introverted sensing.

[shoeless]

nobody talks about it.

it's our tertiary function. it's there. but what the hell is it?

i get Si when it comes to more Si-dominant folks. but how does it present in an INTP? what is it useful for? what are the benefits of developing it?

i think my Si sucks balls.

how about you?

 

[ijustprotectedmyidentity]

i love your quote lately ive been saying it everyday for like 4 days now

any dipship can be a depressed fatalist with a subculture ahahah thats so funny and true its like any dipshit can be a depressed fatalist with a subculture but it takes a real man to stop self pity.

si is like observing the world and then we make patterns out of it? honestly honestly i dont understand ni fe fi ne sorry guys

wats si then

 

[Mello]

It's our secret weapon.

 

[Adymus]

I'll give you a detailed answer to the when I get home and not answering from my phone. For now, all I will say is Si is the reason I get accused of being a closet intj.

 

[Chronomar]

It is...math? Data processing? Or our internal structure...? But, no, that's Ti (?).

As is evidenced by the prevalence of question marks, I don't know.

 

[Adymus]

Si is a function of introverted perception. It is perception because it is a form of pure information being received by a person's apparatus (Conscious mind). The information received comes from within, in the form of subjective recalled memories. When a person accesses Si, it is to check one's experience, historical worldview, known reliable facts, memories, and tradition.
Si is a directive function because the worldview and historical map that it creates has an agenda as to how the real world should be.

How this relates to INTPs

INTPs use Si as a tertiary function, which means it is not one of the INTP stronger and stimulating functions, but it still supports their Ti and Ne. An important role of Si is to rein in the INTP's Ne. Ne wants to 'go with the flow' and adapt to new possibilities as they come, Si makes sure the person can stay on track, and not bounce to possibilities that are ridiculous or impossible. While Ne wants to find what else is possible, Si can map out what is already known and what can't be possible.
One of the most important uses of Si for the INTP is to be the fact checker. When using both Ti and Ne to calculate how something can work, you can relay it into Si to find out how something like this has worked before. It also allows us a reference to make sure we are doing something right. For example, I often consider telling a person something rather bluntly, but I am not sure how they might take it, so I refer to my Si to check how they have taken it before.

Another example is how I use it on some of my friends. They might ask me to clarify or explain the meaning of something I said, so I might check my Si first so I can gather my knowledge of how this friend thinks and how I should approach calibrating my ideas in order to relate my thoughts to them.

INTPs are adaptive creatures, so we reach over to Si anytime we need to put structure and direction into whatever it is that we are doing. It we need to plan, we might check Si for what we have done in the past that can be used now, or we will set up a list of tasks that we must perform, and then make notes of them in our Si.

INTP's dominant function is Ti, this means that Si will be best utilized when it is being used in a way that is stimulating for their Ti. An INTP begins by having a Ti theoretical model that is being peculated, and feeding it more information and expanding it with Ne. This model when used and tested becomes a part of the INTP's experience and history, which makes it a part of their Si worldview. From that point the INTP can go from Si to Fe to communicate this inner model and point of view to the world.

An INTP's Si is interconnected with their Fe, in the same way that their Ti is connected to their Ne. Because of this, when we access Si we take our Fe with it. This is why our Si has kind of an Fe flavoring to it, so to speak. INTPs are notorious for going into their Si and extrapolating an Fe experience with another person, reviewing conversations, reliving enjoyable or even painful moments with people, and even speculating how these situations could have been improved.

Si pitfalls that INTPs can get into:

Many INTPs who have not had enough experience to develop their Ne and Fe, can fall into a pitfall of social Isolation.
Their Ti dominance makes them Isolated from the rest of society, and their Si tells them that people are uninteresting and a waste of time, thus social interaction is a pointless endeavor. This reluctance to leave their comfort zone creates a very narrow development of the INTPs functions, and they take on very judgmental, overly logical, alienated, and adversarial worldviews and behavior.
This however can be easily avoided if the INTP can actually make an effort to leave their comfort zone, and experience the Ne of the world.

 

[Irishpenguin]

Oh crap, I've been spending too much time thinkin' bout Fe and totally forgot about the rest of my cognitive functions!!!....sorry guys (talkin to my Ti, Ne, and Si)

Oh yea and to Adymus. If I'm following right, it seemed like you were getting at that Si is the reason why it takes energy to put structure to an INTPs ideas, did I follow you right? Not to over-simplify your post or anything, just making sure I'm on the same page.

 

[Cognisant]

Si = Introverted Sensing, i.e. internal sensing as opposed to external sensing.
Ergo Si is in essence our introspection function, the metaphorical inward eye.

Which is basically what Adymus wrote, simplified for your convenience.

@-the easily excited
Not technically "back" just yet, I'm just too tired to do anything worthwhile but I can't sleep, so I'm killing time, and frankly lurking isn't as much fun as it used to be.

 

[NeverAmI]

One of my favorite descriptions is on a google books preview, here is the link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=twt29GlROowC&lpg=PA18&ots=7E4lZLhAnM&dq=extraverted%20sensing&pg=PA19#v=onepage&q=extraverted%20sensing&f=false

It does a good job comparing and conrasting the various functions.

I tend to think of Si as memory of sense, but also the ability to recall past memories of something which allows us to compare and contrast. It can be very important for our analytical minds, but not always great for removing bias.

Someone had mentioned in another thread the ability to remember what people say, I would think Si plays into that ability at least partially, if not fully.

 

[Adymus]

Oh crap, I've been spending too much time thinkin' bout Fe and totally forgot about the rest of my cognitive functions!!!....sorry guys (talkin to my Ti, Ne, and Si)

Oh yea and to Adymus. If I'm following right, it seemed like you were getting at that Si is the reason why it takes energy to put structure to an INTPs ideas, did I follow you right? Not to over-simplify your post or anything, just making sure I'm on the same page.

That's a bingo!

 

[Lithorn]

That's a bingo!

Someone's been watching Inglorious Basterds

 

[Mello]

That's a bingo!

You just say bingo.

 

[Adymus]

You just say bingo.

Bingo! Ooooo how fun!

 

[cheese]

Adymus:
Does Si also tend to keep us tied to the past? INTPs seem to get more bogged down by past failures and negative experiences than INTJs. It shapes us and holds us back. Ni people seem more able to move forward - they create their future. Si people seem to think theirs is created by their past (which I'd argue is true, but ) and are generally more negative.

The best example I can think of for this is Nietzsche (some sort of INJ). He argued (I think, I think) for a severance of the future from the past and didn't restrain himself to conventional causality.

Ni is a more abstract type of worldview, right? It's built around inferences, whereas Si is a detailed model of actual experience. We're sort of more backward-looking in our personal lives than Ni types, who look forward towards their vision. Not that we don't have dreams about how the future should be, but we don't believe in their realisation as much, unless backed by hard data.

Is any of this right? I'm not getting it out well, sorry.

*edit
In fact, following this line of thought, I'm pretty sure Adymus isn't an INTJ since he's arguing his typology points with Si (or at least is claiming to) by going off a wealth of data, rather than Ni. I imagine the latter sort would have greater belief in transcendence or personality alteration without necessarily having concrete data or some equivalent. An INTP might be interested in experimenting, but wouldn't put belief in the hypothesis without results. Perhaps?

I think I'm basically saying Ni is visionary, and Si isn't. Sorry, I know this has been done before. My main point though (I think) is that INTPs tend to be more negative about possibilities than other types with Ni instead of Si.

 

[NeverAmI]

Adymus:
Does Si also tend to keep us tied to the past? INTPs seem to get more bogged down by past failures and negative experiences than INTJs. It shapes us and holds us back. Ni people seem more able to move forward - they create their future. Si people seem to think theirs is created by their past (which I'd argue is true, but ) and are generally more negative.

The best example I can think of for this is Nietzsche (some sort of INJ). He argued (I think, I think) for a severance of the future from the past and didn't restrain himself to conventional causality.

Ni is a more abstract type of worldview, right? It's built around inferences, whereas Si is a detailed model of actual experience. We're sort of more backward-looking in our personal lives than Ni types, who look forward towards their vision. Not that we don't have dreams about how the future should be, but we don't believe in their realisation as much, unless backed by hard data.

Is any of this right? I'm not getting it out well, sorry.

I definitely see Ni as having some sort of far off ideal in sight, some search for how the current circumstance/situation fits into their idea of the future/path. Heavy symbolism takes place in Ni, instead of storage of empirical observations, abstract relationships are made with deeper meaning.

This apple was rotten, why was it rotten, does it mean something? That tornado came within a certain range of our house then suddenly changed direction, was that divine intervention? Why has it rained 3 days in a row, does it mean something?

Si is much more traditional - I have seen 15 rotten apples in the past 5 days! I remember when I picked apples with my dad 15 years ago. These apples are similar to some others that ended up making excellent pie. I remember how the earth shaked and the thunderous sounds the tornado made.

At least those are my observations.

 

[cheese]

Yes, that makes sense.

Another thought:
Would Ni be more interested in psychology than Si? I find it seems to have a lot of unsubstantiated theories (although I am really quite uneducated about it) and while interesting, I get impatient with it. Neuroscience on the other hand seems like the path of real insight into the mind. *

It's also interesting that I'm trying to tie everything to concrete examples. Although perhaps this just means I'm an idiot.

*The point being perhaps I think this way because of Si.

*edit
More fatalistic. Less belief in our ability to change things. Greater sense of powerlessness. These things I'd associate with Si types more, especially those who have it as a lower function (it would strike in low/defenceless times, rather than keep us permanently grounded in reality as it would with higher-position Si). Perhaps. I'm not sure, but I'm curious. Help please.

 

[Adymus]

Cheese: Yes! Ni and Si are both based in time, Ni is forward perceiving, speculating how things will unfold in the future. And Si is based in the past, checking how things used to be.

Although, there is a crucial detail that I completely forgot to mention, about having Tertiary Si. We are not tied to our Si like the Si doms are. For example, the INFJ holds the ideal future society in their Ni, and they try to shape the present to match their vision of the future.
That means when things change, and our current model of Si is rendered obsolete, we can completely rebuild it with the new facts that have just emerge. This is something Si dominants have far more difficulty doing, because their identity is in their past.
However, since our Ne is inspired by Ni, we are not completely bogged down by the past, and we will be excited by the possibilities of the future seen by Ni vision, especially if our Ti and our Si validate the possibility of it occurring.

And yeah, that is exactly why I am not an Ni dominant. But most people are noobs, and only see the directive behavior that Si yields, and automagically think "he's a J!!!" But I wouldn't be surprised if people think my Si is actually Ni, because a.) The knowledge I have on typology is not known by anyone else who is not also working on the the model that I am using, so it seems very original and forward thinking. Which it is, just not in an Ni sort of way.
b.) People may not realize that Si refers to Subjective knowledge. When they hear "Known facts" Then they might think it means objective facts that everyone is supposed to know. Si actually just means subjective historical data, this could be something you read out of a book, or you witnessing a murder, it is entirely subjective. I'll answer the rest of your questions later, gotta go to class!

 

[BigApplePi]

Adymus. There seems to be some controversy over the Si/Se function. Can we say what the following is? Do you know me well enough or is information lacking? Would you say this is Se? What is happening? Am I now or was I an ISTP? Re: Sports and INTP

"Extraverted Sensing occurs when we become aware of what is in the physical world in rich detail. We may be drawn to act on what we experience to get an immediate result. We notice relevant facts and occurrences in a sea of data and experiences, learning all the facts we can about the immediate context or area of focus and what goes on in that context. An active seeking of more and more input to get the whole picture may occur until all sources of input have been exhausted or something else captures our attention. Extraverted Sensing is operating when we freely follow exciting physical impulses or instincts as they come up and enjoy the thrill of action in the present moment. A oneness with the physical world and a total absorption may exist as we move, touch, and sense what is around us. The process involves instantly reading cues to see how far we can go in a situation and still get the impact we want or respond to the situation with presence."
http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedsensing.html

Si is a function of introverted perception. It is perception because it is a form of pure information being received by a person's apparatus (Conscious mind). The information received comes from within, in the form of subjective recalled memories. When a person accesses Si, it is to check one's experience, historical worldview, known reliable facts, memories, and tradition.
Si is a directive function because the worldview and historical map that it creates has an agenda as to how the real world should be.

How this relates to INTPs

INTPs use Si as a tertiary function, which means it is not one of the INTP stronger and stimulating functions, but it still supports their Ti and Ne. An important role of Si is to rein in the INTP's Ne. Ne wants to 'go with the flow' and adapt to new possibilities as they come, Si makes sure the person can stay on track, and not bounce to possibilities that are ridiculous or impossible. While Ne wants to find what else is possible, Si can map out what is already known and what can't be possible.
One of the most important uses of Si for the INTP is to be the fact checker. When using both Ti and Ne to calculate how something can work, you can relay it into Si to find out how something like this has worked before. It also allows us a reference to make sure we are doing something right. For example, I often consider telling a person something rather bluntly, but I am not sure how they might take it, so I refer to my Si to check how they have taken it before.

Another example is how I use it on some of my friends. They might ask me to clarify or explain the meaning of something I said, so I might check my Si first so I can gather my knowledge of how this friend thinks and how I should approach calibrating my ideas in order to relate my thoughts to them.

INTPs are adaptive creatures, so we reach over to Si anytime we need to put structure and direction into whatever it is that we are doing. It we need to plan, we might check Si for what we have done in the past that can be used now, or we will set up a list of tasks that we must perform, and then make notes of them in our Si.

INTP's dominant function is Ti, this means that Si will be best utilized when it is being used in a way that is stimulating for their Ti. An INTP begins by having a Ti theoretical model that is being peculated, and feeding it more information and expanding it with Ne. This model when used and tested becomes a part of the INTP's experience and history, which makes it a part of their Si worldview. From that point the INTP can go from Si to Fe to communicate this inner model and point of view to the world.

An INTP's Si is interconnected with their Fe, in the same way that their Ti is connected to their Ne. Because of this, when we access Si we take our Fe with it. This is why our Si has kind of an Fe flavoring to it, so to speak. INTPs are notorious for going into their Si and extrapolating an Fe experience with another person, reviewing conversations, reliving enjoyable or even painful moments with people, and even speculating how these situations could have been improved.

Si pitfalls that INTPs can get into:

Many INTPs who have not had enough experience to develop their Ne and Fe, can fall into a pitfall of social Isolation.
Their Ti dominance makes them Isolated from the rest of society, and their Si tells them that people are uninteresting and a waste of time, thus social interaction is a pointless endeavor. This reluctance to leave their comfort zone creates a very narrow development of the INTPs functions, and they take on very judgmental, overly logical, alienated, and adversarial worldviews and behavior.
This however can be easily avoided if the INTP can actually make an effort to leave their comfort zone, and experience the Ne of the world.

 

[Adymus]

Well Pi, Why don't you tell me how you feel about this? Is there anything in Si that you can relate to. Better yet, is there anything in Ne that you can relate to, why or why not?

 

[BigApplePi]

Well Pi, Why don't you tell me how you feel about this? Is there anything in Si that you can relate to. Better yet, is there anything in Ne that you can relate to, why or why not?

I take it you read this: Re: introverted sensing

How I feel about what? Define "this" !

"Is there anything in Si that you can relate to."
I haven't memorized Si to far and don't have a feel for it. I'm looking at this personality typing from the outside and although I am very fond of the potential for classifying I hate to actually put it to the test without more concreteness. When I read your writings my general impression is absence of specific examples. You wrote something on introverted sensing yet I don't relate it well to independent sensing experiences that everyday experiences people that sense do. I want the theory followed by better examples. (I'm guilty of the same thing in parts of my writings.) Without examples to concretize the generalities, the novice can't understand.

Added later: I must have concrete examples to check generalities out. Once I have them I will check to make sure the generalities work. Then I need more examples and repeat the process. I want to constantly look for examples that will blow the generalities out of the water so the limits of the generality can be tested.

"Better yet, is there anything in Ne that you can relate to, why or why not?"
I've haven't thought about this. I don't think, "Now I'm thinking intuitively or now I'm sensing." I would prefer not to be asked that question unless you give me something specific. I hate to take the lead, but I can pick something to try and make things concrete to answer your Q.

Just as you mentioned the other day you might like to write about your knowledge of personality typing but are procrastinating (paraphrase), I would like to write about this: Re: How To Understand Anything
I have to get a feel for the system. There are necessary and sufficient conditions. I listed six of them. Have I got them all? Are they independent of each other? Redundancy is no good. I take the thing as a whole and search for exceptions. The thing must be complete. Nothing missing. Ideally everything must fit together harmoniously. If satisfaction were my goal I wouldn't be satisfied with anything less than a work of art.

I think abstractly but realize those abstractions can fail unless the generalities stated fit every case. So I have to check out a few cases that are concrete against the generalities. At present one of the elements for understanding is levels (i.e.Hierarchy). But just stating the meaning in a general way is too obvious. People would say, "I know that." No good. I have to take a survey of a dozen kinds of level examples, order them, their ordering rule yet to be determined, compare them until I can grasp the meaning of different kinds. I also have to find situations where people don't understand levels, present the problem and then spring the solution on them so they think, "I didn't know, now I do, that was worthwhile." Everything has to feel right and work right. So it's a project I postpone because it requires time, energy, motivation and more ability than I have to do it. You are looking at just one page. I visualize 20 to 100 pages! I'm not sure I can do it. In fact I'm sure I can't. Without a muse (someone who cares, who will inspire, who says, "BAP you've got a great idea -- go for it", I let it go. Self-doubt and lack of confidence.

Added later: I don't know if this fits Ne, but I hate memorizing what someone says. I loathe it but will do it anyway just to get along with people. I want to understand everything in the sense of having a "feel" for it. Once I have that I can apply it anywhere. Everything works. Everything fits. Without that, I hate the situation. I will sit glumly and listen.

This kind of thing is really upsetting to me: I have some unanswered things on quantum mechanics which no one knows the answers for. In the back of my mind are some vague solutions I wish to inquire about or even pose. I have discussed some things with Agent Intellect whom I have a great respect for. So in response he posts some links which he believes will be helpful. But to me the links are only more unproven ideas. I have ideas for which I'd like to propose the start of a solution but those links try to tell me something I don't accept. I may have the word "intuition" wrong (you tell me) but to me it all intuition. Throw things at me and if they don't fit I will put them aside until they will fit. I hate to accept things socially forced.

I took a gander at this Ni writeup via Google: http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedintuiting.html

Is what I wrote above Ni or Ne? I don't know one from the other. This ain't my field. I'm unable to separate introverted from extroverted. Poor reading skills, lol? I keep thinking, "Introverted is me looking inward; extroverted is socializing", but the writeups seems to be using some other meaning.

Adymus. Is this enough? It's emoting and rambling. Or would you like something more formal or perhaps would you prefer you didn't ask for something and have to read this in the first place, lol?

 

[Adymus]

Okay, Pi, this is really hard to answer... Because I have absolutely no idea where you were going with this.

And please don't take offense to this, because it is not your fault in any way, but I am starting to get a headache trying to figure out what it is you want out of me, because it seems like nothing I am giving you is helping you at all, it is extremely frustrating.

You don't have to know that you are thinking intuitively or not, by now you should have a basic feel for how our mind works and processes information. What I am asking is, do any of these general descriptions relate to what you already know about how you approach data processing?

For instance, before I even got into MBTI I already knew that I liked to explore possibilities and the deeper meanings of symbols, but never hold one interpretation as being undeniably true. I also knew that I liked to try and understand things from a point of view that is completely dispassionate, using as much objective data as I can. Another thing that I knew about myself is that I tend to be completely oblivious to my surroundings, something my ESTP friend loves to poke fun at anytime it comes at. Things like this gave me a pretty good idea of what cognitive functions I was using, and/or not using.

I'm going to give you some examples of how I personally use my Si.

So every now and then I stress out thinking about the possibility that some random unfavorable thing is going to happen to me. I will go into all of the ways that this unfavorable thing could happen, and what the probability of it occurring is. (Here is where Si comes in) and I will look into my past and then notice that this thing that I am worrying about has never happened before, then I ask myself "If it has never happened before, how likely is it to happen now? And then I'll probably stop worrying at that point.
You see, the first part of that thinking process, was me using Ti and Ne. Seeing the possibilities of whatever it was I was worrying about occurring (Ne), and then trying to determine what it would take for it to happen (Ti), all of this is disenchanted by my realizing that it has never happened before (Si).

Personally, I am not certain where I stand on your personality type just yet... Because on one hand, the problems you are having sound like they are coming from Ne. For instance, "Who decides what is Subjective and objective" These are the kinds of questions a person using Ne would ask, the philosophical understanding of the relative nature of definitions. However, I can see that you rely heavily on concrete facts and explanations, which could be an indicator of Se, but it could also be an indicator of Si.

Added to this later:

On second thought, I am defiantly leaning toward INTP with you. You see, I can at least be pretty certain that you are a dominant Ti user, your approach from the very start has always been from the adaptive reactionary point of view of telling me what does or does not make sense, and you are looking for logical consistency with your requests for me to be more deductive in my explanations. The example that you gave me of your exchange with Agent Intellect, also appears that you are still seeing the possibilities of being wrong (Ne) and that you need it to be based in something concrete (Si) to have any certainty with the theory. This is actually extremely common with INTPs, which is why the vast majority of us are either Atheist or Agnostic. We need logical consistency for us to believe anything, we can see the possibilities of pretty much anything being right or wrong (Ne) if we don't have any empirical evidence to prove it (Si). Essentially the pathway to our Si is logical consistency (Ti takes the highest priority) and it must be able to be tied to a concrete and experiential fact (Si itself)

 

[BigApplePi]

Adymus. I wrote a long response to this two days ago, but I didn't like it. Your comment, "this is really hard to answer... Because I have absolutely no idea where you were going with this." was something that caused me to withdraw and introspect over.

Now I have a better answer. So first I would like to keep things as simple as possible, knowing how complicated someone like me can make things when I don't know the answers.

Let us say you came across this experience of a person and didn't know who the person was. You knew nothing else about them:


"You won't believe this. I always run alone listening to my body with a pre-planned goal. I keep track of my runs inserting them into a spreadsheet depending on the distance. I use that to calculate the percentile rank and that tells me how well or poorly I'm doing. One year I decided to train for the Corporate Challenge which is about 3.6 miles in the park. I trained for it, diet and carbo loading the day before, etc. I even took unnecessary keys off my keyring to lighten the load.

The day of the race I wanted to get near the start line as it was crowded. I walked my way up to about the front 5th of the crowd. So in taking off I found I needed to go my best pace and get past these slower guys. I found myself in the middle of a crowd something I wasn't used to. They were all breathing in an out in unison! Loud huffs and puffs. I couldn't believe it. These guys were all (Exxx's (extroverts) or something close to it. I got the hell outta there.

Ran a personal best. That was over ten years ago. Still running but much more slowly."


Questions, in this order. My motive for these questions is I believe they have great bearing on our ability to type and how we type people as opposed to giving our best guess.

1. What function or functions is this person displaying?

1a. Do we know if these functions are typical of the person or are anomalies? Do we need to know?

2. If #1 can be answered, can we tell if the function(s) is(are) dominant auxiliary tertiary or inferior?

3. If #2 can be answered, is the information inadequate to type the entire person? Can we eliminate any types if we can't narrow it down?

 

[Adymus]

Nothing can be determined with certainty from so little information.

 

[BigApplePi]

Nothing can be determined with certainty from so little information.

Not even #1?
1. What function or functions is this person displaying?
___________________________

If observation is inadequate to say cognitive functions can be observed, then what can be observed short of that? Can we give it a name?

Am I to assume the observer must have some sort of minimum experience with a person before they can make a judgment? Or perhaps we can make guesses with a reliability in proportion to that experience. We might even have to define what kind of experience is required.

Tests are different. They ask the party being judged to make broad choices in some format. If those choices are representative and distinct, then we are duplicating objective experience as in, "I would definitely make that choice in a variety of situations. If those choices fail to distinguish, the test results will be ambiguous as in, "I don't know what I would do here. Sometimes this; something that."

 

[Adymus]

Not even #1?
1. What function or functions is this person displaying?
___________________________

If observation is inadequate to say cognitive functions can be observed, then what can be observed short of that? Can we give it a name?

Am I to assume the observer must have some sort of minimum experience with a person before they can make a judgment? Or perhaps we can make guesses with a reliability in proportion to that experience. We might even have to define what kind of experience is required.

Tests are different. They ask the party being judged to make broad choices in some format. If those choices are representative and distinct, then we are duplicating objective experience as in, "I would definitely make that choice in a variety of situations. If those choices fail to distinguish, the test results will be ambiguous as in, "I don't know what I would do here. Sometimes this; something that."

He is displaying many possibilities of different functions, suggesting he is just using one with so little information would just be completely ludicrous.

I could say that your preparation for your run was a very Ti like calibrated approach, and that the way you describe your experience was very interpretive and reminiscent of Ne more than Se... but I wouldn't agree with typing a person based on only this.