- Type: TiNe
- Development: l-l-
- Attitude: Adaptive
Auburn: What I wondered was if e.g. TiNe I-I- is the same as TiNe-Si ?
I have seen in the old forum that some members are typed as say FeNi-Se,I-II which indicates that it might not be the same. and I wonder if this should be read as conscious Se and Ti PLUS dominated more by Se than Ni?
Before I discovered CT I looked into Dave Powers who use the term “jumpers” for types that has “jumped over” their 2nd function and use their 3rd function instead, which then makes them either double extroverts or double introverts. Would “-Se” signify such ‘jumping’? Would I-II? (your earlier answer seems to suggest a no to this) Or would neither?
I have to think more before I answer how I experience Ne and which traits I thought of as Ni before I can say something meaningful about it.
Aux: Very inspiring response about Si. I enjoyed the image of memories as an assortment of fragments that end up washed on the beach of any particular day, so much that when after reading it I finally laid down that evening to relax I experienced every thought that came up like driftwood. Its interesting to see how you think of memories as impersonal. This is what I somehow is trying to practice when meditating and it can help with artistic articulation like yours. I guess that the “I” vs “she” distinction refers to you as consciousness and “she” as the content of consciousness i.e. the personal history and memories.
I am still in the proces of getting a grasp on the functions, but I get that Si might among other things might be about being grounded in that part of reality that has to do with time and place and maybe other measurable or tangible qualities. And yes, it could make sense that the rejection of Si is a sort of escape into a state of not taking fully part in relating to the more mundane part of life. I guess that I to a certain degree has taken Jesus words about being in this world but not of it, as being of this world but not in it 😉