storiesintheend123Â rebloged my post about Ni vs Si and added this to it, and I felt that it was very important for me to share it because I literally had about 50 Si users start slamming me for no reason. Â I focused solely on Ni because I felt that Si had been universally explained to the point where it was understood while Ni was confusing to many. Â Instead a bunch of people sent anon hate (literally calm down?) and added vague sentences like Ni is an apple and Ne is a pear which is confusing and the whole reason I made the post. Â I will probably soon just make a post that gives a deep explanation of the 4 perceiving functions in comparison and working together and then one for the judging, but high Si users, please just chill because it was literally only a post about making Ni easier to understand as opposed to Si abstraction which was not what I was focusing on. Â I was not trying to make Si seem basic, I was simply trying to explain the subjective future orientation of Ni vs. the subjective past orientation of Si. Â Â
âSo I am an ENFP as well, but as a Si user (inferior though it may be) who has spent plenty of time hashing out MBTI stuff with an INTJ, an INTP, and an ESFJ ⌠the whole Si-focuses-backward and Ni-focuses-forward is true. It is, of course, a stereotype, and it wonât always apply perfectly (or even all that well). But the point is that SJs and NPs tend to interpret the present by drawing on reference points in the past, while NJs and SPs tend to work through the present by drawing on predictions about the future. Both of them pay attention to the present, but they integrate it differently.
For example: my INTJ friend tends to view his life by focusing on who he wants to be, then making decisions about his current state of being based on that. Where he is going next is extremely crucial to him (the same goes for an INFJ friend of mine). He hates admitting he is wrong about something because it contradicts what he wants to be in the future (in a position closer to the unachievable self-perfection, from which stepping backwards is discouraging). Even my STP friends think about the future first, though with high Se this often translates into âwhat adventure do I go on next, or what is the next thing I have to do to keep myself alive or winning or whatever in the middle of this adventure or sport, etc.â
Contrast that with my ENFP self and my INTP and ESFJ friends. All three of us think in terms of âhow did I get here?â (just like Desmond the Moon Bear, of course). We think back to where weâve been, which was what brought us to where we are now. We fear repeating past mistakes because we know weâre liable to do the same things in the heat of the moment. We plan and agonize based on âwell how did that work in the past?â rather than on âwhere do we go from here?â Si can be surprisingly spontaneous, though usually because we donât have a set direction to go and therefore just do whatever comes into our minds that doesnât automatically raise red âthis didnât work last timeâ flags.
You can even see the difference in how my INTJ and ISTP friends felt while fighting depression and in how I and my ESFJ friend have felt. Ni worries because itâs not able to progress to where it wants to be. The future seems unreachable, and so what is the use of pursuing it? Just give up and sit where you are. Si worries that itâs not going to be able to break the cycles of the past. You mucked up three friendships already by turning them into codependencies, so what does that say about the fate of your current friendships? The state of ânormalcyâ that existed before canât possibly be returned to, since too much damage has occurred for ânormalâ to ever be achievable ever again. Ni despairs of being able to move toward the goal, while Si despairs of being able to move away from the problem.
As far as Si vs Se and Ni vs Ne goes âŚ
Si and Se both deal with impressions and perceptions. Si compares input to the past, while Se tries to process input on its own merits. Si says, âWe canât trust Mr. Gold, because heâs screwed us over so many times.â Se says, âWe shouldnât trust Mr. Gold, because we know heâs got the means to screw us over and the motive to encourage screwing us over.â Si builds off of past data points (very deductive). Se gathers current data and makes a statement about it (very inductive).
Ni and Ne both deal with judgments and intentions. Ni judges input from what it foresees, while Ne tries to weigh input on its own merits. Ni says, âMr. Gold is going to screw us over, because heâs never going to give up his dark powers.â Ne says, âMr. Gold might screw us over, because he wants to protect people his own way, and because he hates losing control of situations and the most obvious solution to this situation is for him to give up control.â Ni predicts based on what is most likely (probability-oriented). Ne predicts based on what things might occur (possibility-oriented).
Sensing functions can be easily skewed by misperceptions and misinformation. Intuiting functions can be easily skewed by misjudgments and misapplication. Si is like an encyclopaedia (what has been proven), Se is like a dictionary (what is accepted), Ne is like a flowchart (what is possible), and Ni is like an almanac (what is predicted). Si and Ni can look both forward and backâthe difference is where they are rooted/which direction they base their confidence in. Se and Ne can both look inwards and outwardsâthe difference is whether something is observed or inferred.
Long response, I know, but I feel like a lot of yâall higher-Si users are getting wrapped up in nuances of Si that are beside the point.â
Mod says: I really hope none of my followers send anon hate, because if so: