Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz
Did you get a feel for my type at all?
After looking at some of your posts here and elsewhere INFJ seems solid. I sometimes have difficulty separating Ti and Ni, but you seem to have both. Whenever you construct an idea, you seem to have a relative awareness of it's shortcomings or potential ramification, traits that I associate with Ni. I understand that this can also be exhibited by Ti users, but the way you do it gives me more of a Ni vibe. Ni-Ti in general can be thought to attempts to construct a perfect hypothetical model of something. Once a model has been constructed, it then is compared to the real world equivalent model. Ni quickly points out discrepancies between the real model and the hypothetical one, and the hypothetical one is then adjusted.
Anyways, for you I'd agree with INFJ. Arguments could be made for INTJ, ISTP, or INTP. Extroverted counter parts are less likely but still possible.
I 'spouse I should go for a brief definition of my understanding of functions.
Si sort of "memorizes" the results of past actions. "Last time we did it this way, it went pretty well. Not perfect, but well." Ne provides a solid counter balance. It's focused on all the alternate possibilities and explanations. When asked to do a task again, Si will remember how it was done last time and Ne will bring up a list of alternative methods.
Si doms and auxs will tend towards a more conservative approach. They will tend to stick to the original method or an alternative method that shares characteristics with the tried and true. They still explore with Ne, searching for better methods. As they try new things the get a better understanding of what works and what doesn't. History shows this to work, and not this.
Ne doms and auxs tend towards a more open approach. They see all the alternatives, and they want to explore. They still use Si to help understand what is effective and what isn't. Sometimes, if a new idea goes especially bad and they've only explored the method a few times, I've observed them to stick more rigidly to the tried and true. Ne doms seem to be more rigid about some things than Si doms surprisingly. But this could merely be an observation.
In general, Si-Ne can be thought of as additive. When an idea is tried, impressions are gathered for each element. As new ideas are tried, new impressions get added to overlapping elements, and the impression of those elements grow.
The stronger Ne is, the less the elements of an idea tend to overlap.
Ni likes to understand individual elements of an idea. When Si is addition, Ni is subtraction. As a Ni dom I tend to try new ideas with minor, usually specific variations. Then, I contrast the ideas and subtract them from each other so that only the differences remain. In this way, I can understand the causality of my variations.
For example; I might notice that the more I push my foot on the accelerator, the faster the car goes. My intuition then equates pressure on the accelerator with speed.
In the future, I push my foot on the accelerator and it doesn't accelerate as much. This is odd. I quickly start looking for variations from previous experience in an attempt to isolate the issue. Eventually, I discover that the car isn't accelerating as much because it's on ice. Still my curiosity is piqued. My Ti(I think, could be Ni) needs to know why. So I examine further, upon further observation I realize that the gas pedal is linked to the tires. And I begin to discover the rules of traction.
Over the years my Ni has built a relatively refined tool kit. When looking at a new situation my Ni quickly uses it's past observations to isolate the elements of the situation that I don't know.
A good example of this is the game of broom ball I played the other day.
I haven't played broom ball in years, and my fine motor control is somewhat limited. I can get my body to do what I want, but only to an extent. As such, I'm not good at offence. But defence...
As I played I'd ask myself questions; "Who is going to get to the ball first?" "What direction are they going to hit it?" "What do I need to do to intercept it?"
And my Ni would quickly craft the scenario and compare it to reality. But when compared to reality, there was little to no significant difference.
"Who was going to get to the ball first?" That wasn't unknown information. I could look at the speed of individuals, their direction and orientation, and many time, I just knew. For the rest my Ni presumably subconsciously analysed them for potential future use.
Something more difficult, like: "What direction were they going to hit it?" Would be answered as my Ni quickly assembled information like their skill level, team, body langauge, and the information they themselves were aware of.
As for what I needed to do. I needed to avoid interfering with the previous questions, sort of take myself out of the equation, and then get myself into position. If I could do that, I would succeed.
As for Se, as it is more dominant, is less focused on figuring things out. Where a Ni dom might be isolating 1-2 variables, a Se dom might be isolating many more variables. I'd presume that as Se pulls in more variables, those variables become more difficult for Ni to isolate from each other. A Ni dom in a Se environment might experience sensory overload if they aren't prepared for it.
My understanding of perceiving functions is a lot firmer than my understanding of judging functions. I will endeavor to write a peace on them later though.