# Si dom vs. Ni dom?



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

I've been having a hard time figuring out whether I use Ni or Si. I know that the two are really different functions and that I shouldn't be confused, but I definitely do see elements of both in my thinking. Here's the data:

-In general, my memory is a sieve with a couple of extra holes poked into it, but I am really good at remembering songs (I learn music by ear fairly easily and I love studying music), the general plots of books I really enjoyed, and other things that I find interesting. When it comes to facts I care about, I'm a bit of an encyclopedia. 
-I love studying languages, especially modern languages, and I'm good at identifying the way words are supposed to be said and linking meaning to new vocab words. 
-I love to use metaphors and similes when I speak. My friends call me the queen of metaphors since most of the time my comparisons are slightly bizarre but mostly accurate (for example, I described the crazy climate of where I live as "The weather gods spinning the wheel of fortune" once. Still haven't been able to live that one down). I also am better at thinking in pictures, and usually come up with an idea all at once as opposed to in planned steps. 
-I actually suck at living in the present. During sports practice, I'm always thinking about what I have to do after practice, planning my week out, or just thinking about philosophy in general. Everything but what I'm supposed to be doing essentially. I'm a huge day dreamer all the time to be honest.

I get that these are all generalizations, but I'm hoping you smart people can help me out. What do you think? Ni dom? Si dom? Neither? Thanks for taking the time to look at this!


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

I don't know anybody with dominant Introverted Sensation that has admitted to being "a huge day dreamer all the time" so let us agree that you have dominant Introverted Intuition.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

@einna123

Neither. Maybe Ti-dom.

Si is subjective sensation, Ni is subjective intuition. Both are irrational functions that see the background of existence. There's nothing particularly dreamy in your post, which is what I'd expect when consciousness is dominated by an introverted perceiving function.

Your love of metaphors is important, but it seems intellectual (not Si or Ni). You play games with words, with ideas. In general, the quality of your thinking seems very Ti-ish. You want to play with your thoughts, and facts matter only if they relate to your interests. Then they become fuel for the fire burning within.

Here's a quote from Jung that seems relevant:
Facts are of secondary importance for this kind of thinking; what seems to it of paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, of the initial symbolic image hovering darkly before the mind's eye. Its aim is never an intellectual reconstruction of the concrete fact, but a shaping of that dark image into a luminous idea. It wants to reach reality, to see how the external fact will fit into and fill the framework of the idea, and the creative power of this thinking shows itself when it actually creates an idea which, though not inherent in the concrete fact, is yet the most suitable abstract expression of it.


----------



## giorgaros2 (Sep 2, 2014)

@einna123

INFP? INFJ ? INTP ? one of that three most probably and since INFJs are pretty rare i would learn about INFP personality first if i were you


----------



## Robopop (Jun 15, 2010)

You sound more Ni dom, especially with the daydreaming and interests in metaphors.


----------



## BlueWings (Jan 27, 2015)

You definitely sound like an Ni-dom. "Suck at living in the present" is a general description of Se-inferior, where Ni is the opposite dominant force that focuses on the future and on the general underlying implication of reality.


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

einna123 said:


> -In general, *my memory is a sieve with a couple of extra holes poked into it*, but I am really good at remembering songs (I learn music by ear fairly easily and I love studying music), the general plots of books I really enjoyed, and other things that I find interesting. When it comes to facts I care about, I'm a bit of an encyclopedia.


Bolded - they way you described it seems Ni. That's it from this, really. 



> -I love studying languages, especially modern languages, and I'm good at identifying the way words are supposed to be said and linking meaning to new vocab words.


I doubt it's safe to assume that it's one particular function on the run. 



> -I love to use metaphors and similes when I speak. My friends call me the queen of metaphors since most of the time my comparisons are slightly bizarre but mostly accurate (for example, I described the crazy climate of where I live as "The weather gods spinning the wheel of fortune" once. Still haven't been able to live that one down). I also am better at thinking in pictures, and usually come up with an idea all at once as opposed to in planned steps.


Both - Ne and Ni can make bizarre comparisons. That comparison is more likely Ni-Se, than Ne-Si. 



> -I actually suck at living in the present. During sports practice, I'm always thinking about what I have to do after practice, planning my week out, or just thinking about philosophy in general. Everything but what I'm supposed to be doing essentially. I'm a huge day dreamer all the time to be honest.


Not Se dom. 



> I get that these are all generalizations, but I'm hoping you smart people can help me out. What do you think? Ni dom? Si dom? Neither? Thanks for taking the time to look at this!


I don't see why Si, based on this.


----------



## Prada (Sep 10, 2015)

I agree with the above. High Si users are usually very down to earth and I don't know any that would enjoy spending time "in their head" while I can confirm than high Ni users can be really big day dreamers. So I'm leaning to Ni-dom. I don't see anything in you that would imply otherwise.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Prada @Apple Pine @Coyote @siljeth @Robopop @Army Man @giorgaros2
Thanks to everyone who replied! I think these have been some of the clearest explanations of functions I have seen in a little while. Like I was telling someone on another thread, I've been reading into MBTI for a couple of years now, so all the descriptions are starting to blur together, kinda like when you were a kid and mixed ALL the paint colors, only to realize that they just end up making a mucky brown. Things are way more clear now. Thanks again!!


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Coyote

I'm interested in hearing more of your opinion, if you're willing to share it. I actually did consider Ti-dom types, since you're right in saying I'm super analytical, but I thought my Fe was too high. Do you think an Ni-Ti loop might be the reason why?


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

I fail to see why Ti dom from this. To be totally honest, @einna123 you should write more.


----------



## Schizoid (Jan 31, 2015)

einna123 said:


> I've been having a hard time figuring out whether I use Ni or Si. I know that the two are really different functions and that I shouldn't be confused, but I definitely do see elements of both in my thinking. Here's the data:
> 
> -In general, my memory is a sieve with a couple of extra holes poked into it, but I am really good at remembering songs (I learn music by ear fairly easily and I love studying music), the general plots of books I really enjoyed, and other things that I find interesting. When it comes to facts I care about, I'm a bit of an encyclopedia.
> -I love studying languages, especially modern languages, and I'm good at identifying the way words are supposed to be said and linking meaning to new vocab words.
> ...



You seem like the poster child of INFJ to me. :tongue: 


If you want to know what Ni is about, I recommend you to read up storybooks of Hercule Poirot. 
And yes, Hercule Poirot is an INxJ of some sort. 


Some quotes from Hercule Poirot:


“What are you doing, Poirot?"
"I dissect rucksacks. It is very interesting.”

“It is the brain, the little gray cells on which one must rely. One must seek the truth within--not without." 

“But it is not everything in life that has its ticket, so much. There are things that are not for sale.” 

“Eh bien, then, you are crazy, or appear crazy or you think you are crazy, and possibly you may be crazy.”

“I am all that there is of the most real.” 

“I find most of the human race extraordinarily repulsive. They probably reciprocate this feeling.” 

“Ah, but my dear sir, the why must never be obvious. That is the whole point.” 

“Everyone is a potential murderer-in everyone there arises from time to time the wish to kill-though not the will to kill.” 

“For somewhere," said Poirot to himself, indulging in an absolute riot of mixed metaphors, "there is in the hay a needle, and among the sleeping dogs there is one on whom I shall put my foot, and by shooting the arrows into the air, one will come down and hit a glass house!” 

“The world is full of good people who do bad things!” 

"It is the quietest and meekest people who are often capable of the most sudden and unexpected violence for the reason that when their control does snap, it goes entirely."

"In conversation, points arise! If a human being converses much, it is impossible for him to avoid the truth!"

"Everyone likes talking about himself."


^ If you are curious what Ni is about, this is how Ni looks like. Hercule Poirot is a good example of an Ni dominant. 
If you haven't read any of his storybooks before, I recommend you to read up his books. He will give you a lot of insights on how Ni dominant thinks like.


----------



## giorgaros2 (Sep 2, 2014)

@einna123 
Yes you are most probably INFP or INFJ , but you need to research it more , dont be one of these mistyped INFJs who 
make things more complicated instead of helping. One way to see it is see what is your inferior function.

Inferior Se: Sensitive to sounds,images,you look at the aesthetics of an experience a lot and you get drained a lot when 
the aesthetics are ugly.Also inferior se makes experiencing things in reality pretty difficult.By this i dont mean like studying etc, i mean doing things a Se dom does , things that need balls. I am sorry that i say that , i believe Ni doms have a lot of strength
inside them but they fear it and repress it.IF they have very repressed Se like when they are young they will lack balls/courage a lot.

Inferior Te: I dont know about that , i believe it has something to do with dislike of objective criticism directed at the self.
Others could help too on the inferior functions


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

Infp


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Jippa Jonken

If you don't mind my asking, why INFP?


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

einna123 said:


> @Jippa Jonken
> 
> If you don't mind my asking, why INFP?


IxxJ's never sincerely ask for advice. They got their truth fixed and that's just how it goes. There are very few exceptions to this tendency, and most of them are obviously peculiar and situational.

INFP is the most soul-dwelling and vulnerably hesitant. Fi-dom, Ne-aux (creative function). Doubt and second-guessing (perhaps goofiness?) is how you express your self. Your self as such is perpetual honing in on authenticity.

INFP implies the gullibility apparent in your quest for guidance toward definitive typological truth. INFJ would be less gullible, but also less open to others.

Do you believe yourself to be transparent? A classic NP trait.

Just my impressions. Feel free to disregard. I mean no condescension.


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

I'd like to add, @ everyone, that it's meaningless to focus on the claims a person self-reports. Much more telling is the manner in which this is done. Turn your gaze to the subtle, likely subconscious, cues. We are trying to assess true type, not simply summarize self-reports which may be biased and interpret them according to some preordained code. For example, some people in here have hastily assumed it reasonable to exlude all types but Si- and Ni-dom.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

einna123 said:


> I've been having a hard time figuring out whether I use Ni or Si. I know that the two are really different functions and that I shouldn't be confused, but I definitely do see elements of both in my thinking. Here's the data:
> 
> -In general, my memory is a sieve with a couple of extra holes poked into it, but I am really good at remembering songs (I learn music by ear fairly easily and I love studying music), the general plots of books I really enjoyed, and other things that I find interesting. When it comes to facts I care about, I'm a bit of an encyclopedia.
> -I love studying languages, especially modern languages, and I'm good at identifying the way words are supposed to be said and linking meaning to new vocab words.
> ...


Weirdly, and out of nowhere, MBTI correlated Si to memory or 'the past' and S as focused on the real.

Jung said neither, and the opposite of the second. 

Si has NOTHING to do with memory or the past. Si may be down to earth but it is NOT real or realistic or an attention to detail.

Forget memory. My aunt is the most Si-dom human alive and is always complaining about her memory... she just has a crappy memory. Some people just have a crappy memory.

However, I'd say that people tend to remember things that they care about... things that interest them or catch their attention. So, one might argue that what you've told us is that you (perhaps unconsciously) find facts interesting. 

Now, on the point of metaphors... this is a secondary thing that might indeed hint at N. Not in and of itself, but someone adept or prone to this do seem to more often be N types? I've met plenty of N types, though, that aren't particularly prone to metaphors in speech. I wouldn't call some Ni-doms I know the king or queen of metaphors. So, if that is your thing... maybe it is just your thing. It depends. Ni is about how you perceive the world, not about how you choose to communicate that. That you focused on the outward expression of it is telling... as if you don't feel anything particular inside, but notice something outside. Is that meaningful?

Not being able to live in the present is particular to introversion in general. Jung mentioned this particularly for both Ni and Si. In his description of Si he even went so far as to say that Si types find the 'present moment improbable'. The oft-quoted analogy Jung gives in describing Si is that if a group of Si types were shown the same flower vase, and then were asked to draw it, the results would be wildly different from one another because of the intense influence of the psyche on the perception of stimuli in Si types. 

It's a weird analogy, but the point is that Si types are bound to be eccentric and seen to live in their private world. True Si-doms are anything but realistic or practical. ISTJs are practical not by virtue of Si, but of Te. 

Adherence to private tradition, for example, is a perfect example of the unrealistic mind of the Si. It isn't THE WORLD, which moves on and accepts all manner of progressive shiny ideas... but MY WORLD, that subjectively selects what is worth considering real and sticks to it, despite the world. One walks into the home of an old Si-dom and enters a world apart. Relics and memories of a past that didn't really exist, because what you are seeing is those experiences warped through the psyche of the Si-dom. 

My grandma is an Si-dom and she lives in the middle of nowhere in a pioneer village she has constructed. Her actual home is somewhere between a Martha Stewart catalog and an episode of hoarders, and every object is eccentric and eclectic as possible... though none are overtly symbolic. I, who have studied that old era at length, could offer 1000 corrections of her fantastical and idealized interpretation of the past. It isn't the past, but her fantasy world... and idyllic world that reflects nothing but her wholesome private imagination.


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

^ Excellent description of Si.


----------



## SolusChristus (Jun 21, 2015)

Si-dominants (if I can speak from own experience) can enter a Si-Fi loop which would make them seem as detached from reality as possible. When Fi outweighs Te, strange and irrational solutions start to form, and this can also clear the way for selfish and almost cruel decisions. I think, however, that Fi somehow filters sensory information on its own, and can overrule otherwise proven solutions suggested by Si+Te. In that case you become hyper-aware of your surroundings. Or this might just be me and my issues 

If I'm an ISTJ, then my love for metaphores and word plays must be connected to some heavy impressions from my childhood. For example, I used to listen to comedy bits on tape when I was little. All those jokes, the way they were delivered and the particular response from the crowd shaped my taste of humor. Nowadays I implement the best ways of observing and making fun of everyday stuff when I communicate with friends. My type of humor is similar to that portrayed in shows such as Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Louie, etc. I'm a sucker for word plays, analogues, observational and situational comedy, all that classy stuff. Extroverted intuition also helps, I think, or it's just the vast memory bank that Si offers for finding interconnections and relations between things. However, I dose my jokes, almost to the OCD point of thinking about the time spent after my last witty response, so that the humor would not be pushed, but rather seem naturally flowing. It's kind of weird, but I do enjoy manipulating others into believing I'm an open-minded, laid-back and free living person (while I live in a figurative box). Not that I do it on purpose, but I like it - and from time to time I resent. I also enjoy synthesised humor, and when I get to make a joke or a witty remark, I try my best to deliver quality stuff that linger on without any bad aftertaste. Did you already guess my field of education? 

I get high scores on Ti when I do cognitive function tests, but I don't seem to use Ti. And since I don't rely on my gut feeling (but this might be a result of my fear of being wrong), I should be a Si- rather than Ni-dom.

Oh, and my memory is already starting to reach its full capacity, which is evident in the way I filter unimportant (from my point of view) things. I will still focus on stuff I'm used to carefully observe, and when I need to remember something that's new, I struggle to do so. I need to devote time and thinking, like writing a CD at minimal speed, so that I can remember it in the long run. However, this comes at the cost of forgetting something else, which I dislike very much, but what can you do... I wish I could do memory backups on some external carrier. Then I will achieve my weird dream of never forgetting EVERYTHING I'm able to sense. Which would be horrible.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Jippa Jonken

OK, that makes sense. Thanks so much for giving your opinion!
Confession time, I was like 99.99999% sure I'm an INFJ when I wrote this post. I always have been, but I keep trying to convince myself that I'm not for some reason. It might be because of that stupid and probably incorrect "1%" statistic I read a little while ago, which my paranoia has latched onto and fed on. It's most probably because I keep trying to apply stereotypical behaviors to myself, which is a dumb move that the people reading this SHOULD NOT DO. YOU GUYS ARE ALL PERFECT THE WAY YOU ARE!

I'm extraordinarily grateful for all the replies I've gotten since I posted this. Thanks to all of you for your time and effort!


----------



## Squirrel54 (Sep 25, 2015)

The best way I could explain Si vs Se. I could be a little wrong, but here's my understanding

Let's take a school lunch room with tables spread out every where. 

An Se person is more likely going to sit at whatever table the other Se types are at, or at a table close to any action going on. Perhaps the biggest table with the most "loud" and sociable people. They won't really care so much about what table it is as much as what's going on at that table.

An Si person is going to have that particular table they prefer sitting at for little reasons. In past experience, this table was well grounded, chairs weren't messed up, it has their preferred social scene, or some other past experience with the table that gives them preference for it.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Squirrel54 said:


> The best way I could explain Si vs Se. I could be a little wrong, but here's my understanding
> 
> Let's take a school lunch room with tables spread out every where.
> 
> ...


Sort of caught between ISTP and ISTJ, but I would choose a table that has the least amount of action and is away from the rest. Some place that is quiet and distant from others is an ideal place for me to sit. I have always preferred to sit alone and just be alone with my thoughts and observations, so nobody can make me feel bad for who I am.


----------



## Squirrel54 (Sep 25, 2015)

Army Man said:


> Sort of caught between ISTP and ISTJ, but I would choose a table that has the least amount of action and is away from the rest. Some place that is quiet and distant from others is an ideal place for me to sit. I have always preferred to sit alone and just be alone with my thoughts and observations, so nobody can make me feel bad for who I am.


That sounds like inferior Se to me. My examples more rely on Dom/Aux level Se/Si. One website describes inferior Se this way: 

Inferior Se:

My awareness of my environment gives me “clues” about other people, which feed my intuition, but the less I pay attention to the people and things around me, the more wrong my conclusions are. I sometimes feel overwhelmed with too much sensory information all at once; can we put away the disco ball and turn the music down? I wasn’t sure I would like that scary ride, but I did! I’m going again! I really want to see my dreams become real, and I’m willing to do all the hard work required to make it so. I like learning things that help me be stronger and more fit.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Squirrel54 said:


> That sounds like inferior Se to me. My examples more rely on Dom/Aux level Se/Si. One website describes inferior Se this way:
> 
> Inferior Se:
> 
> My awareness of my environment gives me “clues” about other people, which feed my intuition, but the less I pay attention to the people and things around me, the more wrong my conclusions are. I sometimes feel overwhelmed with too much sensory information all at once; can we put away the disco ball and turn the music down? I wasn’t sure I would like that scary ride, but I did! I’m going again! I really want to see my dreams become real, and I’m willing to do all the hard work required to make it so. I like learning things that help me be stronger and more fit.


Well if I've got inferior Se then why is there an INxJ who insists that I'm a Sensor?


----------



## Squirrel54 (Sep 25, 2015)

Army Man said:


> Well if I've got inferior Se then why is there an INxJ who insists that I'm a Sensor?


I couldn't be quite sure, but going off of this statement:



> sit alone and just be alone with my thoughts and observations,


That speaks more N type than S type to me.

I spent many days in highschool sitting at the corner table and just day dreaming until lunch was over.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Squirrel54 said:


> I couldn't be quite sure, but going off of this statement:
> 
> 
> 
> That speaks more N type than S type to me.


My thoughts and observations aren't exactly abstract, mystical, or deep. It's just that they're rather pointed and "mean" so others are likely to take my words the wrong way. Keeping them to myself is good.


----------



## Squirrel54 (Sep 25, 2015)

Army Man said:


> My thoughts and observations aren't exactly abstract, mystical, or deep. It's just that they're rather pointed and "mean" so others are likely to take my words the wrong way. Keeping them to myself is good.


Hmmm, if you just think about angry thoughts towards other, this makes me think of a disgruntled Fi.

Fi will spend a little bit of time in their head to think about values and people, but not as much as an intuitive type. When someone steps on an Fi's values, that can set off a bit of a flare, but your other functions will determine how you handle that flare.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Not necessarily angry (typical Fe user, attributing emotion to my words), just so straight-forward and practical that it might be seen as judgmental. I admit, I am hard on others. I don't usually speak openly about that though since it is offensive.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

Army Man said:


> I don't know anybody with dominant Introverted Sensation that has admitted to being "a huge day dreamer all the time" so let us agree that you have dominant Introverted Intuition.


I was, in a major way, when young. Still am, if I'm bored. I just don't have much time to be bored anymore.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

Psychopomp said:


> Weirdly, and out of nowhere, MBTI correlated Si to memory or 'the past' and S as focused on the real.
> 
> Jung said neither, and the opposite of the second.
> 
> ...


You started out okay, but deviated very far from the reality that is a Si-dom. Old people, regardless of type, often pine for the "good old days" and some may try to escape from present reality into that world, as it exists in their minds, via various interests or mechanisms. But that is not attributable to Si.

Taking myself as an example, I am ruthless in destroying clutter, keepsakes, mementos, etc. The only concessions are things of great value tied to a specific event/time for a particular individual (and keep it small), and pictures. I also prefer that the pictures be digital. Who needs stacks of photo albums lying about?

A Si-dom is such an animal, not because of their auxiliary function, but because of their perceiving function. Meaning, how I arrive at conclusions. I must take the whole and disassemble it into its component parts, and reassemble them, in order to feel comfortable in knowing how the whole works. In comparison, a Ni-dom will intuitively grasp the whole from a set of data points, and feel comfortable with their knowledge of the whole, as an extrapolation. I never feel comfortable with my understanding of something when I do that.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

niss said:


> I was, in a major way, when young. Still am, if I'm bored. I just don't have much time to be bored anymore.


Still doesn't prove me wrong, since I included the words "all the time". I daydream when I have nothing better to do, also. It can be a fun outlet.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

Army Man said:


> Still doesn't prove me wrong, since I included the words "all the time". I daydream when I have nothing better to do, also. It can be a fun outlet.


"All the time" is probably a bit of a stretch, even for a Ne-dom. So, I'd take this litmus test with a bit of salt.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

The essence of daydreaming, not the act.


----------



## Lady Lullaby (Jun 7, 2010)

giorgaros2 said:


> @_einna123_
> Inferior Se: Sensitive to sounds,images,you look at the aesthetics of an experience a lot and you get drained a lot when
> the aesthetics are ugly.Also inferior se makes experiencing things in reality pretty difficult.By this i dont mean like studying etc, i mean doing things a Se dom does , things that need balls. I am sorry that i say that , i believe Ni doms have a lot of strength
> inside them but they fear it and repress it.IF they have very repressed Se like when they are young they will lack balls/courage a lot.


I just wanted to pop in and thank you for the Se-inferior mention. I completely concur! Overcoming that repression is ongoing. (It's one of the reasons I force myself to make vids and keep them online :laughing



giorgaros2 said:


> IxxJ's never sincerely ask for advice. They got their truth fixed and that's just how it goes. There are very few exceptions to this tendency, and most of them are obviously peculiar and situational.
> 
> INFP is the most soul-dwelling and vulnerably hesitant. Fi-dom, Ne-aux (creative function). Doubt and second-guessing (perhaps goofiness?) is how you express your self. Your self as such is perpetual honing in on authenticity.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately I disagree with this part though. Ni is called the function of doubt! It is what Ni-Ti loops are made of!! Round and round and round trying to make things just right, just so. And Fe wants validation and feedback. It's Fi that is is secure in their personal, subjective likes and dislikes and opinions. But @einna123 can see what she relates to and how she understands the functions. I've been on Socionics and MBTI forums for too long to really delve deep in arguing the functions individually. They don't actually work independently this way - it's more in tandem with each other that determines a person's type. NiFe vs FiNe is way different than SiFe or TiNe for example.

Lastly, I agree with @*Psychopomp's *entire post, especially that introversion is more likely the cause of difficulty being in the present moment.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

niss said:


> You started out okay, but deviated very far from the reality that is a Si-dom. Old people, regardless of type, often pine for the "good old days" and some may try to escape from present reality into that world, as it exists in their minds, via various interests or mechanisms. But that is not attributable to Si.
> 
> Taking myself as an example, I am ruthless in destroying clutter, keepsakes, mementos, etc. The only concessions are things of great value tied to a specific event/time for a particular individual (and keep it small), and pictures. I also prefer that the pictures be digital. Who needs stacks of photo albums lying about?
> 
> A Si-dom is such an animal, not because of their auxiliary function, but because of their perceiving function. Meaning, how I arrive at conclusions. I must take the whole and disassemble it into its component parts, and reassemble them, in order to feel comfortable in knowing how the whole works. In comparison, a Ni-dom will intuitively grasp the whole from a set of data points, and feel comfortable with their knowledge of the whole, as an extrapolation. I never feel comfortable with my understanding of something when I do that.


I don't think that Si is tied to keepsakes, per se. It OFTEN is, in my personal anecdotal experience... but I don't think it is by any means necessarily. Still, I'd argue that it is some other function, such as Te, that is specifically responsible for this efficiency and orderliness on your part. If that was missing, what would you be?

This disassembling and reassembling is not Si, at least not if you even vaguely consider Jung. That would be a rational process, the process of ordering or explaining or understanding something, and thus must be Thinking. Surely, though, Abstraction of Sensation contributes to that... though I don't see how it could in the way you describe.



Army Man said:


> Still doesn't prove me wrong, since I included the words "all the time". I daydream when I have nothing better to do, also. It can be a fun outlet.


I was going to comment on daydreaming and Se in this thread, but you made my point for me. Se-doms can and absolutely DO daydream, as a means to seek out dynamic interaction in an environment that otherwise lacks it. In a boring classroom, an Se-dom is not paying rapt attention to anything, because there is nothing that engages them.... so, their mind will invent something to get wrapped up in. Since it is more or less realistic things that promise the most engagement and experience, the Se will tend to imagine these things... but, sometimes Hover Cars provide the same! So, Hover Cars it is!


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

Lady Lullaby said:


> Unfortunately I disagree with this part though. Ni is called the function of doubt! It is what Ni-Ti loops are made of!! Round and round and round trying to make things just right, just so. And Fe wants validation and feedback. It's Fi that is is secure in their personal, subjective likes and dislikes and opinions. But @einna123 can see what she relates to and how she understands the functions. I've been on Socionics and MBTI forums for too long to really delve deep in arguing the functions individually. They don't actually work independently this way - it's more in tandem with each other that determines a person's type. NiFe vs FiNe is way different than SiFe or TiNe for example.
> 
> Lastly, I agree with @*Psychopomp's *entire post, especially that introversion is more likely the cause of difficulty being in the present moment.


Internal doubt, yes. Externally they are adamant. An aura of aloof, stubborn, egotistical elitism and firm, apparently unfounded conviction is really the common trait in how all the Ni-doms i know get perceived by people overall. I'm sure they do consider things other people say, because they are interested in improving their perceptions - it's just not natural for them to express this.

To me Fe is not looking for validation but looking to convince everyone to agree. Fi is looking for validation. But INFP's and ISFP's are different. ISFP's are a lot like you describe due to Se-Ni. INFP's not so much. ISFP's are looking for people to realize their value, which they themselves know. INFP's are looking for people to grant them value. ISFP is a harsh, belligerent presence, replete with pride. INFP is a soft, accommodating, modest one.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> I don't think that Si is tied to keepsakes, per se. It OFTEN is, in my personal anecdotal experience... but I don't think it is by any means necessarily. Still, I'd argue that it is some other function, such as Te, that is specifically responsible for this efficiency and orderliness on your part. If that was missing, what would you be?
> 
> This disassembling and reassembling is not Si, at least not if you even vaguely consider Jung. That would be a rational process, the process of ordering or explaining or understanding something, and thus must be Thinking. Surely, though, Abstraction of Sensation contributes to that... though I don't see how it could in the way you describe.
> 
> I was going to comment on daydreaming and Se in this thread, but you made my point for me. Se-doms can and absolutely DO daydream, as a means to seek out dynamic interaction in an environment that otherwise lacks it. In a boring classroom, an Se-dom is not paying rapt attention to anything, because there is nothing that engages them.... so, their mind will invent something to get wrapped up in. Since it is more or less realistic things that promise the most engagement and experience, the Se will tend to imagine these things... but, sometimes Hover Cars provide the same! So, Hover Cars it is!


But as I have discussed previously with other members here, I could be a not-so-disciplined ISTJ. Yes, I know that ISTPs and ISTJs have zero functions in common. But either I have confused how the functions work with me, or I am not sure about them in general.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Lady Lullaby said:


> I just wanted to pop in and thank you for the Se-inferior mention. I completely concur! Overcoming that repression is ongoing. (It's one of the reasons I force myself to make vids and keep them online :laughing
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would say Ni "knows" while Ti is what creates doubt in Ni. So, you're right that's the Ni-Ti loop, but I wouldn't say Ni is the function of doubt. And I think Fe does want validation, but they want validation for different things than Fi does. Fe wants people to agree, or look approvingly, on their actions. I can't say I've seen Fi care about this as much. Fe may even change what it thinks, based on how others perceive them, though I would say this is more true in Fe-doms who haven't developed their auxiliary functions. Ni-dom won't really change their internally derived ideas, because it's true to them and that's all that really matters, but they will "test out" their ideas in the external realm with Te/Fe to see if they hold up, and how people react. They want people to see what they see in terms of their ideas, but they realize the difficulty of getting others on the same page as them, so in that sense you could say they're seeking validation. Fi-doms might seek validation in their emotions, and what they're feeling, but I'm not too sure about this; like if they can find something outside of them that expresses how they're feeling inside, a particular song, for example. Everyone probably does this to some extent, but I've seen it more often in Fi-types.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Daydreaming has nothing to do with intuition, which, if you read Jung, you'd know, as he'd attribute daydreaming to a cognitive activity entirely unrelated to the functions.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Army Man said:


> But as I have discussed previously with other members here, I could be a not-so-disciplined ISTJ. Yes, I know that ISTPs and ISTJs have zero functions in common. But either I have confused how the functions work with me, or I am not sure about them in general.


Well, then, it can be fairly easily reduced to the question of Te vs Ti.

Ti types are prone to abstraction and a reliance on their own logical processes and conclusion, where an ISTJ would instead fall back on their own more or less unconsidered and non-rational perception of reality. 

When ISTJs THINK, it is purposeful and directed, and very objective. Logic will seem like it is a common thing, that should shared by all and something that should be obvious to all. The writing on the very wall. Objective. From the ISTJ you get the impression that logic is as tangible and in the world as the curb in front of you, and if you don't recognize it and react to it, will trip.

Ti types on the other hand are abstract, and think in a VOID. If something is logical in principle, or in the mind's eye, it should more or less apply in reality, and should be followed as a principle. Everything is held to the rigorous and searching, and even constantly revising, standard of abstract logic. One gets the feeling from the Ti dom that true understanding is not common, must be explained sometimes at length, is hidden and has been discovered by them, and is often at odds with the accepted perception of things. 

For example, I have two friends who are Christians but neither of them are 'dyed in the wool', as you might say. I ask each of them to justify their faith. The ISTJ offers no logical abstraction to me... does not logically justify his faith because to do so would more or less require abstraction. He might say that God is evident in the world - which isn't a logical justification in the sort of abstract way I tend to consider logic, but an objective observation of what appears to him to be fact. When asked to justify this interpretation, he falls back on his subjective preferences in viewing reality, which are fundamentally and profoundly non-rational and thus can only shrug. "God is real or he isn't and choose to believe." Unable to turn to anything really objective to justify his belief, he offers simply his subjective perception of reality as it is... which is not a logical thing. 

The discussion with the ISTP is entirely different. It becomes quickly and immediately abstract and filled with logical principles. He cites first Pascal's Wager, which will form the basis of his argument, but also that (to me, quite tired) argument that without God he would be somehow depraved, as if his own morality is handled entirely by outside forces and circumstance, and he need only arrange those circumstances... as if morality is Minecraft. We will debate this all VERY abstractly, since I am also a Ti-dom, we get more and more abstract and focused on logical points and counter points that all seem to exist in a void. Pure logic, it might be called. None of it is evident, but all quite difficult to grasp with the mind, far from practical things.... almost silly at times. 

"Can the myriad questions of God be reduced to a single binary? For example, if one feels the Holy Spirit, can one disregard all other questions... and let them 'ride' as needing to necessarily be true because this one facet is deemed to be true? Or do all facets need to be verified of their own merit?"

That is the sort of abstract thing that might be put out. This sort of abstract reverie would quickly bore the ISTJ, who would recognize it for what it is.... too abstract, too in the void. It would not resonate with them. The question of God, for the ISTJ, would hinge on abstractions that were not even in the realm of rational thought. They would believe because, in their world, God is real. Why is God real? The question is nonsensical. In their world, He is. Far more likely, the ISTJ will critique the sensibility of this or that in the operations of the Church, which is an objective thing worth considering. One Church or another might be chosen by how in tune with objective logical reality they are.. how much practical sense they make. The ISTP would be far more attracted to a religion with a consistent theological framework.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

giorgaros2 said:


> @einna123
> 
> Inferior Se: Sensitive to sounds,images,you look at the aesthetics of an experience a lot and you get drained a lot when
> the aesthetics are ugly.


Wouldn't that apply to any type using Se? Like an Se dom, would they not care if the aesthetics are ugly? Why?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> Well, then, it can be fairly easily reduced to the question of Te vs Ti.
> 
> Ti types are prone to abstraction and a reliance on their own logical processes and conclusion, where an ISTJ would instead fall back on their own more or less unconsidered and non-rational perception of reality.
> 
> ...


Would an ISFJ do the same abstract discussion because of tertiary Ti? What about INFJs?


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

einna123 said:


> @Prada @Apple Pine @Coyote @siljeth @Robopop @Army Man @giorgaros2
> Thanks to everyone who replied! I think these have been some of the clearest explanations of functions I have seen in a little while. Like I was telling someone on another thread, I've been reading into MBTI for a couple of years now, so all the descriptions are starting to blur together, kinda like when you were a kid and mixed ALL the paint colors, only to realize that they just end up making a mucky brown. Things are way more clear now. Thanks again!!


It is my humble duty to serve.
:happy:


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> Well, then, it can be fairly easily reduced to the question of Te vs Ti.
> 
> Ti types are prone to abstraction and a reliance on their own logical processes and conclusion, where an ISTJ would instead fall back on their own more or less unconsidered and non-rational perception of reality.
> 
> ...


I believe in God as a Christian. My rationale is that it seems very impractical that life would just start all by itself spontaneously from nothing. Almost everything in life starts from something. In fact, I cannot think of anything that begins from nothing. Also, I think that He serves as a purpose for our lives to continue, He gives us hope, and He is the foundation of all good morality. Without Him, there is nothing on which to base any moral principles. Society does not provide morality for us, and all you have to do to see the proof of that is to look at current events and the people that society looks up to, namely celebrities.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Wouldn't that apply to any type using Se? Like an Se dom, would they not care if the aesthetics are ugly? Why?


I might be able to take this one. Note that I don't know any other Ni doms super well in real life, so I'm only going off of my personal experience. @giorgaros2 please correct me if I'm wrong!
You're right, I'm sure Se doms (or auxes or terts for that matter) do experience these things to some degree. The thing is, since Se is the Ni dom's inferior function we aren't able to control it as well. Our Se is kinda primitive and weak, so when it decides to wake up and smell the roses we're sometimes not really sure what to do with the information it's giving us. Doing traditionally Se things are like living a series of oxymorons. I'm into going to dances at school, especially when I'm with my friends, and I totally have it in me to be the kind of person who sings loud obnoxious karaoke and dances on tables, but I really can only go to like two parties a year, max. Even then I end up coming home completely drained and wishing that the music wasn't so loud the whole time. I am also very sensitive to the aesthetics of a place and the vibe it's giving off, especially since my Se is constantly working in tandem with my Ni to look at the symbolic meaning behind, well, everything. A type with a better handle on their Se won't feel NEARLY as overwhelmed as Ni doms, and will probably be more comfortable in scenarios like these. Does that help/make sense?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Okay, gotcha. I think I have inferior Se.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Lady Lullaby and @Jippa Jonken, thank you so much for bringing up the importance of looking at functions in context! This is definitely really important to consider when typing people.

Regarding the Ni doms as certain/uncertain issue: The way I see it, Ni-Ti works together to analyze pieces of data and fit them into a conceptual framework. They're essentially making a lego set without using the instructions. The problem is that Ti REALLY DOES NOT LIKE IT when you have few loose pieces that you can't seem to fit properly into the model. It keeps looping back to consult with Ni, which does its thing in the subconscious and comes back with an "out of nowhere" answer that seems to mollify it, but then it finds another piece that makes no sense and the cycle begins anew. I assume that Ni-Fi works in a similar way, with INTJs using these functions in tandem to fit new information into a preexisting internal value system. Any INTJs out there want to affirm/refute this claim?

Sometimes, dominant-tertiary loops go on for an extended period of time. This obviously isn't healthy for a person cognitively, since it leaves them relatively unbalanced when it comes to the introverted-extroverted function ratio. For that reason, the best way to break out of a loop is by really focusing on using and developing one's aux. In my case, that's using Fe. Fe is all about external harmony and common ground. Fe-Ti in particular is saying "I've done all I can internally to figure the issue out, and I have a solid stance. Now, I'm running it by the group to see whether it is understood/approved by the community." Out of curiosity, does Ti-Fe work in a similar way?

Regarding the "who wants validation" problem: The issue here is the way the word is being defined. In this case, I agree with @mistakenforstranger. INFJs are looking for intellectual validation (i.e. for understanding), while INFPs look for emotional validation. In the INFJ's case, the individual in question really does want to tell someone about what's going on in their crazy head. They hope that they will be able to one day find some people who will look at them and say, "No, you're not insane for thinking that way. I totally get what's going on in your head. It makes sense." It reassures their Fe and lets them know that they still fit comfortably in the collective, despite the fact that they feel like an outsider.
On the other hand, the INFP wants emotional validation. They want to present their values system to someone and have that someone say "The way you feel about life is totally legitimate. While I may not agree with you on all issues, I respect the system you have created. What you stand for is moral.” It’s emotional validation. They don't want to be understood, though; it makes their Fi individuality super uncomfy.

Does any of this make sense? Please let me know what you think!


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Okay, gotcha. I think I have inferior Se.


Welcome to the Ni dom party


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

einna123 said:


> Welcome to the Ni dom party


Let's party (all types included)!
:happy: :crazy: :kitteh: :tongue: :wink: :laughing:


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

Army Man said:


> Let's party (all types included)!
> :happy: :crazy: :kitteh: :tongue: :wink: :laughing:


^^^^^^Good plan :kitteh::happy:


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

einna123 said:


> @Lady Lullaby and @Jippa Jonken, thank you so much for bringing up the importance of looking at functions in context! This is definitely really important to consider when typing people.
> 
> Regarding the Ni doms as certain/uncertain issue: The way I see it, Ni-Ti works together to analyze pieces of data and fit them into a conceptual framework. They're essentially making a lego set without using the instructions. The problem is that Ti REALLY DOES NOT LIKE IT when you have few loose pieces that you can't seem to fit properly into the model. It keeps looping back to consult with Ni, which does its thing in the subconscious and comes back with an "out of nowhere" answer that seems to mollify it, but then it finds another piece that makes no sense and the cycle begins anew. I assume that Ni-Fi works in a similar way, with INTJs using these functions in tandem to fit new information into a preexisting internal value system. Any INTJs out there want to affirm/refute this claim?
> 
> ...


This post and the one about inferior Se are making me think that I might be an INFJ.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Ive been sure I was INFJ many times but I don't feel like I'm like the other INFJs I meet so that makes me think I'm not.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Ive been sure I was INFJ many times but I don't feel like I'm like the other INFJs I meet so that makes me think I'm not.


*WARNING: Blasphemy ahead* 
MBTI is not the be all end all. If you read through the other posts on this thread, you'll notice a common theme: MBTI does not necessarily dictate behavior. Heck, basic MBTI isn't even necessarily in the same ocean as the iceberg that is human cognition. Any type can exhibit any number of different behaviors depending on their level of development and life experiences. There are sixteen different personality categories, but there are definitely more than sixteen kinds of people out there. You can totally be an INFJ and behave differently from other INFJs. If the shoe (or in this case cognitive function model) fits...

Another thing: A lot of people feel attracted to the label "INFJ" since it's supposedly the least prevalent type at like an estimated 70 million individuals worldwide. (Such special snowflake, very scarcity. Wow). Other people who probably are INFJs feel like they couldn't be a part of such a Rare and Elite group of individuals. Please, if you feel this way try to reevaluate. Thinking like this clouds your judgement and closes off the opportunity to explore your awesome type options! Every single type has its strengths and weaknesses. I personally think the current statistics are a load of hooey, so if you feel like an INFJ you should go ahead and explore the possibility that you are one.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Ive been sure I was INFJ many times but I don't feel like I'm like the other INFJs I meet so that makes me think I'm not.


Do you really think that people can be categorized in only 16 groups and everyone in a group has the exact same personality?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Not exactly the same obviously, but it seems to be a known "fact" that infjs are the most lovable people and all they wanna do is help people and blabla. Honestly I'm not that much about helping people I don't know like I feel charity for example does nothing. 
People that don't know me seem to think im more of a thinker but my boyfriend who actually KNOWS me thinks im a feeler.
Another thing, I usually like to argue because it clears the air if that has anythng to do with this.

And thank you einna, that was really helpful


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

I guess my problem is I listen too much to what others think while I don't have a true grasp of who I am.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> I guess my problem is I listen too much to what others think while I don't have a true grasp of who I am.


This is Fe. Just because INFJs have Fe doesn't mean that they will help everyone. Even Fe doms don't do that.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Eluid Sade said:


> This is Fe. Just because INFJs have Fe doesn't mean that they will help everyone. Even Fe doms don't do that.


That is correct.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

ohh. are Fi doms more likely to donate to charity etc because it makes them feel better?


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> ohh. are Fi doms more likely to donate to charity etc because it makes them feel better?


Probably, if they think it is the right thing to do they will. It all depends on what they value.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> ohh. are Fi doms more likely to donate to charity etc because it makes them feel better?


One could say so. One could also say that Fe doms are more likely since they are more in tune with the suffering of those around them. TBH it's pretty useless to try to take social behavior traits like these and try to translate them into MBTI terms. You just end up confusing yourself since everyone has a different opinion on the matter. Besides, any type can frequently donate to charity. It's the reasoning behind the donation that will be different. Does that make sense?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Yup it does make sense


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Yup it does make sense


What types have you considered?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Like all. But seriously considered Infj, Intj, Istp, and isfj though I have looked mostly into Infj


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> Like all. But seriously considered Infj, Intj, Istp, and isfj though I have looked mostly into Infj


I'll have a look at your posts and see if I can find something about your type.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

einna123 said:


> @_Coyote_
> 
> I'm interested in hearing more of your opinion, if you're willing to share it. I actually did consider Ti-dom types, since you're right in saying I'm super analytical, but I thought my Fe was too high. Do you think an Ni-Ti loop might be the reason why?


When I was relatively new to MBTI, I thought that I was an INFJ. I tried to use Ni-Ti loops to explain why I relied so much on thinking, while my Fe seemed inconsistent. It seems kinda funny to me now, the way I had to twist myself into a pretzel to make MBTI work.

So, no, I don't attribute anything to a dominant-tertiary loop. That's just a way for people to plug holes in the MBTI boat (IMO).

For you, I'm still inclined to say Ti-dom. It's not a purely "analytical" function, it just tends to focus on internal consistency when it's playing with ideas. And the inferior function is extremely important, so it's not like Ti-doms are logic-bots or something. They tend to be pretty playful and nice, though it obviously varies by individual.

If you identified with what I said in my previous post, then I'd recommend looking at Ti-dom. But it sounds like you're pretty much set on INFJ, which is totally cool with me.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

einna123 said:


> Regarding the Ni doms as certain/uncertain issue: The way I see it, Ni-Ti works together to analyze pieces of data and fit them into a conceptual framework. They're essentially making a lego set without using the instructions. The problem is that Ti REALLY DOES NOT LIKE IT when you have few loose pieces that you can't seem to fit properly into the model. It keeps looping back to consult with Ni, which does its thing in the subconscious and comes back with an "out of nowhere" answer that seems to mollify it, but then it finds another piece that makes no sense and the cycle begins anew. I assume that Ni-Fi works in a similar way, with INTJs using these functions in tandem to fit new information into a preexisting internal value system. Any INTJs out there want to affirm/refute this claim?


I've thought about Ni-Ti similarly. It's the cognitive dissonance that is troubling. We want the answer. Every piece of information that we have access to must be considered. It must line up with the Ni conclusion exactly. At a certain point, I think Ti can help you analyze that not all the information you encounter is as accurate as others. 



einna123 said:


> Sometimes, dominant-tertiary loops go on for an extended period of time. This obviously isn't healthy for a person cognitively, since it leaves them relatively unbalanced when it comes to the introverted-extroverted function ratio. For that reason, the best way to break out of a loop is by really focusing on using and developing one's aux. In my case, that's using Fe. Fe is all about external harmony and common ground. Fe-Ti in particular is saying "I've done all I can internally to figure the issue out, and I have a solid stance. Now, I'm running it by the group to see whether it is understood/approved by the community." Out of curiosity, does Ti-Fe work in a similar way?


Yeah, the auxiliary function is important, but I still haven't figured out how beneficial it actually is. I think there's drawbacks to it, as well. 



einna123 said:


> Regarding the "who wants validation" problem: The issue here is the way the word is being defined. In this case, I agree with @_mistakenforstranger_. INFJs are looking for intellectual validation (i.e. for understanding), while INFPs look for emotional validation. In the INFJ's case, the individual in question really does want to tell someone about what's going on in their crazy head. They hope that they will be able to one day find some people who will look at them and say, "No, you're not insane for thinking that way. I totally get what's going on in your head. It makes sense." It reassures their Fe and lets them know that they still fit comfortably in the collective, despite the fact that they feel like an outsider.
> On the other hand, the INFP wants emotional validation. They want to present their values system to someone and have that someone say "The way you feel about life is totally legitimate. While I may not agree with you on all issues, I respect the system you have created. What you stand for is moral.” It’s emotional validation. They don't want to be understood, though; it makes their Fi individuality super uncomfy.
> 
> Does any of this make sense? Please let me know what you think!


I've thought about this a little more, and I think the idea of wanting "validation" may actually be more linked to the Enneagram Type 4. As it says here, https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/type-4/

_While it is true that Fours often feel different from others, they do not really want to be alone. They may feel socially awkward or self-conscious, but they deeply wish to connect with people who understand them and their feelings. The “romantics” of the Enneagram, they long for someone to come into their lives and appreciate the secret self that they have privately nurtured and hidden from the world. If, over time, such *validation* remains out of reach, Fours begin to build their identity around how unlike everyone else they are. The outsider therefore comforts herself by becoming an insistent individualist: everything must be done on her own, in her own way, on her own terms. Fours’ mantra becomes “I am myself. Nobody understands me. I am different and special,” while they secretly wish they could enjoy the easiness and confidence that others seem to enjoy.
_
I think INFJs are less inclined to say or think to themselves, "I feel misunderstood," and more, "Everyone else doesn't understand, or lacks a proper understanding, while I'm the only one who truly knows..." The misunderstanding is projected onto others (Fe), always seeing them at fault, rather than being a quality of one's self (Fi). It can be almost impossible to convince an INFJ of anything that goes against their own idea of something when they're not properly using Fe, because the patterns they notice aren't readily observable to other people. And even if other people point out the flaws in their argument, they have the ability to internally shift their perspective, which leads to a type of confirmation bias in which their idea is "true," even if only to them (Ni-Ti loop). If this continues, at a certain point, INFJs can become completely out of touch with reality (inf. Se), off-base in their assertions, and have no insight whatsoever (though they think they do) into the situation or into their own lack of understanding. Once they get back in touch with the objectivity of Fe (and Se) and listen to others and consider their ideas as well, they might realize how wrong they actually were, but it's usually after the fact. I think Ni would be more prone to this than Ne, since Ne is more open to considering alternative explanations. 

You can read about this idea all here:
https://www.personalitypage.com/html/INFJ_per.html

And compare that with ISFJ's problems with Si:
https://www.personalitypage.com/html/ISFJ_per.html


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Eluid Sade said:


> Would an ISFJ do the same abstract discussion because of tertiary Ti? What about INFJs?


Yes, but not as seriously or with the same intensity and centrality as the ISTP. One gets the feeling that abstraction for the ISFJ is a fun diversion that lacks the power to really affect their core perceptions. That is why SFJs can so happily entertain discordant beliefs and perspectives, even energetically, but then take them off at the end of a conversation like swapping out a party dress. SFJs, especially ESFJs are the 'oooh, you are a militant atheist! Fascinating! Tell me all about that!" but at no point whatsoever is there any danger of their subjective perceptions being disturbed. 

INFJs are a whole other ball-game...mainly in the nature and tone of those subjective perceptions. Their whole being seems suffused with some other-worldliness. Like they are from another world. This, too, is caused by the warping of stimuli into their psyche... but where the Si mind generates and ties itself to mythology... the Ni ties itself to holistic symbolism and visions. For the ENFJ, this often manifests as a perception of a hidden zeitgeist, and for the INFJ, often as bizarre artistic expression.

So, the INFJ is the same as the ISFJ except that instead of defending some mythology that is more or less sensory (the whole story and dogma of Christ, for example, is powerfully sensory) while my INFJ friend, when asked about this, smiles almost ironically and says, like it was the most obvious thing in the world, (paraphrasing here) "we are the fingers of God, plunged into murky waters. We see one another and cannot see that point where we all connect, and thus we imagine ourselves individuals. We are not. We are God and God is us." Then he says that whenever he looks into the eyes of another, he sees his own soul. This is obviously not a value judgment (F) or logic (T), but a subjective PERCEPTION of reality, heavily warped by the influence of his psyche. 



Army Man said:


> I believe in God as a Christian. My rationale is that it seems very impractical that life would just start all by itself spontaneously from nothing. Almost everything in life starts from something. In fact, I cannot think of anything that begins from nothing. Also, I think that He serves as a purpose for our lives to continue, He gives us hope, and He is the foundation of all good morality. Without Him, there is nothing on which to base any moral principles. Society does not provide morality for us, and all you have to do to see the proof of that is to look at current events and the people that society looks up to, namely celebrities.


This isn't very abstract. I strongly doubt a Ti-dom would be content to shortcut the logical process like this. To me this is "I can't imagine it off the top of my head, so............ that's that!" If THINKING were central to you, especially that ruminating, abstract thinking that is Ti, this would have been the absolute beginning of a long journey of logic... on that could not be avoided because of the centrality and insatiability of dominant abstraction of thought.


----------



## Bitterself (Mar 14, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> Yes, but not as seriously or with the same intensity and centrality as the ISTP. One gets the feeling that abstraction for the ISFJ is a fun diversion that lacks the power to really affect their core perceptions. That is why SFJs can so happily entertain discordant beliefs and perspectives, even energetically, but then take them off at the end of a conversation like swapping out a party dress. SFJs, especially ESFJs are the 'oooh, you are a militant atheist! Fascinating! Tell me all about that!" but at no point whatsoever is there any danger of their subjective perceptions being disturbed.
> 
> INFJs are a whole other ball-game...mainly in the nature and tone of those subjective perceptions. Their whole being seems suffused with some other-worldliness. Like they are from another world. This, too, is caused by the warping of stimuli into their psyche... but where the Si mind generates and ties itself to mythology... the Ni ties itself to holistic symbolism and visions. For the ENFJ, this often manifests as a perception of a hidden zeitgeist, and for the INFJ, often as bizarre artistic expression.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your response. In debates I always use "arguments" based on my own perceptions and I use a little logic. Feelings are almost never used. Everything is based on my own vision and perception of the world. Maybe I'm an INFJ after all.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> This isn't very abstract. I strongly doubt a Ti-dom would be content to shortcut the logical process like this. To me this is "I can't imagine it off the top of my head, so............ that's that!" If THINKING were central to you, especially that ruminating, abstract thinking that is Ti, this would have been the absolute beginning of a long journey of logic... on that could not be avoided because of the centrality and insatiability of dominant abstraction of thought.


So, what are you saying?


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

That kind of makes me think I may be a Ti-dom. Or maybe I just use my Ti a lot.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

Psychopomp said:


> This isn't very abstract. I strongly doubt a Ti-dom would be content to shortcut the logical process like this. To me this is "I can't imagine it off the top of my head, so............ that's that!" *If THINKING were central to you*, especially that ruminating, abstract thinking that is Ti, this would have been the absolute beginning of a long journey of logic... on that could not be avoided because of the centrality and insatiability of dominant abstraction of thought.


It would be fine as Te. I totally disagree with his "logic," but that's pretty normal for Ti vs Te.



Army Man said:


> I believe in God as a Christian. My rationale is that it seems very impractical that life would just start all by itself spontaneously from nothing. Almost everything in life starts from something. *In fact, I cannot think of anything that begins from nothing. *Also, I think that He serves as a purpose for our lives to continue, He gives us hope, and He is the foundation of all good morality. Without Him, there is nothing on which to base any moral principles. Society does not provide morality for us, and all you have to do to see the proof of that is to look at current events and the people that society looks up to, namely celebrities.


How about God? Where did he come from?


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Coyote said:


> It would be fine as Te. I totally disagree with his "logic," but that's pretty normal for Ti vs Te.
> 
> 
> How about God? Where did he come from?


Well obviously that part defies reason because he never came at all. He has always been. There was no starting point for Him, just as there is no ending point for Him.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Army Man said:


> So, what are you saying?


That you are probably not a Ti-dom, which apparently has already been worked out.







------------


I'd really love to explore how different types approach religious belief... I think there would be well-defined differences in processing paradoxical ideas such as God. 

Si - Subjective and personal myth acceptance.
Ti - Logical reductionism/abstraction - such as Pascal's Wager or hinging the question on some abstract principle.
Fi - Personal relationship with the impression of deity.
Ni - Subjective holistic visions of the nature of deity. Often leans toward pantheistic or panentheistic epiphanies. 

I mention only introverted functions because extraverted ones mainly fail to handle the abstractions of religion and instead avoid the question through more objective considerations. They'd either want to engage with the more tangible or practical parts of religious life, or to explore other angles of religion... or to consider religion in a social context or in application. 

Fe - Religion as a tool for social good.
Te - Religion as a functional or practical entity.
Ne - The potentials or future states that religion might act as a vehicle for.
Se - The dynamics of experience and life that religion might be a vehicle for.


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> That you are probably not a Ti-dom, which apparently has already been worked out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


True, but I'm still unsure about my type. I'm pathetic. I have such a hard time accepting whatever the truth about my type is. Especially because of things I do and the way I am that contradict stereotypes for any type.

I relate with Si, Fi, and Ni among your introverted function descriptions, and among your extroverted function descriptions I relate with Ne and Se, and a tiny bit with Te.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Army Man said:


> True, but I'm still unsure about my type. I'm pathetic. I have such a hard time accepting whatever the truth about my type is. Especially because of things I do and the way I am that contradict stereotypes for any type.
> 
> I relate with Si, Fi, and Ni among your introverted function descriptions, and among your extroverted function descriptions I relate with Ne and Se, and a tiny bit with Te.


Forget the stereotypes. Stereotypes are heuristic and aggregation that don't actually apply to almost anyone in particular. Everyone violates stereotype upon inspection. Almost no one in the world looks at themselves and thinks, "yep, I fit this stereotype". No one. The most stereotypical person doesn't think this. We see all of our uniqueness. 

Also, we can easily identify glancingly with generalized descriptions from other types or functions. In a way, this is the Barnum Effect... but also just the non-stereotype nature of people in general. Of course you will identify with wanting to have an engaging experience, or see possibilities or whatever. That isn't the point.

An Ne dom isn't someone who enjoys considering possibilities, but someone for whom that is the central aspect of their existence. 

For example, what if your subjective myth acceptance or private world view came head to head with your interest in possibilities? Which would win out, proving itself the more central aspect of your ego and psyche? 

To me, your demeanor is fairly clear. You aren't a Ti-dom, and certainly not an Ne-dom. Surely, you aren't an Ni-dom. So, where is the confusion? 

How is seeing yourself as a more or less well-rounded human incompatible with being an ISTJ (or whatever)?


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> Forget the stereotypes. Stereotypes are heuristic and aggregation that don't actually apply to almost anyone in particular. Everyone violates stereotype upon inspection. Almost no one in the world looks at themselves and thinks, "yep, I fit this stereotype". No one. The most stereotypical person doesn't think this. We see all of our uniqueness.
> 
> Also, we can easily identify glancingly with generalized descriptions from other types or functions. In a way, this is the Barnum Effect... but also just the non-stereotype nature of people in general. Of course you will identify with wanting to have an engaging experience, or see possibilities or whatever. That isn't the point.
> 
> ...


Not so sure that I'm "well-rounded" but that's nice of you to say anyway.
Usually, my _private world view_ wins over alternative possibilities. Otherwise, Ne-doms and Ni-doms wouldn't consider me to "jump to conclusions" or "overgeneralize". The quotes are there because that is what they have told me. Such claims always make me feel bad, and make me want to change myself into a better person, but then I think to myself "Well how can I change? I have no idea." This results in a loop of frustration, disappointment, and feeling like a failure. I know I'm not a failure, but that's how I feel since I cannot get myself past my own issues.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

Army Man said:


> Not so sure that I'm "well-rounded" but that's nice of you to say anyway.
> Usually, my _private world view_ wins over alternative possibilities. Otherwise, Ne-doms and Ni-doms wouldn't consider me to "jump to conclusions" or "overgeneralize". The quotes are there because that is what they have told me. Such claims always make me feel bad, and make me want to change myself into a better person, but then I think to myself "Well how can I change? I have no idea." This results in a loop of frustration, disappointment, and feeling like a failure. I know I'm not a failure, but that's how I feel since I cannot get myself past my own issues.


Aww. Now I like you. 

Don't try to change to please others. You'll just make yourself miserable, and someone new will end up disliking you. It's a game you can never win. 

I think I'll go read some of your type-me threads, so as not to hijack this one. Maybe/hopefully I'll be able to help?


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Coyote
Please, feel free to hijack all you want! This is actually helping me out a ton 
If you do end up going to another thread, will you link me to it? I'm curious to see how all this plays out, but only if Army Man doesn't mind!
@Army Man, I hope you figure out what your type is soon! Don't feel the need to rush it though. It's totally OK if you don't have a definitive set of letters for a while, and you are IN NO WAY pathetic for being confused! It just means that you're a real human! Jung's cognitive function model is a theory: a general explanation to describe a way a thing seems to work. By definition it wasn't designed to account for things like squishy individual circumstances, or even the biological factors that affect the psyche. In the end all the letters do is describe your base cognition. It's your foundation, and you can build whatever kind of building you want on top of it. Everyone is an individual, so even if you do identify with something that is stereotypically "Ne," it doesn't automatically make you an ENxP. Neither does not identifying with Si discount the ISTJ type. It just makes you you 
Try to feel your way through the functions, and see what fits best for you over time. I know it feels confusing and kinda scary to not be pinned down, but the awesome people on here can totally help you out. Often it's way easier to type other people than to type yourself, since other people aren't necessarily trapped by the same cognitive biases you are. If you want to chat, I'd also be happy to give you my impressions of your type!


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

einna123 said:


> @Coyote
> Please, feel free to hijack all you want! This is actually helping me out a ton
> If you do end up going to another thread, will you link me to it? I'm curious to see how all this plays out, but only if Army Man doesn't mind!
> @Army Man, I hope you figure out what your type is soon! Don't feel the need to rush it though. It's totally OK if you don't have a definitive set of letters for a while, and you are IN NO WAY pathetic for being confused! It just means that you're a real human! Jung's cognitive function model is a theory: a general explanation to describe a way a thing seems to work. By definition it wasn't designed to account for things like squishy individual circumstances, or even the biological factors that affect the psyche. In the end all the letters do is describe your base cognition. It's your foundation, and you can build whatever kind of building you want on top of it. Everyone is an individual, so even if you do identify with something that is stereotypically "Ne," it doesn't automatically make you an ENxP. Neither does not identifying with Si discount the ISTJ type. It just makes you you
> Try to feel your way through the functions, and see what fits best for you over time. I know it feels confusing and kinda scary to not be pinned down, but the awesome people on here can totally help you out. Often it's way easier to type other people than to type yourself, since other people aren't necessarily trapped by the same cognitive biases you are. If you want to chat, I'd also be happy to give you my impressions of your type!


Sure, please do here http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-personality-type/732298-yet-another-soul-trying-type-themselves.html


----------



## Super Luigi (Dec 1, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Aww. Now I like you.
> 
> Don't try to change to please others. You'll just make yourself miserable, and someone new will end up disliking you. It's a game you can never win.
> 
> I think I'll go read some of your type-me threads, so as not to hijack this one. Maybe/hopefully I'll be able to help?


I would really appreciate that, and thank you for liking me. That makes me feel better already. Ugh, I'm a basket-case (internalized, though).


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

einna123 said:


> @_Coyote_
> Please, feel free to hijack all you want! This is actually helping me out a ton
> If you do end up going to another thread, will you link me to it? I'm curious to see how all this plays out, but only if Army Man doesn't mind!
> @_Army Man_, I hope you figure out what your type is soon! Don't feel the need to rush it though. It's totally OK if you don't have a definitive set of letters for a while, and you are IN NO WAY pathetic for being confused! It just means that you're a real human! Jung's cognitive function model is a theory: a general explanation to describe a way a thing seems to work. By definition it wasn't designed to account for things like squishy individual circumstances, or even the biological factors that affect the psyche. In the end all the letters do is describe your base cognition. It's your foundation, and you can build whatever kind of building you want on top of it. Everyone is an individual, so even if you do identify with something that is stereotypically "Ne," it doesn't automatically make you an ENxP. Neither does not identifying with Si discount the ISTJ type. It just makes you you
> Try to feel your way through the functions, and see what fits best for you over time. I know it feels confusing and kinda scary to not be pinned down, but the awesome people on here can totally help you out. Often it's way easier to type other people than to type yourself, since other people aren't necessarily trapped by the same cognitive biases you are. If you want to chat, I'd also be happy to give you my impressions of your type!


Also worth noting that Jung felt that many, if not most people, would have no strongly discernible type. He imagined that if any function failed to differentiate itself into consciousness, that all of the functions would more or less exist in a relatively nebulous equilibrium, resulting in what he considered a 'normal man'. No special snowflake for them. 

I personally feel that some differentiation is inevitable, and that most people display coherent type to some extent.... but, I've certainly met people who offer contradictions and ambiguities to the point where, even if I were to type them, it would not do them much good. Technically, they might show Fi over Fe, but it remains ambiguous enough that they can't derive much from that understanding.


----------



## The Anchor (May 5, 2015)

karmachameleon said:


> That kind of makes me think I may be a Ti-dom. Or maybe I just use my Ti a lot.


Hehe. This reminds me of myself. I have wondered if I was Ti dom so many times (and still do sometimes), but in the end I always realize I am too much Fe for it to be possible. I care way too much about what others think and I can easily figure out what to say to a person and in what tone, depending on what I want to achieve and who I have in front of me. I can blend in quite comfortably in many different environments. It is the good old chameleon effect. When you realize that, you just know you are not Ti dom. 

INFJ's do use Ti a lot though, and many tend to use it more often than Fe. The reason for this 'tertiary temptation' is because it has the same attitude (introversion) as the dominant function. Ni and Ti work in a tandem, but will quickly become unhealthy if Fe isn't used appropriately to provide a reality check. This is often the case and it makes INFJ's think they have dominant Ti, while it is actually their mind playing tricks on them and bypassing their more developed and natural aux Fe. Here's the article that further elaborates on what I'm talking about: http://www.stellarmaze.com/tertiary-temptation-in-infj/ And if you really are an INFJ, this article will also resonate strongly with you: Fi in INFJs | Stellar Maze


----------



## Howy (Aug 7, 2014)

I wrote this in another thread so I'll just copy and paste.

Want to understand ni as someone who use Ne?

As you know si function is experiencing sensory information. And that sensory information Is stored in your long term memory which naturally accumulates over time. These memories become associated with your sense of self and is viewed by you as a irreplaceable part of your identity. In the present, sensory information that are similar to your memory are viewed as familiar while new sensations are viewed as alien or untrustworthy. Strong si Dom have a compulsive need to adjust their sensory environment to match familiar sensory memories which to them feel more comfortable. If this compulsive need is not met they feel anxious or unwell. When they get to change their sensory experience to what they prefer, they feel comfortable. 

A person with ni sees intuitive connections just like Ne. The difference is that Ni stores intuitive information into long term memory in its abstract, non sensory form. These memories are associated with the persons sense of self like si and the individual perfer certain ideas just like an si user to sensations. Certain ideas are familiar to the ni Dom and they develope a preference to certain ideas. They have a compulsive need to match be the ideas of their present to their preferred intuitive preferences that accumulated over time . 

Basically ni is Ne plus long term memory without sensory information plus personally preference plus OCD. 
Si is Se plus long term memory without intuitive information plus personally preference plus OCD. 

But how do someone with Ne remember intuitive information such as how thing relate to each other? What Ne users do is remember key sensory information that if recalled will allow the user to see the inuitive connections at the moment of recall. Ne users tend to have a need to convert thier intuitive understanding to sensory representation. I.e. Explain an idea with words or pictures. This is because for Ne user to remember the information it needs to be in sensory form.

How do ni user remember sensory information? They remember intuitive ideas ( it's often called a model or system because it's a very big intuitive memory that grew and improved over time) that will always allow them to put in the right sensory information when the intuition is recalled at the moment.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

einna123 said:


> I've been having a hard time figuring out whether I use Ni or Si. I know that the two are really different functions and that I shouldn't be confused, but I definitely do see elements of both in my thinking. Here's the data:
> 
> -In general, my memory is a sieve with a couple of extra holes poked into it, but I am really good at remembering songs (I learn music by ear fairly easily and I love studying music), the general plots of books I really enjoyed, and other things that I find interesting. When it comes to facts I care about, I'm a bit of an encyclopedia.
> -I love studying languages, especially modern languages, and I'm good at identifying the way words are supposed to be said and linking meaning to new vocab words.
> ...


I don't think it matters what other people think. You already decided. You just want confirmation.

That's ok. I just don't get why you want this confirmation from others,..... oh yeah,.... Fe.


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Peter

*slow claps* Nice job, man 
I'm good at knowing what other people want/think, not super familiar with my own motivations unless I sit down and have a conversation with my values to figure out what the hell they're thinking. That's why I'm always interested in finding out what I look like from the outside. It helps me figure out what I'm like without any cognitive bias blocking my view, and it also lets me know whether or not I need to change anything so that I don't offend people. TBH I was 99.9% sure of my INFJ-dom before I made this post, but I wanted to confirm to be sure. I'm glad I did, because I (and hopefully a few other people) really learned a lot about functions! I'll be able to type people a lot more easily now, which is always great 
Thank you again to everyone who responded! This was super, super helpful!

P.S Those text typer things in your signature were really interesting! I wonder what algorithms the creator used to teach the computer what "sensing" and "intuition" or "feeling" and "perceiving" were. Wouldn't it be more subjective since it's dichotomy based? Usually everyone's definition of a term differs anyway?


----------



## Lunacik (Apr 19, 2014)

@einna123

*Take a look at your past and think about what you've struggled with the most throughout your life.* Think of specific examples.
Which function does that tie into?
The inferior function is usually something you either struggle with or have struggled with a lot in the past. It should have been something that caused problems in your life, something you've had to really work on....although it's theoretically possible to be "ambidextrous" as well.
For instance, I thought of my greatest weakness I had during my childhood which was fear, but because of MBTI I realized all my fears revolved around _physical _things. I never did have confidence in anything such as climbing, certain parts of gymnastics (running full speed at an inanimate object aka the vault), etc. As for visual arts, I always struggled with the physical implementation and accurate aesthetic imitation (structure, texture, color, etc), but have always excelled at creative ideas. Childhood nicknames included "spacey," "clueless," because I was never aware of my surroundings...or anything else going on. These things are all _hints _to Sx being lower in my stack.

*Also, take a look at your function stack.* Is there anything you _don't_ like about it? If there's a function you particularly dislike, what don't you like about it? Is that something you are struggling to admit you dislike about yourself? Can you think of any times when others have accused you of being that way in the past?
How well do you like the function stack you think you are? If it's all your favorite functions in the order you most prefer them to be in and there's not a single thing in there that you struggle to admit, you probably should examine whether you're being entirely honest with yourself. Sometimes we delude ourselves with unintentional bias. We're human, we _all_ do it at some point or another. It's impossible to eliminate bias 100%.

Thinking about what you want to do later doesn't automatically indicate being an Ni dom. Are you interested in what you're doing when you drift off? Most Ni doms--especially INFJs--feel isolated from the world and fail to notice surroundings as if _life_ is just a dream, regardless whether they like it or not. They struggle to notice surroundings and physical details, they often have plenty of confidence in their ability to generate ideas but lack confidence in their ability to implement. *If there is no significant difference in these things for you, you might consider Fi.* You don't seem like Ti because Ti is subjective logic...it trusts its own evaluations and assessments rather than those of others. People with well developed Ti are often skeptical of everything, and hear-say on a forum is far from an exception. They'd usually see no point in asking here because they wouldn't be able to trust the accuracy of the feedback they received...it is possible for a Ti dom to have poorly developed Ti, but you'd probably figure it out eventually if it was suppressed. *Point being, I think you're probably on the right track if you omit the people saying Ti dom, and also that's why I say check out Fi if you start to wonder if you are neither Ni or Si dom.*

I know you are probably just posting this after seeing everyone else on here do the same, but as for people typing others...even practitioners don't do that. They only help you type yourself. That's all anyone _can_ do.

I wrote up an S vs N thing the practitioner taught me when he did the instrument with me, let me see if I can dig it up and link it to you.



Here are some notes I took from a book:

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
[/CENTER][/B]

*[HIGHLIGHT]Introverted Functions:[/HIGHLIGHT] concerned with internal phenomena*
❣ *Si -* remembered past and inner sensations
❣ *Ni -* insights and impressions from the subconscious
❣ *Fi -* personal feelings, tastes, morals
❣ *Ti -* subjective logic, methods, strategies

*[HIGHLIGHT]Extroverted Functions:[/HIGHLIGHT] concerned with external phenomena*
❣ *Se -* novel, outer sensations and experiences, as well as keeping up appearances
❣ *Ne -* perceiving and recombining circulating ideas, theories, and possibilities
❣ *Fe -* establishing interpersonal rapport, meeting others' needs, and observing social norms
❣ *Te -* analyzing and optimizing external systems, methods, and operations

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*

[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Si:[/HIGHLIGHT]*
To retain, condense, and recollect information; to consult past experiences, routines, and traditions; to perceive inner bodily sensations.
_(Associated with: Routines, habits, valuing and preserving "the tried and true," material conservatism, high regard for traditions and authority._

❣ Retains, condenses, and recollects past information; it also perceives inner bodily sensations.

❣ Retains, consolidates, and recollects historical and autobiographical information. It attends to and draws on a concentrated body of past experiences, routines, and traditions (i.e. the "tried and true"). It forgoes the constant pursuit of new or broad experiences, finding safety and security in stability and consistency. It also surveys inner bodily sensations.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Ni:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To collect conscious and unconscious information, then synthesize it to produce impressions, insights, answers, and theories; to see deep causes, patterns, and laws underlying sense data.
_(Associated with: Deep perceptiveness and insight, deep "knowing," theoretical genius, powers of analysis and focus, advising and troubleshooting.)_

❣ Ni collects and synthesizes information to produce convergent impressions, insights, answers, and theories.

❣ Collects conscious and subconscious information, and then synthesizes it to produce convergent impressions, insights, answers, and theories. It sees deep causes, patterns, and laws underlying sense data. It is characteristically penetrating and insightful.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Fi:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To explore and refine tastes, feelings, and values, contributing to a strong sense of personal uniqueness; to maintain inner emotional and moral order; to emotionally invest in a limited number of persons, animals, or interests.
_(Associated with: Fighting for "underdogs," emotional restraint, nuanced morals and values, nurture and care-giving, sensitivity to perceived iniquities and injustice.)_

❣ Concerned with emotional and moral order of the self; like Ti, it is self-regulating and self-controlling.

❣ Explores and refines personal tastes and feelings, contibuting to a strong sense of personal uniqueness. It is self-regulating and self-controlling, working to maintain inner emotional and moral order. It may also emotionally invest in a limited number of love objects, be they persons, animals, hobbies, or causes.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Ti:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To examine practical or conceptual issues using deep, implicit, and nuanced logic; to develop and refine subjective methods, strategies, or concepts.
_(Associated with: Deep skepticism, tacit logic, self-regulation and self-optimization, personal independence and autonomy.)_

❣ Imposes rational order on the self and its objectives; it is concerned with self-regulation, self-direction, and self-control.

❣ Utilizes deep and nuanced logic to examine techniques, problems, concepts, or theories. It seeks self-regulation and self-optimization through the development of personal skills, methods, and strategies. It takes a skeptical and reductive approach toward knowledge.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Se:[/HIGHLIGHT]*
To perceive and meditate prompt responses to external details and events; to seek breadth of novel sensory experiences; to physically interact with the world.
_(Associated with: Sensation-seeking, kinesthetic intelligence, an "eye for detail," attunement to style and appearances, hands-on activities, effortless performance._

❣ Surveys a breadth of external sensations and experiences; it is characteristically open-ended and non-discriminating

❣ Seeks extensive outer stimulation in the "here and now"--new sights, sounds, tastes, experiences, etc. It is open-ended and non-discriminating with respect to new experiences. It can also be associated with image-consciousness and observation skills, displaying a keen eye for detail. Outwardly, it may manifest as a recurrent desire for activities beyond talking ("Let's _do _something!").

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
*​

[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Ne:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To broadly explore, synthesize, and express ideas, associations, possibilities.
_(Associated with: brainstorming, innovative / artistic / ideational creativity, divergent thinking, holistic / web-like associations, a nose for promising new enterprises.)_

❣ Surveys and recombines a breadth of ideas and possibilities; like Se, it is characteristically open-ended and non-discriminating.

❣ Surveys and creatively recombines a breadth of ideas, associations, patterns, and possibilities. It is characteristically innovative, divergent, open-ended, and non-discriminating. Outwardly, Ne users may present as scattered, random, quirky, witty, and ideationally curious.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Fe:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To survey a breadth of human emotions, values, morals, striving upward toward interpersonal or group consensus; to directly express feelings and judgments; to instruct or motivate others toward growth and excellence.
_([HIGHLIGHT]Associated with:[/HIGHLIGHT] An interpersonal focus (relating to relationships or communication between people), emotional expressiveness, communication skills, talkativeness, attunement to social norms, advice giving.)_

❣ Facilitates order and gives direction to the world of human relations; it seeks social and moral order.

❣ Surveys a breadth of human emotions, values, morals. It strives toward interpersonal rapport, consensus, and continuity. It can also be associated with effective communication and social intelligence, facilitating growth and transformation in others. Outwardly, it delivers opinions and directives in a direct yet tactful way, often with a sense of emotional urgency and conviction.

*

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀​*
[HIGHLIGHT]*Function Te:*[/HIGHLIGHT]
To succinctly express logic-based judgments; to understand or render systems and operations more rational, efficient, and effective.
_(Associated with: Explicit logic, precise and pointed expressions, bureaucracy and "red tape," quantitive methods "show me the numbers!")_

❣ Seeks to impose rational order on external systems; it is outwardly controlling.

❣ Uses explicit logic, including standardized methods, measurements, policies, and procedures, to make systems and operations more rational, efficient, or effective. This often involves working as a part of an institution, be it corporate, scientific, academic, etc. Outwardly, Te delivers opinions and directives in a firm, direct, measured, and unemotional fashion. It may at times be perceived as harsh, tactless, or unsympathetic.[/COLOR]













*Tbh...Si dom theme song:*


----------



## Lunacik (Apr 19, 2014)

@einna123 

Alright, I found the post I wrote with the thing someone certified taught me.


First, here's an example that's more interactive:

Take a look at this for a second and observe some things about it before reading further.
:woof: :ball:






*A Sensor is naturally more oriented around what's seen.*
An S natural might see a dog barking and a cat playing with a white ball that's like half its size, so maybe it's a young kitten or maybe it's just a big ball. The dog is brown and white, looks like a beagle. The cat is grey and striped, like a tabby. It has pink in its ears. They will naturally notice whatever details that I as an INTP or INFJ never would without taking a few minutes to pay attention to it.
By some iNtuitives, this can be interpreted as unimaginative or "not seeing the underlying connections"...but to Sensors, it's concrete fact, and can also be seen as more reliable, realistic, practical, and trustworthy than the following iNtuitive example. So another effective strategy is to observe your stressors, if you identify with these.

Alternate Example 1: If shown a painting and asked what they saw, an S would start to identify things like, "there's a baseball bat, a ball, a guy with a beard, he's hitting the ball" etc.

Alternate Example 2: If they saw a table, they might start to notice the sensory details.

*An iNtuitive would immediately focus more on the unseen inferences or underlying dynamics.*
An N user might see something like,
"maybe the dog is barking at the cat because it wants it to play with it instead of the ball, so it's trying to get its attention?"
"Maybe it's trying to scare it away, but it's not even paying attention?"
"Maybe if there was a wall between them, the dog would be barking because it hears the noises the cat is making?"
:woof:|||:ball: <-wall
iNtuitive inferences such as these can sometimes drive Sensors nuts, because they are not fact based. They're theoretical, and unsupported by sufficient evidence. They seem to Sensors to be less realistic or practical. So another effective strategy is to observe your stressors, if you identify with these.


Alternate Example 1: An intuitive might say things like, maybe the gravity is making the woman fall a certain way, or make some other possible inference about something.

Alternate Example 2: So when they see the table they might naturally think of the process of how it's made rather than the physical details of it. For many iNtuitives, noticing details feels much more strained while noticing underlying dynamics flows.

Of course, since we use both, we CAN do both. The question though, is which one is most comfortable to you? For me, the very first thing I saw (before I even placed those things next to each other) was the iNtuitive example I gave. I had to stop and look at the other "sensor" details just to even be able to add them for this example. Edit: Also, with the iNtuitive examples, I could have kept going effortlessly but stopped myself because it wasn't necessary. In me specifically, that just signifies there's a clearly distinctive and natural knack for the iNtuitive, while I need to work a little harder at my Sensing. For others, it might be more difficult to distinguish if for some reason they've nurtured or developed their other function more, while suppressing their natural one. For this reason, sometimes people can outwardly seem to be types they are not.





This is a response from someone who posted a Sensor example that was much better than mine:


> The dog becomes an actual randomly generated puppy barking at me(hurts my ears) and turns into a robotic walking-barking puppy (I can see it walking and barking and I think it would be fun to buy one of those again, They are fun to watch and play with) The cat makes me remember/realize how I like to fidget with random things and how I often act like a cat when I play. I imagine multiple things I could use to play with the way the cat plays with the ball.
> I see a random ball, feel its texture. I see a wool made ball I have in room, i touch it and feel its texture. I see a random color wool of ball, feel it's structure, see it untangling as it rolls or gets thrown up, figure out I could tie the lose end to stop the untangling, see the ball with tied end, I pull it, I figure I could actually let it untangle, I see a tangled wool that the lose end turned into after playing with untangled ball, I squeeze it, I tangle it, untangle it, I put it between my fingers, make random shapes of it, cut a string and make a cat toy of it by tangling a small item to it, imagine I knit with it, I see my needless and the wool on them, I feel the scarf like thing under my fingers, I conclude other materials make better scarfs, I feel a plush scarf under my fingers, I figure it would me nice to make one, I browse memory for plush clothes possible to destroy and make the scarf of, I see picture of plush pants I rarely wear, I imagine myself cutting them and making a scarf out of them...


----------



## Lunacik (Apr 19, 2014)

Peter said:


> I don't think it matters what other people think. You already decided. You just want confirmation.
> That's ok. I just don't get why you want this confirmation from others..... oh yeah.... Fe.


What evidence even supports this claim? Lol


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

Si is more intuned with the external world
Ni is not.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

einna123 said:


> P.S Those text typer things in your signature were really interesting! I wonder what algorithms the creator used to teach the computer what "sensing" and "intuition" or "feeling" and "perceiving" were. Wouldn't it be more subjective since it's dichotomy based? Usually everyone's definition of a term differs anyway?


From what I understand, they use all the posts in this forum, and associate those with the type people have in their profile. With that information they build writing profiles for types and compare that to the text you let it analyze.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

Lunacik said:


> What evidence even supports this claim? Lol


Her post.

Read her post and see what's going on. In her reply to my post, she acknowledges I was right.

I wasn't being mean in that post, though if you don't see what I saw in her post, then I can imagine you might reply the way you did.


----------



## Lunacik (Apr 19, 2014)

Peter said:


> Her post.
> 
> Read her post and see what's going on. In her reply to my post, she acknowledges I was right.
> 
> I wasn't being mean in that post, though if you don't see what I saw in her post, then I can imagine you might reply the way you did.


Oh, yeah I didn't read her response to you.
After a second look at the original post also, I see that most of what she lists off is aimed towards Ni dom.

Interesting observation.


To me that always screams, "deep down I know I'm not this, but I want to hear others tell me I am so that I can convince myself."


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Peter

Oh. OK! That's way more logical than what I had imagined. For some reason, I was thinking they'd use sentence structure and diction to match paragraphs up with theoretical definitions of the different parts of each dichotomy, depending on the test used. But then that would raise a bunch of questions about which definition is the right definition, how to define things like "intuition," where the point is that it's undefinable, etc. The system they've got going seems neat!
@Lunacik

Thank you so much for the incredible compilations you posted! They were incredibly helpful, and also really fun to look at (your formatting skills are truly spectacular)! I also appreciate the fact that you provided an example that was so clear. A lot of cognitive function beginners are going to benefit from your posts 
Also, yes, it's true. I used the comforting fact that the internet is an anonymous place to confess to the fact that I need social validation. I'm generally not a fan of false advertising. I hope I didn't come across as mean or snarky! That definitely wasn't my intention. I just like the sound of my own voice too much not to respond when prompted...


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Peter

Oh. OK! That's way more logical than what I had imagined. For some reason, I was thinking they'd use sentence structure and diction to match paragraphs up with theoretical definitions of the different parts of each dichotomy, depending on the test used. But then that would raise a bunch of questions about which definition is the right definition, how to define things like "intuition," where the point is that it's undefinable, etc. The system they've got going seems neat!
@Lunacik

Thank you so much for the incredible compilations you posted! They were incredibly helpful, and also really fun to look at (your formatting skills are truly spectacular)! I also appreciate the fact that you provided an example that was so clear. A lot of cognitive function beginners are going to benefit from your posts 
Also, yes, it's true. I used the comforting fact that the internet is an anonymous place to confess to the fact that I need social validation. I'm generally not a fan of false advertising. I hope I didn't come across as mean or snarky! That definitely wasn't my intention. I just like the sound of my own voice too much not to respond when prompted...


----------



## einna123 (Dec 8, 2015)

@Lunacik @Peter

Oh no! So sorry for the double post! Technical difficulties are such a pain.


----------



## Annie Anthonio (Sep 27, 2014)

Coyote said:


> @einna123
> 
> Neither. Maybe Ti-dom.
> 
> ...


Umm.....

The quote from Jung is Ni.

Ni is the framework, the vision, the picture of the finished puzzle. Ti is to put puzzle together through logical equation. Ti is not to see or seek meaning. Ni can put the unrelated pieces of the puzzle on the right spot without going through deduction of Ti, because Ni already know what it is going to be


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

Beautiful Ouroboros said:


> Umm.....
> 
> *The quote from Jung is Ni.*
> 
> Ni is the framework, the vision, the picture of the finished puzzle. Ti is to put puzzle together through logical equation. Ti is not to see or seek meaning. Ni can put the unrelated pieces of the puzzle on the right spot without going through deduction of Ti, because Ni already know what it is going to be


... You're correcting Jung on his own theory?


----------



## Annie Anthonio (Sep 27, 2014)

Coyote said:


> ... You're correcting Jung on his own theory?


No. The person wh quoted it represent Ti. I said the other wise


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

Beautiful Ouroboros said:


> Umm.....
> 
> The quote from Jung is Ni.
> 
> Ni is the framework, the vision, the picture of the finished puzzle. Ti is to put puzzle together through logical equation. Ti is not to see or seek meaning. Ni can put the unrelated pieces of the puzzle on the right spot without going through deduction of Ti, because Ni already know what it is going to be





Beautiful Ouroboros said:


> No. The person wh quoted it represent Ti. I said the other wise


I quoted it from Jung's Ti section, so the quote represents Ti. If you think it sounds like Ni, that shows how much MBTI has modified/corrupted Jung's original theory. So now Ti is a mere logic machine that finds no meaning in anything, while Ni is the all-seeing, all-knowing function that doesn't even need logic in order to be right. 

That's why I get frustrated with MBTI's caricatures and return to Jung. Because whatever its faults, his theory was holistic, consistent, and helpful. I don't know how MBTI is supposed to help anybody, if it's just telling us that we're robots or brilliant demi-gods.


----------

