# Is this Se or Ne



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

Knowing what makes others tick.


----------



## jeffbobs (Jan 27, 2012)

Dont think it is any....introverts who use Si or Ni also know how to make people tick, because there are so many different ways to do so


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

It could be either in my opinion. I think intuition is more likely to pick up on subtle, hidden meanings. Sensors can pick up on what makes someone tick, too, especially if the person they're observing makes those things obvious. Intuitives are likely to pick up on those types of patterns rather quickly. Sensors can pick up on them as well... it just might take a little longer for them to figure those things out. I'm guessing that the speed at which a sensor figures those things out really depends on how well the sensor's intuition has developed (Se+Ni or Si+Ne). If this makes no sense, forgive me. I'm running on very little sleep, and I'm kinda just talking out of my ass right now.


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

Yeah that's true I guess. But I'd think Se/Ne would know "faster" and be more accurate about it. I'm asking because I'm not sure whether I'm Se or Ne. I normally hang out with my best friend (ISTJ), an ISFJ girl, and my ESFJ girlfriend. I'm the only perceiver there.


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

Independent Fire said:


> It could be either in my opinion. I think intuition is more likely to pick up on subtle, hidden meanings. Sensors can pick up on what makes someone tick, too, especially if the person they're observing makes those things obvious. Intuitives are likely to pick up on those types of patterns rather quickly. Sensors can pick up on them as well... it just might take a little longer for them to figure those things out. It really depends on how well the sensor's intuition has developed. If this makes no sense, forgive me. I'm running on very little sleep, and I'm kinda just talking out of my ass right now.


I think your ass is pretty knowledgeable. I'm beginning to think I'm an Ne user, but I still pick up visual cues as well...


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

Coke said:


> I think your ass is pretty knowledgeable. I'm beginning to think I'm an Ne user, but I still pick up visual cues as well...


I'll send you an article I wrote differentiating the two... it might be a couple of days though before I get to the computer on which that article is stored.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Well anytime you are perceiving something that isn't obvious or right in front of you that's generally intuition. That being said Se-doms can actually be quite insightful about people, but much of this is based on their great perceptions of things like body language, tone of voice, etc., mixed in with some intuition, but Intuition in Se-doms is a mixed bag. They might often misinterpret motivations of people or read too much into the details of an event rather than it's subtext.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Ne-Fe might correlate, although generally, this isn't type-related - there are too many variables (e.g. how well you know the person, etc.)


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

Could be either, might even be neither (F types, whether also extraverted perceiving or not, are often reportedly in tune with that kind of stuff as well). Could you describe your process (or lack of) more?


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> Well anytime you are perceiving something that isn't obvious or right in front of you that's generally intuition. That being said Se-doms can actually be quite insightful about people, but much of this is based on their great perceptions of things like body language, tone of voice, etc., mixed in with some intuition, but Intuition in Se-doms is a mixed bag. They might often misinterpret motivations of people or read too much into the details of an event rather than it's subtext.


I can relate to this since i consider myself to be pretty damn good linguist in body language. But would you agree that Ne can notice those kinds of stuff, as wel?


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

ElectricSparkle said:


> Could be either, might even be neither (F types, whether also extraverted perceiving or not, are often reportedly in tune with that kind of stuff as well). Could you describe your process (or lack of) more?


What do you mean?


----------



## electricky (Feb 18, 2011)

Coke said:


> What do you mean?


How do you know what makes others tick? If it's unexplainable, could you hypothesize on it?


----------



## Agent Blackout (Mar 1, 2012)

Coke said:


> Knowing what makes others tick.


This alone is not enough information... lol


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

We have to avoid saying that only Se types or only Ne types can pick up on this stuff. That would be silly. Intuition is basically having a instinct or a gut-feeling about something without having any physical data to back up that notion. So certainly you could read a person's motivations this way, it would just depend on how strong your intuitions were if your conclusions were right. Sensation looks at things as they are, but if you observed enough stuff, you notice patterns and come to similar conclusions. In reality, like others have said its probably a combination of a lot of functions (because we can't leave out Thinking and Feeling here either).


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

ElectricSparkle said:


> How do you know what makes others tick? If it's unexplainable, could you hypothesize on it?


Body language, tone of voice, their emotions, their reactions to what I say -- I judge these based on the current surrounding/atmosphere. And also what they say, and how they say it, and their expressions.


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

LiquidLight said:


> We have to avoid saying that only Se types or only Ne types can pick up on this stuff. That would be silly. Intuition is basically having a instinct or a gut-feeling about something without having any physical data to back up that notion. So certainly you could read a person's motivations this way, it would just depend on how strong your intuitions were if your conclusions were right. Sensation looks at things as they are, but if you observed enough stuff, you notice patterns and come to similar conclusions. In reality, like others have said its probably a combination of a lot of functions (because we can't leave out Thinking and Feeling here either).


Yeah you're right. But since I know for sure I'm not Ni/Si, I had to limit the options to only Ne/Se


----------



## Agent Blackout (Mar 1, 2012)

Coke said:


> Body language, tone of voice, their emotions, their reactions to what I say -- I judge these based on the current surrounding/atmosphere. And also what they say, and how they say it, and their expressions.


They can look very similar, so here's an example of a specific type of situation...

When you're trying to persuade someone for some specific goal:

Se - Better at keeping track of _willingness _of person you're persuading. Looks at _next step_; doesn't necessarily aggregate everything that was said during the conversation, it just wants to _get it done... and now! 
_*At-a-glance: Tactical

*Ne - Better at figuring out their _intentions/directions_ and steering those into the direction you wanna go (sort of like laying out a path that the person's train of thought is just going to have to happen to follow -- but not really lol). Looks at how each step taken so far should _flow _into the next step (which is aimed at _creating opportunities_ to move toward final goal).
*At-a-glance: Strategic*


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

Agent Blackout said:


> They can look very similar, so here's an exmaple of a specific type of situation...
> 
> When you're trying to persuade someone for some specific goal:
> 
> ...


Very enlightening post, think I'm an Ne user now. Everything you said about the Ne is true.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Well you can't really compare to Ne to Se because they are doing two different things. Its like comparing hand to foot. Intuition is specifically not looking at the world as it is where Sensation only pays attention to the actual world via the five senses. That's why we call Intuition the sixth sense, its a way of perception that isn't tangible. So you can't really compare Intuition to Sensation in this way because they're doing two different things. It not really one or the other like Ne over Se. But rather Se over Si or Ne over Ni. Just like you can't compare the purpose of your hand to that of your foot. They do two different things.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Could be Fe-Ni-Se as well. I usually know how to make someone "tick" in a variety of ways --- can be quite adapt at getting the responses I want. The way I do it is ... I just know what it would take to act like a chameleon in social situations - and when one is acting like a chameleon ... one is basically being able to do so based on taking in what's happening around and adjusting behaviour in order to please everyone else. 

A great example of this is job interviews ... Using a combination of Fe-Ni-Se, an ENFJ can anticipate a great deal of questions that will come or which question leads to the next .. and then it's a simple matter of anticipating what questions are going to be asked, and then interpreting based on what the ENFJ can quickly gather about the person in front of him and designing his responses in such a way that he knows would endear him most to the person sitting in front of him. I do it all the time.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I can attest to actually making up information of more interesting potentials if I'm uninterested enough in the details of something. This would definitely be a sign of downplaying sensation in favor of intuition. Even my INTP twin finds it annoying when I do this, lol.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

That is a very obscure question. There are many way to see how people "tick". I'm sure many of the functions would help you see different parts of someone. Are you referring to something specific? 

Se lets me see physical cues, of which I can gleam some information.



Coke said:


> I can relate to this since i consider myself to be pretty damn good linguist in body language. But would you agree that Ne can notice those kinds of stuff, as wel?


I don't believe that Ne users are very observant of physical cues at all. My 2 good friends can become quite oblivious of things going on around them if they start on some topic of discussion.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yep, I think a lot of Ne dominants tend to overestimate how observant they are. I agree with @_TreeBob_ - all of the ones I know are like this too, where everything they tend to talk about and tends to inspire their conversation has absolutely nothing to do with what's actually present in any discernable ways.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Yep, I think a lot of Ne dominants tend to overestimate how observant they are. I agree with @_TreeBob_ - all of the ones I know are like this too, where everything they tend to talk about and tends to inspire their conversation has absolutely nothing to do with what's actually present in any discernable ways.


Yeah, seeing possibilities has nothing to do with seeing what is happening right in front of you.


----------



## Agent Blackout (Mar 1, 2012)

TreeBob said:


> That is a very obscure question. There are many way to see how people "tick". I'm sure many of the functions would help you see different parts of someone. Are you referring to something specific?
> 
> Se lets me see physical cues, of which I can gleam some information.
> 
> ...



Ne user here... I'm very aware of physical cues, but it's more sub-conscious though (if that makes sense), meaning I won't always observe directly and perhaps even out the corner of my eye but the information still gets processed and I get gut-feelings about it.

My ESTP brother seems to notice the smaller details of what's physically going on with someone, and I'll notice their _overall_ physical behavior and the meaning behind it (and it gets compared to every other time I've observed that person).

Edit: Oh, and I forgot. The obliviousness during discussion sounds about right, LOL. I become clueless sometimes, but I still feel like I'm on auto-pilot.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

TreeBob said:


> Yeah, seeing possibilities has nothing to do with seeing what is happening right in front of you.


Exactly. In fact they sort of contradict each other. Either you are seeing what is in front of you or you're paying attention to possibilities.


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

Yeah. Now i'm lost.. thanks anyway for the replies, but i can relate to both Se and Ne. Can an estp have a good Ni?


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Coke said:


> Yeah. Now i'm lost.. thanks anyway for the replies, but i can relate to both Se and Ne. Can an estp have a good Ni?


Depends on how you define 'good.' I mean certainly the intuitions of a Se-dom might be decent (meaning they end up being more accurate than not accurate), but again because Sensation types prefer to see things from the world as it is, the Se-type would probably be hesitant to follow their intuitions or might feel that their gut feelings will lead them astray. Intuitives in contrast would probably go the other way not trusting what their eyes tell them.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> What do you think?


There are a million reasons it could be an intent to harm, but it just as easily might not be. We can't know. "Intent" refers to what's going on in his head and obviously you can't see that from watching him. If this were a legal matter, I think you would have to have physical evidence to show intent. And you can't get that evidence from watching the incident itself. Perhaps if he had a previous beef with the player he fouled. But this incident fits the pattern of World Peace (lol) being a "loose cannon". He seems to have poor judgement or no judgement at all sometimes, which makes it hard to hold him _morally_ responsible, but you could still make a case for never letting him play another game because even if he isn't fully in control of his actions, he could be considered a threat to other players. So I don't know what I think.

I wrote this post without watching the video or having heard of the incident outside of your post, so yeah. I'm gonna watch it now. lol.

Ok, having seen it, I think it was intentional. I figure if it weren't he would have had negative reaction upon knocking the other guy over. It doesn't seem premeditated or anything but nevertheless intentional.

/overly long and incoherent post made longer by this footnote


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Yea I wasn't trying to argue whether or not he's guilty or not, plenty of people including Magic Johnson say it was probably intentional (though it was interesting they all pointed to physical reasons why), just that people will tend to favor either the raw sensory data or their gut-feelings to help come to a conclusion and sometimes this can lead to very different conclusions even though people are looking at the same thing.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> Yea I wasn't trying to argue whether or not he's guilty or not, plenty of people including Magic Johnson say it was probably intentional (though it was interesting they all pointed to physical reasons why), just that people will tend to favor either the raw sensory data or their gut-feelings to help come to a conclusion and sometimes this can lead to very different conclusions even though people are looking at the same thing.


Yeah I know it's not about the conclusion but how you form that conclusion.

Edit: I can't tell if my rationale is more Se-Ni or Ne-Si. Because I think I'm looking at empirical evidence to form my conclusion.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

Coke said:


> Yeah. Now i'm lost.. thanks anyway for the replies, but i can relate to both Se and Ne. Can an estp have a good Ni?



No. In fact I theorize most ESTP aren't even aware they have intuition. We make our decisions very quickly, which leads to us constantly jumping into crazy situations or making stupid comments. It isn't until later in life that we actually think before we speak. That little guy (Ni) is in our head talking to us but it takes awhile to start listening to him. 

You really can't relate to both Ne and Se, they are nothing alike. Maybe you are romanticizing Ne?


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

TreeBob said:


> That little guy (Ni) is in our head talking to us but it takes awhile to start listening to him.


Maybe if it would speak up we could hear it better!



LiquidLight said:


> The Se-type would probably be hesitant to follow their intuitions or might feel that their gut feelings will lead them astray. Intuitives in contrast would probably go the other way not trusting what their eyes tell them.


Would under a temporary moment of extreme stress or fatigue make a Sensing type react more like the iNtuitive experience you described? I believe I've seen it referred to as an Se failure or is that more likely just something an Ne type might experience?


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Neon Knight said:


> Maybe if it would speak up we could hear it better!
> 
> 
> Would under a temporary moment of extreme stress or fatigue make a Sensing type react more like the iNtuitive experience you described? I believe I've seen it referred to as an Se failure or is that more likely just something an Ne type might experience?


Absolutely. Under stress the more ego-centric functions (Se for a Se-dom) begin to break down and they can get in the grip of (largely negative) intuitions. Negative forebodings, hyperbolizing, conspiracy theorizing, assuming the worst, etc. In my profession there are many, many Se-doms and in my experience they tend to all react the same way when stressed (making crazy assumptions, always assuming the worst possible outcome, etc). Sometimes it just comes out in an off-handed remark that makes you go "...where did that come from? Why would you think that?" I had one boss that swore we were doing work for another company. Every type has their weakness. Sensation types (Se and Si) have theirs around Intuitions. Intuitives are weak with Sensation, etc.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@ketchup

When in doubt, I pretty much declare those who question their types a ton Ne dominants. Okay, I'm half kidding, but that's a major trend I tend to see with them, where they'll get extremely caught up in possibilities that aren't even there about typology and see a million different things one statement could mean and sort of overlook the obvious. You don't strike me as a sensor (takes information at face-value) type of person at all.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> When in doubt, I pretty much declare those who question their types a ton Ne dominants. Okay, I'm half kidding, but that's a major trend I tend to see with them, where they'll get extremely caught up in possibilities that aren't even there about typology and see a million different things one statement could mean and sort of overlook the obvious. You don't strike me as a sensor (takes information at face-value) type of person at all.


Sensors take information at face-value? I was under the impression that Judging functions would prevent that. I've met sceptical Ss who take almost nothing at face-value. Just because a study reports X doesn't mean they'll take it at face-value. They have to go over the study with a magnifying glass first and question the shit out of it! lol. That doesn't seem like taking it at face-value to me. But I see your point -- thanks.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@ketchup

Sensors PREFER to take the world at face value, yes, although if they are disturbed by negative intuitions, they might go against this. The judging functions will of course be behind questioning things further, no duh, but it's going to be to support the dominant function and prevent them from having to deal with gut intuitions. Btw, you have a comically bad understanding of Se (Se doesn't mean robotically accepting facts in stone - they see connections between facts and reality easily - this isn't anything like Ne, btw), so I'm now definitely thinking that it's your 8th function, lol!


----------



## Portal (Jan 3, 2012)

This is on a tangent but what can I say my Ni is kicking in a bit. Anyway here goes the scenario. 

Let say a couple is divorced and they are still friends for whatever reason. One day they are out having a meal together and one of the spouse (let's call this spouse, S2) brought a friend along. This friend could be the new S.O or could just be a normal friend, doesn't matter. The ex-spouse (let's call this spouse, S1) also brought someone along, let say it's their best friend/cousin. Everyone got along extremely well throughout the dinner. At the end of the night when they were driving home, S1 turned to their cousin/best friend and recount the night's events. S1 would mention things like "oh did you hear what the friend said? I think it means this" or "did you see what S2 did?" or "did you see what the friend did? I think it means this and this". 

Given this situation do you think S1 is using Ne or Se? Or perhaps a combination of the two? Also I didn't specify the sex because it doesn't matter could be any.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Sensors PREFER to take the world at face value, yes, although if they are disturbed by negative intuitions, they might go against this. The judging functions will of course be behind questioning things further, no duh, but it's going to be to support the dominant function and prevent them from having to deal with gut intuitions. Btw, you have a comically bad understanding of Se (Se doesn't mean robotically accepting facts in stone - they see connections between facts and reality easily - this isn't anything like Ne, btw), so I'm now definitely thinking that it's your 8th function, lol!


Ok, I see. My understanding of Se was mostly centred around a feedback loop with the environment, where the person is reacting to stimuli immediately without conscious judgement. There was an ISFP (I don't remember who, sorry!) who posted about avoiding a car accident by quickly maneuvering out of the way, and I think she was using it as an example of Se. I have to go read up on Se more if my understanding is that bad, haha, because I want to understand type for itself even if I'm not an Se type. The Ni-Se axis seems pretty foreign to me. I'm also considering ESFJ for my type because Fe > Ne > Si seems probable. Thanks again.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@ketchup

Well no, that is all Se ALONE, but you're previous example was a silly one about Se types having to look at everything through a magnifying glass, as if they have no sense of relevance to their own ego interests.


----------

