Talk:Introverted sensing

Since it's on the category of Classical socionics, White Sensing should have a Classical definition.

Augusta said that White Sensing was percieved in the context of Black Logic and Black Ethics. White Sensing manages tangible connexions between processes happening in one space and time, which means mechanical interactions between objects. --Machintruc ??:??, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

Imagine two rotating gears which interact to each other. You can see how their explicit movement, Black Logic, is percieved on the context of their mechanical interaction, White Sensing.

I personally don't fully understand the connection between Augusta's tangible connexions between processes happening in one space and time' and the usual health and inner physical states definitions. If you could do a better job of it go ahead. If you can't or don't feel like doing it I'll give it a go. --Electric 16:57, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

I think there's a place for both kinds of definitions (the abstract and the pragmatic), so we shouldn't have to choose either-or. They just have to be clearly written out, with the different approaches reconciled or at least side by side. This is, after all, an encyclopedia, so we just have to accurately present the situation. (Admin 17:01, 8 June 2007 (CDT))

I was thinking about linking the two definitions together and presenting them as one. --Electric 17:09, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

I think that -Si is focusing on mechanical interactions, and +Si on subjective experience. Machintruc 15:57, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

You can't, because it's the same thing. All information you could give about White Sensing will be useful. --Machintruc 17:12, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

Changing main Si definition

I altered the definition of Si to move health and aesthetics away from the primary emphasis and make them more consequences rather than the primary definition. My reasoning is that people may be interested in health from many perspectives. I know people who know lots of current research on health who are most likely TeNi types. Also, I know NiFe types who care about aesthetics. I don't think that this is through Si PoLR or Si role in these people; simply the interest in health or aesthetics is a broader thing than Si. (See if you agree.)

Similarly, I'm still concerned about "inner states" as being part of the definition, although it contains the word "physical." I know a lot of NF types who are always talking about their "inner state," and again, I don't think that comes from Si.

Finally, I wonder if definitions of Si too often stress enjoyment and aesthetic experience without also somehow including its more practical use. Surely Delta STs must use Si in a practical way? It's hard to imagine that LSE types use Si only for fun and aesthetics. --Jonathan 19:23, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

PS...for Si PoLR, it says mentions lack of awareness of "aesthetic details." Could that not also include awareness of "practical details" also? Or would that be more Si as the 6th function? --Jonathan 19:27, 8 June 2007 (CDT)

I personally don't see a problem with the "inner states" definition, as long as it has the word 'physical' attached to it I don't mind. It doesn't conflict with Ni "inner states" since that is mental or Fe "inner states" since that would be emotional.--Electric 06:39, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

For Si PoLR, "aesthetic details" is more relevant for LIE, "practical details", for EIE -- Expat 06:47, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

I'm having problems figuring out what the "details idea" (practical or not) mention by expat has to do with the phrase "Introverted sensing focuses on tangible connections between processes happening in one place and time" if anyone could link this please do. Thnx--Electric 07:59, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

"in the case of the EIE, the low focus on is more noticeable as a dislike for low-level practical details, such as filling up forms, signing documents, or filling tax returns." -- to me this sounds more like disinterest in Te (impersonal procedures). (Admin 08:03, 9 June 2007 (CDT))

Ok, fair enough -- not sure how to improve it, though, it's actually Te + Si, just like the aesthetics bit is Fe + Si Expat 09:22, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

On "believe that Si does not matter" - that's not quite accurate, it's about giving it less priority than other things. Si it's like the task you keep postponing. Expat 09:22, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

I've changed "does not matter" to "is of less importance"--Electric 09:37, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

BTW, there are a number of circular statements in this definition now, such as "Due to individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function believing that Si aspects are of less importance, they tend to be thrown off course by unthought of, new or neglected introverted sensing matters." Obviously, if you substitute any other function into this sentence, it would work just as well. I'd suggest we try to be aware of and avoid such patterns in all of these definitions. Usually, with some more thought combined with real-life data, one can rephrase such sentences into something that's more specifically related to the function at hand. Or maybe such statements should be generalized and, if accurate, moved into the definition of "vulnerable function" (or whatever category of function is appropriate). --Jonathan 14:37, 10 June 2007 (CDT)

There is nothing stopping you from doing it yourself.--Electric 15:33, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Just time, other commitments, and a tendency to want to observe what other people have come up with. :-) I've made changes here and there to various definitions on the wiki, but I prefer to start in the discussion section, as I think about what would be the ultimate formulation. --Jonathan 16:58, 14 June 2007 (CDT)

Suggestive function

What about a mention on being attracted to people who optimize them? I don't know how to phrase it, though. Expat 03:22, 23 June 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I'd like to see more on the suggestive function. As it is, it makes me wonder how IxE types are even able to walk around or take care of themselves at all. I remember Rick had a lot more detail on his website about Si as the suggestive function. However, that time the article focused more on enjoyment, which is what Si as role focuses on in this page. --Jonathan 08:26, 25 June 2007 (CDT)

Mobilizing function

"The individual is unable to generate pleasurable experiences for others": Is it really that bad? And if so, how can anyone stand them? I think there's possibly a problem with this statement; surely, different people have different notions of what's pleasurable, and I'm sure LIIs and LSIs can generate pleasurable experiences according to some people's definition (?). I think this needs more investigation...something just seems wrong here. --Jonathan 21:29, 24 June 2007 (CDT)

How is the current formulation: The individual has difficulty producing pleasurable sensory experiences for others (and for himself as well), but likes to talk about pleasure, enjoyment, and relaxation, hoping that someone nearby will take the hint and take the lead. (Admin 23:39, 24 June 2007 (CDT))

That's much better, thanks. :-) But even then, I keep thinking about some of the famous people Socionists type as LII. Rachmaninoff comes to mind; surely he produced some music that many people regard as providing very pleasurable sensory experiences. (Some composers may be regarded as using sound only as a vehicle for communicating an essentially intellectual experience, but Rachmaninoff doesn't fall into that category.) Also, I don't know too much about Patricia Kaas, but surely many people regard her singing as producing pleasurable sensory experience?

I understand that part of the problem here is that in the arts, it is often hard to distinguish between what is "sensory" and what is something at a different level, only evoked through the senses but not in its nature about the senses. And of course all artists may be regarded as "exceptions." :)

Anyhow, I'm at a loss on how to improve it at the moment. I know someone who I'm pretty sure is EII and who enjoys good food, and I know someone I'm pretty sure is LII who plays the piano in a very pleasant way and seems good at having fun with his kid. Maybe I've mistyped them though. --Jonathan 00:13, 25 June 2007 (CDT)

I disagree with these new formulations: He tends to extremes in this area, either depriving or indulging the senses to an unhealthy extent. The individual believes health and pleasure the ultimate purpose of all life, and the primary rationale for existence. The individual believes there are forces at work "safeguarding" the world, because they see the only reason for force's existence as being the defense of life and its quality.

LIIs and EIIs seem to be more prone to limiting their sensory indulgence than to overdo it. Also, for each of them their leading functions are far more motivating than the mobilizing function, and here it says "the ultimate purpose of all life, and primary rationale for existence." This sounds like an exaggeration of the hidden agenda. Certainly, the Si motivation of EIIs and LIIs is far less than that of SEIs and SLIs. --Admin 11:56, 13 July 2007 (CDT)

I agree, it's an exaggeration of the hidden agenda. Expat 12:06, 13 July 2007 (CDT)