalty stands (Fe), based on their perceived truth (Ni) of the situation.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> In the context of taking sides, an INFJ would evaluate where their loyalty stands (Fe), based on their perceived truth (Ni) of the situation.


Yeah except they wouldn't take sides if they weren't involved in the situation in any way.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

reckful said:


> You are what's technically known as a _screaming N_. :tongue:
> 
> Just in case you want to read an "Introduction to S and N" I put together a while back (with quotes from Myers and Keirsey), see the first sub-spoiler in the main spoiler (if that's not too confusing) in this post.
> 
> ...


I could relate to _everything_ you wrote there.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

This is an ISFJ  hes so cute
Do you relate to the way he speaks or his train of thought or anything like that?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> This is an ISFJ  hes so cute
> Do you relate to the way he speaks or his train of thought or anything like that?


I don't think that he is cute, I am a male XD
As for the way he speaks, he looks really passionate. I am too, about the topics that I like, but not at that degree. Also, about the way he speaks about society, it's just like me. I want the best for society, I want to change it. But what makes me think of this is something different. He thinks that because of his personal experiences while I try to see the world by "using" other people's eyes (that's what made me understand what's football and many many more). He only understands what's the best for the world because he experienced it, while I just try to perceive what's the best for the world. 
But overall, I think we speak the same.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

@Eluid Sade Why can't you think he's cute just because youre a male?  I think he's cute because hes just so happy about everything and he's always smiling in his videos, and he's really caring about others.

Well, youre more likely to become really passionate about something when you've experienced yourself or have someone close to you experience it. This is just him talking about one specific subject, and I think you're wrong when you say "he only understands whats best for the world because he experienced it".

From my experience ISFJs has this gentle happy vibe about them. And I think writing novels, poems, lyrics in some cases, are an Si/Ne thing mostly. Many writers are Si/Ne. But then theres my dad whos an ISFJ and he sucks at writing probably. 
Btw your quote is misspelled, "tittle". lol
But yeah I get an ISFJ vibe from you. ^^


----------



## KalimofDaybreak (Aug 6, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> @KalimofDaybreak @mistakenforstranger @karmachameleon I asked my sister on what she thinks about me and here's what she said:
> You are very disconnected from the world.
> You open to only a few people, and you don't tell your secrets even to them.
> You trust no one but yourself.
> ...


Yeah, seriously, you seem like a pretty clear INFJ. I mean, just based on how similar we are and how much you've related to my descriptions of Ni, that was enough to convince me, but the rest of this just reinforced that. Like @reckful said, you're a screaming N.


----------



## KalimofDaybreak (Aug 6, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> The sensory world has always been one of the most difficult things to deal with. I am much more better in my mind. To be honest, I can only see the material world through the lens of science, nothing more. But surprisingly, my inner self doesn't seem very disconnected from reality. In fact, even though I fail to understand it, it still has a big impact in my self. It is where I get my meaning from. After all, without reality everyone would be like a tree in the middle of a desert. But the opposite happens with my ideas. I don't need the real world to have them. It's not like someone taught me what is life, death, existence. My mind did it. Another thing is that I don't care about material things. I see people wanting money, cars, phones and I fail to understand them. Why do they need such things? Just to make themselves feel better? That's all they care about, themselves, and that's what makes me angry, all of these people wanting attention, wanting to be unique, and willing to do anything for it. They only care about the material world. I've always thought to myself:"Why do they think what they are doing is the most important thing? Don't they know that there is more in this world than meets the eye?" It really made me sick. It was because of this, this obsession of people for the material things that made me lose my faith on most people, and not trust them. (But this was a long time ago, I am much more tolerant now. I have developed A LOT the ability to see the world through other people's eyes, changing my perspective). If I want something material (like money for example) is because of other people. Honestly, the only thing that makes me to want to earn money is my family. They have done so much for me, I can't disappoint them. It is one of my responsibilities to make my family proud and happy.
> Another thing is that I am really bad with details. For example, If I see someone for the first time, It is 100% sure that I will forget his/her face. Also, working on details stresses me, but if I have to do it I will. My memories are also very vague.
> Another thing is that I remove my attention from the real world very frequently. I start thinking in the middle of a conversation.
> That's all I guess. And thank you for your help


Screaming N. I'm actually curious now: what made you think ISFJ?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

KalimofDaybreak said:


> Screaming N. I'm actually curious now: what made you think ISFJ?


I don't know. Some people saw Si in me and I thought I was one.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> Lol, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about finding new ideas from your unconsciousness, which takes the form of yourself while you are a witnesser of what is being said. You are not directly aware of what you're thinking, you're just letting them flow, you can't control it.



So you're talking about intuition?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

tanstaafl28 said:


> So you're talking about intuition?


I don't know. I just said it happens to me.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

@Eluid Sade —

Just in case you're still paying attention to any internet forumites who shall remain nameless who think you're probably an S, or if you're otherwise interested in some additional reading on S/N, this post has brief bullet-point summaries (from official MBTI reports) of the five "facets" of S/N in the "Step II" version of the MBTI.

And at the end of that post, you'll find a link to a stickied @Abraxas post that has fuller descriptions of those facets (from the MBTI Manual).


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> I don't know. I just said it happens to me.


That's intuition as far as I can tell.


----------

