How do you identify Ni/Ne and Si/Se in people

[Tannhauser]

On the topic of second-hand typing..

I feel it is easy to tell whether someone has Fe or Fi and Ti or Te, but how do you identify the other ones?

I guess one method for N is to see whether they tend to come up with new, unexpected ideas or on the other hand tend to seek convergent solutions.

And also one can use the fact that the introversion/extroversion are opposite for N and S (correct me if Im wrong)

 

[onesteptwostep]

Give them beer and see what they like/are comfortable talking about. If they come up stupid things but keep insisting on it, then they probably have Ni. If they're joking and crazy about random trivia, then it's probably Ne. If they reminisce about something, something in the past, then it's probably Si. If they start ripping their shirt off and start stampeding like Godzilla it's probably their Se working. Or an alternative to that would be that they would begin to challenge you to a drinking contest, or start wanting to 'get wasted'.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Se: Intimidating, imposing, mentally quick and alert but hints at substance not actually present; superficial.

Representing or referencing a bold, irrefutable normalcy, a keen appreciation of life as truly is with its struggle and its joy alike and intertwined.

Ni: Idiosyncratic and stubborn perspective, vainly expecting others to abide and thus collecting frustration. Capable of tremendous depth and certainty and completeness of internal models. Twisted but very serious and consistent ethics. Never gives up, even if wrong. Remarkable clarity and elegance in cerebral matters coupled with clumsy interpersonal skills and a certain poverty of expression which is the same regardless of whether it's worn as a badge of no-bullshit honor, or buried underneath layers of compensatory verbiage. Unless they specifically develop some presenting skills, they will be at the mercy of kindness and faith when making first impressions, with their true value only available to confidantes. Usually it's not a problem because they are sympathetic and pleasant, so that kindness and faith seem appropriate responses.

Si: Going by the rules, ranging from admirable focus into neurotic fear. Normal, but unlike Se it's a contractual normalcy, a normalcy of subservience and fear rather than embodiment of unspeakable visceral drive. Emotionally transparent, but usually neutral.

Ne: Asking many questions without shame, showing a flexible identity and playfulness. Child-like. Does not get surprised or disrupted but finds wonder in many things. Has many unique, personal interpretations and wants to share them.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Give them beer and see what they like/are comfortable talking about. If they come up stupid things but keep insisting on it, then they probably have Ni. If they're joking and crazy about random trivia, then it's probably Ne. If they reminisce about something, something in the past, then it's probably Si. If they start ripping their shirt off and start stampeding like Godzilla it's probably their Se working. Or an alternative to that would be that they would begin to challenge you to a drinking contest, or start wanting to 'get wasted'.

To me this doesn't hit the core and looks more like a repertoire.

However, this may be correct considering how type expression is often a mask and a contextual phenomenon. The problem arises when your model is thought to reflect true type. It is simply not the case that casual brainstorming means a person is Ne, or that recollecting the past means it is Si, etc. These are things all people do, to the extent that a checklist based on them creates confusion. To assess such a thing as true type, we have to look further into how the behaviors relate to the person's interest. For this purpose, your model is lacking severely. It is necessary to take a leap of faith, to get personal and to interpret. Typology cannot be done unless one is willing to be a judge. This is where you fail. But as said, your model is valid as a reminder to look at type in a broader, more fluid sense and to be more skeptical about pidgeon-holing persons.

 

[Architect]

The basic characteristic is "wide and shallow" (the e) versus "narrow and deep" (the i). Forest versus the trees.

Ni/Ne

Easier to see if two people like this next to each other. Compare a Ne dominant ENTP like Adam Savage versus a Ni dominant like INFJ Terry Gross or Marc Maron. Adam will be all over the place. I saw him in a talk at Makerfaire where he wandered from making stuff to his favorite literature.

Ni's don't go that wide, they grasp onto a topic like a dog with a bone and keep worrying out ideas around it. This is why Ni dominant INFJ's like Terry and Marc are such good interviewers.

In argument or discussion its funny to see the two contrasted, like an INFJ with an INTP. I'll be trying to make some grand point, and my wife will deflate the balloon by the fact that she keeps bringing up specific examples. Which vexes me, "I'm trying to make a point". Well actually she's just trying to help, which for her means specific corroborating evidence, which is a little distracting and pointless to me.

Si/Se

Example I give, a Si dominant and Se dominant go into the party. The Se dominant takes it all in at once and addresses the room "Hi everybody!". He will simultaneously be eating and greeting everybody there. The Si dominant will focus on something specific - say one or two friends they see.

Example is Norm (Se) and Cliff Claven (Si) from Cheers.

 

[onesteptwostep]

@bronto

It was mostly a tongue-in-cheek :P

nice analysis

Spoiler

To be more serious though, at the OP, I'd say any 'Xe' expression is more open whereas any 'Xi' expression is more serious in nature. So if a person has a tendency to lean towards more to one side of that, then they're.. er, that.

 

[Architect]

It is simply not the case that casual brainstorming means a person is Ne, or that recollecting the past means it is Si, etc. These are things all people do, to the extent that a checklist based on them creates confusion.

Agree, and this is accounted for in the theory. Under the 8 function Beebe model we all have all eight functions, to varying degrees. So again its the statistics. With MBTI it's the frequency and ability a person does this.

Compare an INTP (Si tert) with an ISFJ (Si dominant). The ISFJ's I know live their life by how they grew up. They live so much in the past, and they try to interpret the present in light of that past. I do that too - mildly. Even more than that I use information from the past, and I have a good sense of internal bodily conditions. I also tend to focus more on specific things in the physical world, rather than 'taking it all in at once'.

So statistically I 'do it' infrequently, where a Si dominant appears to do this almost continuously, which is predicted in the theory.