Pe Descriptions. Should we focus on Hunter-Gatherer, Synchronicity, Channeling?

[Animal]

Sports, can be described as:
Pe [ play ]
In a competitive environment
Involving a chase/hunt [ after a goal ]
A need to develop mastery
That is proactive
That is dynamic
That is visceral
And depending on the sport, is also a performance art/expression

Yes! This is exactly what I was after.  This kind of coverage of what Se "is" ---  is perfect.
I don't think sports are shallow at all.  I see music as a type of 'sport' since it requires physical mastery. I don't see it as deeper or shallower than sports.  What I felt  was 'shallow' was the idea that Se types can just watch someone and see how they do things off the bat, and then offhandedly do it themselves.  I don't feel this is true.
A need to develop mastery -- this is what I was hoping for in the description. Without this need, then the Se person becomes nothing more than an 'addict,' but a healthier mindset will lead to a hunt for mastery, challenge, adversity etc. Basically the list you just wrote is exactly perfect! (imo)

[Animal]

Ok, let me sum up my more important points just to get organized, since I made a few more.

• Heightened Focus: The idea that Se users can automatically ‘copy’ movements by breaking down the components, is treating it more as a Ji function. It also suggests a kind of ‘magic’ in Se users copying movements, which is not necessarily the case. The real reason is….
• Vitality and Volition: This is key for Se people – as is Flow and Aesthetic. Your description is great for these; but what is left out is how these components lead a Se person to put effort toward mastering something or chasing skills rather than just thrills. Skills is a bigger challenge, which is a bigger turn-on! 🙂
• If the only “hobbies” listed for Se are ‘drag racing and daring’ then you are basically limiting their ‘skill set’ to a list of addictions. Temporary adrenaline boosts. On top of that, suggesting that they pick up these things magically in the first section, takes away from the tremendous mastery and will that goes into performing daring feats. To be clear, I have no problem with drag racing, sports and daring feats being used as examples -- examples of what? -- mastery & skills, as well as 'addictions.'
• Addiction: With this in mind, the addiction section is spot on; but needs to be put in perspective. Right now, the addiction section is really no different from the “vitality and flow” sections. If you include more emphasis on a need for mastery & skills in the earlier sections, then you can see how a focused Se user might manifest through mastery of skills (or other ‘hunts’) that put them ‘in the flow,’ whereas those who lose sight of these willful pursuits, become addicts.
• Ergonomics/Aesthetics: I was not suggesting taking out 'fashion' or 'trends.' Just discussing what it really stems from, which isn't "trends" or "money" but rather, a need to make an impact, an impression. A need to flaunt (and master!) one's refined aesthetic. There is a lot of writing by many authors, beginning with Jung, but not ending with him; about how Se leads need to make an impression & impact, and how they master and refine their look. Clothes & other aesthetics, like cars, are great examples of this; but again, need to be put in context with why. The "why" is not because something is trendy. Se users see themselves as autonomous masters of their own will, apart from social norms; which is why they are tricksters.  So... the "why" behind it is what I'm addressing.

 
Stuff that's missing

• Realism. How Se is used for realistic perception and can lead to insights about the real world which are unmatched by any other type in "is-what-it-is"ness.  Things like sense of direction, knowing where to find things, knowing what people are really about by just looking at them. Se people are often good readers of character (in person especially). This is part of the trickster appeal.
• Seeing trends in reality. Ni axis stuff which is present in all Se users.  Knowing what is BEHIND reality.  Knowing what will happen next, based on seeing the pattern in real events that have already occurred. (This also plays into skills in sports. You have to know what the other person will do next.)
• Mastery.  This was discussed already.
• Synchronicity, channeling.  This is covered somewhat in 'flow.' I will articulate this in a bit.
• Autonomy. "No one can tell me what to do." I think you touch on this in the trickster sections, though I have wondered before if it needs more emphasis. I am going to cover these too. It helps me to write out a long thing and then boil it down to shorter notes. Sorry if annoying 🙁

[Animal]

Ok now that I'm not on my phone and summed up my previous points, let me address your points directly @auburn . Thank you for taking the time to engage me on this. I really appreciate it. And I apologize again if my tone seems abrupt. It's so difficult for me to 'channel' these thoughts in words.

But to me, the fact remains that they will be prone to boredom if there is nothing to do. Let me give you an example. It’s hot outside, their step-dad doesn’t have internet connection. All their friends are out of town. I’ve seen my SeTi brother bored to death on the couch, just wanting for something to happen. Sure, they’ll take the initiative and make something happen if they can, but if there really is nothing to do (that satisfies the desire for newness/exploration), then they get bored. And this is why I say “The environment will feel clumsy, suffocating and static.”
Now, if it were true that an Se user can engage themselves in whatever environment, even a completely empty room of white walls, I may agree with you. But I think objects of stimulation are a necessary component for Pe to operate. Exploration requires environments (physical or non-physical) to explore. And without those environments, Pe becomes restless.

I've seen a lot of Beta ST's getting bored, but with Fi, there's a whole 'inner world of feelings' that belongs to us.
I actually have no problem alone in a white room. I've always been able to entertain  myself for hours by writing books inside my mind. I used to tell myself these stories at night, because my parents would make me turn out the light and I had insomnia.  But as I got older I learned to completely shut off my mind, I guess a kind of meditation?

@ivory says he would go crazy alone in a white room, but I really can't relate. However I know you will say this is 'just me' and may not be a thing for other Pe users. So I cannot insist on anything here. I am genuinely curious if other Pe users relate to it, and i'd like to start a thread on it. Which I will. It will be more neutral in tone than this thread. 😛
I just... want to know.
My brother for instance, I don't know his type, but he is pretty obviously not Pe conscious.. and he is always bored, whereas I've never uttered the words "I'm bored" in my life. I have too big an imagination, not to mention, always something to do. (Writing, music, or actually going out and doing something.) If left to my own devices I write books in my mind or shut my mind off. It makes perfect sense to me that most people can't shut their mind off. this is a skill I mastered to deal with insomnia, and through spiritual work, even if it was not that difficult for me to learn and I was fairly young. What doesn't make sense to me, is why other Pe users wouldn't just tell themselves stories if they are bored, or come up with something creative in their own mind. Isn't this what Pe users do? Generate ideas, creativity??
After a talk with a few friends, they had hypothesized recently that this self-directed imagination style was actually Fi. I don't know if that is true either.  All I know is the "You'd be restless in a white-room" principle applies to several people I know who are not Pe conscious, and not to me; for whatever that's worth. I'd  like to explore it further. If I'm 1 exception out of many, I can accept that it's something beyond Pe and leave it at that 🙂 but right now, the people in my life who I know who complain of getting bored, are unrelated to whether or not they are Pe conscious.  It seems more related to something like enneagram 7.  (My father, for instance, is a 7w8, and gets bored.)

@devon, you're Ne first and 5 fixed. Do you get bored? Would you be restless if left alone in a white room?
I'm gonna answer your other posts separately.

[Animal]

For anyone who wants to help out my curiosity about Boredom, no matter what your type is, please answer here:

Do you get Bored Easily? Would you get Bored Alone in a White Room?

[Animal]

@auburn is such a good sport and champ.
Just saying.

[Animal]

Copying something here from discord.  I'm collecting thoughts here on Se and Pe so just adding this to the pile which I'll sum up at the end with suggestions, ideas and so forth.
-

@thanatesque wrote:
What does the clothing we wear say about us and our values? What does it say about our culture? Our class status? We are all attuned to these questions but we don’t necessarily consciously frame them in that way.
Me:
So much of this stuff is "visceral" for Se. This is what I was trying to get at in some of my commentary to @Auburn around Se. "What do they Se?" --- there's an extreme attunement to "reality' so you pick up all these implications about who someone is and what their character is like based on body language and clothing, but you don't necessarily "break it down" into lists in your mind. You just "see" it.
Extraverted perception.
Sensing.
People often attribute "implications" to intuition but - each type has its own type of intuition. And for Extroverted Sensing Perceivers it's this.
Jung calls it "Realism." But to be a "realist" , it means you've built up a picture of "What Reality Is" over time. It's not just "the couch is brown, the floor is brown and the ceiling is low." It's, "the room is cozy and rustic. The person who lives here is tranquil."
Originally I wrote that I notice 'what kind of person they are' - but I reworded this.
"what kind of person they are" is more of a categorizing and I didn't mean it that way
i DON'T do what @Ivory does, which is he walks into a room and types everyone
I don't have that implicit need to categorize things
So 'what kind of person they are' is right for him, with Se following Ti
but saying they're tranquil is more like observing whats in front of me
rather than category-grouping them.

@faeruss wrote:
it's a more gestalt impression
fuzzy around the edges
not sharp like a judgment (J)

[Animal]

Thinking aloud again, about a post in the Alpha/Gamma thread by Rondo.
Also, @rondo
I want to highlight this quote of yours:

Furthermore, some of Animal’s rather striking observations about Se fall into what I would term “animism” in the technical sense of the word, and would provide the natural counterpart to Ni’s “shamanism”.

This really hits the nail on the head, when it comes to my 'complaints' about the descriptions. It is hard for me to nail down just a few words, whereas I notice that some Alphas - like you and Auburn - just excel at honing in the exact "bottom line" point.
In the Ni descriptions there is "shamanism," but I'm not seeing a clear, explicit discussion of "animism" in the Se descriptions, which makes me feel like one part of the equation is missing.
--------------
In the last few days, I've begun to suspect that my brother may be SeTi. He is so different from me that people feel a need to tell us "Wow... you are so different." All the time.  We look similar enough to spot us as relatives, but people never do because our attitude, dress, talk style, could not possibly be more opposite. Yet, he fits in with the SeTi's in the videos.
He actually fits the Se description; though of course I cannot be sure that he's SeTi until I get him on video..but I wish myself luck convincing him. He isn't into abstract systems, or really anything except food and momentary sensations. He is content with his own declaration that he has no imagination; he has his collections of knives, food, and stuff to do. He is an extremely likable person whereas I'm a  blunt tornado; but he has no real 'sense of purpose' and no need for it either. He's moment-to-moment; just getting by. Enjoying the experiences as they pass.
It may be easier for Alphas to 'resonate with' how Se works in someone like my brother, since there's kind of a removed element to it. He sees stuff, figures out how to do stuff, experiences stuff. But with Fi, there's an animism & embodying aspect, which needs to become, feel and express.  So there's a self-expressive sentiment coming through the visceral energy.
This is why my family always saw me as an intuitor and him as a sensor; because I'm more witchy, have tons of imagination, express through imaginative ways, tap into the symbolic. I am not by any means claiming that other SeTi's don't do this, but just that by default there's a more visceral-personal vibe with Gamma, which is just so far beyond the reaches of Alpha NT's native "ghost space." This may be why I have a hard time seeing the Se description applying to Gammas.
I'm sure there are Gammas that fit it. But there are some parts like 'figuring out how someone did this or that - moved this way, then this' - which strike me as highly Ti influenced. And the particular word choices around ergonomics, fashion trends, etc; seem to favor Fe 'collectivism' over Te pragmatism & Fi individualism.
I also stand by my previous mention of the need to include realism in the description. This is the one thing my brother and I have in common.
That said, my family saw me as an intuitor and laughed at me when I said I was a sensor. They consider my unvisual and abstract since my brother by comparison is more visual. He will see something done and then copy the steps; whereas I could not tie my shoes as a kid without someone explaining the steps to me in words. However, I've always been better at figuring out underlying patterns, like advanced music theory (when I was 10). I've always been more of a 'channel' - songs and novels write themselves through me.
My brother and I play music together and we are very much in the flow, in the pocket. In this, we are identical. The "flow" section is correct for us both; but the part about figuring something out step by step, is right for him and not me. I've asked a few other Gamma Se people about this and they also said they didn't have particular talent in this area (of breaking down the steps); so I'm going to keep asking around and see if there's a trend.
While my brother is very visual in a concrete, immediate way; I have visual symbolism and meaning. We both decorate our environment to produce a sentiment or an atmosphere, but his is more 'comfort & ergonomics' based like the description, while mine is more about this expressive aesthetic, which is very typical of Gamma Se.

And indeed, this is "animism." Animating the inner spirit through aesthetic, color. It's not about ergonomics or something being fashionable or cool. My Beta father and (likely Beta) brother are very aware of how something will come across, whereas , from what I understand, Gamma Se is more likely to check in with their inner emotional compass to see if this 'resonates' with it accurately.
So I don't know if this is really Se or Fi; if it applies to Delta Fi too; etc. But for me animism is my driving principle, hence 'animal.'
And it does seem like it provides a good axis against Ni's shamanism.
Not all Ni dominants are shamans, but the description delves into this potential and spiritual aspect. The Ni description also talks about how they tap into their Se, and how the axis produces certain experience. I'd like to see that potential & spiritual aspect covered in the Se description too; and see how the Ni axis comes in.
Again, I'll sum this up into a few basic points after gathering more thoughts. Just leaving this here for anyone to read, hate or chew on.

[Animal]

Good convo from Discord.
puellae sumus

@Animal and @Shelley Lorraine | δ Ne (III-) your convo goes back to what Animal was saying on the forum, that Pe can be selective by its own criteria. I think that's true. But on the other hands, perhaps you can't seperate funciton from each other. LIke ever. Hmmm. But yeah, as a seeker, one becomes more skilled/selective in seeking
I've felt times of unretrained seeking, and it wasn't satisfying, it was compulsive. Different from my normal state where I direct the action more
Animal
yea for me the idea of just 'filling the time with whatever' actually makes me cringe physically
feels like death, losing myself, who i am
puellae sumus
Right
I've been in both places
Or just jumping from curiousty to curiosity
Not satisfying, but I've been there
THere was a good year - almost a year ago now -w where i did just that. It was the worst
Animal
@puellae sumus 🙁 my argument was basically that for any healthy person this would not be satisfying, that it comes about because of depression or anxiety etc
would you agree with that?
because, i wasnt denying that it can happen; but i was just saying that i can't see how it's a healthy fulfilling way of life, to be so open-ended.
ive been to really dark places myself...
but any time i was remotely psychologically healthy i had more direction.
it's not a negative judgment about people who are Pe heavy and have been to that place
but rather, an acknowledgement that pure open endedness is not satisfying for anyone. and maybe some Ji leads need their Pe to 'free them' from rigidity, but, that doesnt mean that for us, Pe on its own constitutes freedom or a 'healthy mindset.' i think the open endedness leaves a healthy Pe lead a lot of room to choose a 'direction' that is right for them. (for some people the direction that is right can be to hop through different hobbies, like shelley.) im not saying it has to be "one singular purpose" to be fulfilling. but rather that it has to be headed toward something
open-endedness with no qualifiers is not freedom, is not health, is not spiritual..etc. it's depression.
faeruss
I like that, Pe leads have a direction, even if it is the maximising of possibilities and experiences of different realities, there is a drive, a libido, selecting this vs that(edited)
Animal
yessss
faeruss
Also, I think the notion of the development of personalities and our sense of self is important here. We have good evidence to suggest that our sense of self goes through very well-defined and fundamentally different stages, which go through every increasing complexity and nuance and perspective of self v others. And if we put the types on top of this structure, there are SeFi and TeSi ways of being at each of those, but sometimes an SeFi and a TeSi at the same stage of ego development might resemble one another more than an SeFi at stage 7 vs an SeFi at stage 3, say
Animal
yess
my "gripe" was that i wanted to see some of the other "stages" covered in the descriptions.
Ni has "shaman" covered. this is obviously a late-stage.
Fe has "hero"
i want to see a more developed, mature, intelligent, spiritual side of Se in the descriptions the way it is for the others.
i don't know about anyone else, but my top-development is not "random stunts."
the other descriptions have both the immature, shallow side of a type... and also, the mature, spiritually advanced side. however, most of the Se description could apply to an average 10 year old.
to apply it to an adult, i would have to factor in major depression.
and developmental stunting.
faeruss
"In contrast to the Construct-aware insights, Ego-aware individuals tend to be people who have become aware of the pattern of development that encompasses an ever broader realm of experience, action, feelings and thought. Above all they may viscerally get the absurdity of trying to understand reality with the mind and via representational means alone. The 5th person perspective enables them to analyze both their own becoming and the evolving theories about their own becoming as well as to begin to notice the fundamental need for orienting frameworks or stories that are at the heart of all human meaning making across the globe regardless of culture."
For instance this is a bit from the description of one of the higher stages, the so-called "Alchemist" stage. And I believe fully that any type can reach this stage, so a description of an SeFi that doesn't allow for the possibility of such a stage is categorically wrong
Animal
that's exactly what i was getting at.
im not saying "all Se types are advanced, spiritual heroic people with a strong sense of purpose."
im saying the description right now doesn't allow for that.
which to me feels dehumanizing.
it would be one thing if all the descriptions were parallel in this. but if some are shamans and some are heroes, where is the possibility of this level of spiritual access in a Se type?
i have written a lot about it on the forum, as a Se "phoenix" myself, who worked hard to become what i am. i still have a long way to go before i'd be anything like a shaman or a hero. and i think my Fe and Ni close friends would agree with that too. i doubt @Thanatesque sees herself as someone who was born as a shaman.
but she can likely see herself in that process.
i'd like to see that process in Se.
faeruss
I have empirical evidence that Se leads can reach the highest high of human potential
Elsie
spill the beans
Umbi
collect the beans
repeat infinitely realise futility of the sisyphean bean cycle retire
Animal
yes, and @faeruss - what I don't like, is that right now, "the highest of human potential" is being posited as "open endedness without direction, just exploring moment to moment." when all of us Pe leads know that this is actually our lower potentials and it doesnt make us feel fulfilled.
Elsie
if its the highest of high im gonna be set to beat it or bust
Umbi
is that talking about Pe in itself or Pe embedded in the rest of the function stack
no function in itself could realise human potential, just lead to absolute chaos or stagnation
Elsie
(this is what have been brought-up, above - how to distinguish)
Umbi
like a car with only accelerator and no brakes, or only brakes and no accelerator
Animal
yes, but the Ni description talks about the shaman potential and the Fe description talks about the hero potential.
for a Ni lead to achieve shamanhood she would have to incorporate Se.
not to mention, J functions.
for a Fe lead to be a true hero
she would need internal consistency of Ti
and some openendedness from P functions to be receptive to others.
and events as they change.
so, if Hero is Fe, and Shaman is Ni,
why is it that Se must be limited only to its 1D potential without the integration of the rest of its functions?
where is its Shaman, Hero, type of potential, in the description?
Instead, the Se description posits that the highest potential is the open endedness that they were born with.
i beg to differ.
the highest potential is being a vessel through which Life Force itself may emerge.
Umbi
isnt that everyone
who attains their appropriate development and aligns with their inner soul
Animal
well yes, and hero, shaman and so forth taps into that.
as Rondo on the forum pointed out,
if Ni is shamanism, perhaps Se is animism.
to draw a parallel.
Umbi
i do feel in myself, Pe has a strong channeling component
Animal
yesssss
Umbi
it rides a divine current outwards
spontaneous unreflective creation i wonder what the difference between Ne and Se versions of that is
it seems easiest for us to let go into it because thats our energetic baseline/anchor
Animal
i agree, the channeling component, channeling "the life force" - applies both to Se and Ne equally, it's just more 'visceral' with Se and it's more 'cosmic' perhaps with Ne, i don't know the right words for it
yes!!!!
one thing ive said about myself for years and others have said similar things about my art
so carnal it's spiritual
i think this is Se-specific
Ne would be something quite similar, in what it channels
but coming from a different beginning (not 'carnal----> spiritual)
Umbi
for me i feel Ne comes from space and returns into space
it doesnt seem to move through the corporeal realm, in itself
floats away from body
Animal
like @Elsie 's collage of the floaters
going toward a channel
Elsie
ppl say (idk about others but) "it's so alive it could be moving/it has an-energy" they feel like they can meet them or something
Animal
yes^^

[Animal]

From discord, re: poisoning the mind. Experiences must be specific, not just ANY experience to fill the space, due to our sense that our perceived 'purity' would be corrupted. (Common thread amongst Pe leads.)
Shelley Lorraine

@Animal I am not one to just turn on the tv and watch mindlessly whatever is on. I seek specific shows and put them on my queue to watch. I never binge watch, I don't understand how anyone has the patience for that But anyway, I watch shows to evoke emotional responses - they serve same purpose as my books or daydreaming - i like to explore the possibilities of emotional expression, to feel other peoples lives, even if only fictional. I am pretty particular about what shows I will watch, but when I do select one, its so I can embody the the experience of the protagonist as my own. Except I do enjoy some sitcoms for mere comedy sake, but I'm still particular about which ones I will expose myself too. I do not watch R rated movies and do not like to expose myself to a lot of things that I believe will taint me or desensitize me to certain experiences
I don't do anything that doesn't resonate with me. In truth, I haven't actually been to a "party" per colloquial definition, but I do enjoy socializing in short bouts with 'my people.' It's quite painful to socialize in any other sort of crowd. I enjoy exploring, but I am also careful about what I decide to delve deeper into, always afraid of tainting my perceived purity
Animal
I relate strongly to all of that
well
i don't do it the same way, with TV, but that's also why i watch movies etc.
Shelley Lorraine | δ Ne (III-)
Yea, I guess what I mean is, I relate to you concern about poisoning the mind, just my approach is different than yours
I need novelty, but I'm cautious about it. It's a strange conflict. I do want to find and embody my true essence, but I feel so lost in that regard that I just try to make the most of life as I have it.
Animal
omg you really got to the heart of it --- this is why i react so strongly against the Pe descriptions. (i just realized this now.) because for me it feels like just 'experience for experience's sake' is poisoning my purity
like it really elicits a disgust reaction.
Shelley Lorraine | δ Ne (III-)
I think I dont understand what you mean by 'for its own sake' maybe we mean a similar thing but come at it from such different angle?
Animal
you are what you do and you are what you consume - so why would i want to be bad tv, bad characters, bad movies and stupid parties?
why would i fill my head with that.. why would i put my body alongside those people
hmm ok, what im saying is
I relate to you concern about poisoning the mind
I am also careful about what I decide to delve deeper into, always afraid of tainting my perceived purity
I don't do anything that doesn't resonate with me.
I relate to all of this 100%
Shelley Lorraine | δ Ne (III-)
But I never did find my one true calling, so I inevitably end up exposing myself to a lot more than I'd like to in my futile search
Animal
 "I watch shows to evoke emotional responses - they serve same purpose as my books or daydreaming "
"to feel other peoples lives, even if only fictional. "
"I can embody the the experience of the protagonist as my own."
"do not like to expose myself to a lot of things that I believe will taint me or desensitize me to certain experiences"
all this
and for me this applies strongly in real life as well.
i don't want to just go out and do things because i'm bored.
first of all , ive never been bored. the idea of boredom does not sit right with me , it's not something i understand.
but secondly, i wouldn't just "do things" because i need to spend energy.
Shelley Lorraine | δ Ne (III-)
and yet we are still so different - i'm trying to isolate where the essential difference is though the core motives may be similar
Animal
well i related completely to all the quotes i put. i mean i've said the same thing
but the parts i don't,
"i like to explore the possibilities of emotional expression"
i wouldnt have phrased it this way
"I never binge watch, I don't understand how anyone has the patience for that"
when i do watch, i binge watch. i want to immerse myself fully in the experience and i have endless patience.
but yeah, i have a strong sense also of my own purity and what kind of person i want to be, and so i don't just "do things for fun" if they don't deeply resonate and match my perceived ideals about myself.
Staas
I do the same, but never with series, the episode ending and starting forever bugs me and prevents me from being fully immersed
I just don't understand people pausing all the time in the middle of movies / episodes, breaks everything I can't stand it
Animal
yeah same @Staas
I have only watched two series in my life
maybe 3, because as a kid my friend got me to watch 90210
the only tv thing i ever watched as a kid
but since then ive seen parks & rec, which i watched all in one weekend(edited)
and GOT which i watched the first few seasons all at once
but i watched with a Ni lead ex so we were going a little slower than i'd like
normally i dont watch anything and two out of three series i ever watched was with someone else
but when doing it myself i just... didnt stop
got fully immersed
Elsie
watching Shadowhunters ONLY FOR THE COOL OUTFITS
poisoning the mind/protecting it....im extremely cautious of this...think about the meanings,effects on subconscious, and worry about it in others also...that would damage something irreparable or something, without notice..is this infact, ji - as in, not pe, though? the whole thing with resonance/essence
Neon
I tend to binge watch a lot. When I'm into something I'm completely into it
I often tend to neglect real things happening to me when I'm diving into a fictional universe
That just happened over the week end with Alita and the manga Gunnm
Watched the movie twice and read the whole original manga
Elsie I agree with the Ji kinda stuff
I do that with adds on youtube, when an add plays I look away and put my earbuds off. Don't want to be manipulated/polluted/corrupted/brainwashed

[Rua]

@ Animal
After really trying to mull over most of what you've said on the topic (which feels like a novella at this point XD),
I don't believe Pe-leads are any more prone to boredom than another type, but I do believe that they more instinctively
rebel/ chafe against anything that reduces their freedom/ doesn't naturally interest them. And that this tendency would be markedly more pronounced than in the other types (of course everyone will chafe against things they don't want to do lol). I also think that "flow" might be more correctly attributed to Pe-Pi interplay than either of Pe's emissaries.
In regards to Animal's remarks on synchronicity, flow, thrill of the hunt (thrill of successfully navigating danger I might say): I can relate to all of these. I began seriously playing sports early in life, and based on the descriptions of flow I have read I am fairly certain that I have experienced these states beginning at a very young age. However, I am not inclined to give my personal experience undue weight in matters that might affect so many individuals, and I do wonder what others have to say about this line of thinking, especially "flow" as a state that exists in the interplay of perceiving functions (Pi-Pe).

[Animal]

 I do believe that they more instinctively
rebel/ chafe against anything that reduces their freedom/ doesn’t naturally interest them. And that this tendency would be markedly more pronounced than in the other types (of course everyone will chafe against things they don’t want to do lol).

I don't know. My husband is TiSe, and he "chafes at" things he doesn't want to do, more than I did even as a child. In fact, I find this to be a common theme among Ji leads.
I was always a self-motivated over achiever and much happier that way.  I didn't ENJOY school but I wanted to do it because I wanted my future to pan out a certain way. Not to mention practicing my various lessons for the sake of pursuing my young music career.
My father tells the story that I made a 'deal' with him. I didn't want to be told what time to go to bed. (Around 3rd grade; age 8 or so.)  And my dad tells this story:
Dad: Go to bed.
Me: Why do you need me to go to bed?
Dad: Because I need you to get up on time for school.
Me: I'll make you a deal. If you leave me alone, I'll get myself up for school on  time every day. If I mess up even once you can go back to yelling at me.
Then I got the perfect attendance award, not to mention, perfect grades for several years.
Bottom line: You're not Je conscious. 😛

[Animal]

Ji is the opposite spectrum from Je.
Je is the function that gets people to do things they "have to do" in a pragmatic fashion.
Therefore, Ji, as its opposite axis, is the function that does 'what it wants,' clinging to its own ideals.  Je is the shadow and opposite axis of Ji, not Pe. In my experience, Ji leads are the most whiny about not doing what they don't want to do or what they don't feel 'makes sense' according to their internal ideals.
Pe is the opposite of Pi.   Motion vs. Stillness.
Or something like that . 😛 (Just a thought.)

[Rua]

I understand you mean this line partially in jest,

Bottom line: You’re not Je conscious. ?

but I think that this line of thinking is very unhelpful; I could say the same line to you about Pi and it would have no more validity. Regarding any pertinent topic (and at this stage of the system there is still so much being worked out, almost everything seems pertinent in one light or another), I think it's important to understand the perspective of someone new to the system who might come in and read a similar notion and think "Oh, I really am less developed than these other people and that's what the system means, I guess my opinions aren't worth much around here." This line of thinking is inherently exclusionary, and there is a reason every individual has all four functions inherent to their biology and that the consciousness of a function as currently understood means the function is capable of exerting more of its own autonomy, but the function was always there and in use.
There is always a complete human being behind every type, and each individual has something valid to contribute, regardless of topic and regardless of development.

[Animal]

@rondo
Rondo, I think we might have misunderstood each other here, which has unfortunately happened a lot with me and Alphas. I definitely meant it in jest!
But I have been told that my opinion doesn't count because I'm Je conscious. So I know how that feels and would not want to tell anyone this.
I was just pointing out that the particular distinction you made about 'chafe against anything that reduces their freedom/ doesn’t naturally interest them' - I've been told that this is relevant to Je and not to Pe, whenever I brought it up.
I'm sorry if my comment came off dismissive - it wasn't my intent in the slightest. I've really enjoyed your comments and our interactions and I would love for you to keep commenting on these threads. I don't know why my tone came off that way, but if it did I'm truly sorry because it was not even close to my intent. 🙁
To make my point in a clearer way:
I just thought that being responsible and fulfilling responsibility that we 'have to do' rather than 'want to do' was more of a thing applying to Je. It doesn't particularly apply to me as a Pe lead, if it's framed as an aversion to 'fulfilling one's responsibilities even if they aren't fun, without complaining about it.' But perhaps this isn't what you meant by it?

[Animal]

I think we had an Alpha-Gamma moment because I really like your posts, and your contributions and attitude in general, and didn't mean it the way it seems to have come off (facepalm)

@rondo

[Bera]

Ok, I read most of what was written here and I think I understand both Animal's and Auburn's point of view.
Now, I honestly did not resonate with the Se article, as I already told you. I thought it was about other people; I didn't see how it could be about me. It took me a couple of months to somehow arrange all the information in my mind in a way in which it makes sense that I am actually an Se lead and I will try to explain how I see it, though I'm not sure it will help Animal because I don't have much to say about organization to attain a purpose or about the ability to lead people. I also see these as Je things but there might be some Se attributes that could lead to these directions too (the focus, the realism etc)
So, Se leads are basically Pe leads who are embodied and who think in a convergent manner. And our myth is the Trickster Myth. I honestly think if you drop all the ideas that suggest Se is ...an adult :)) and just read the article as if Se was represented by a kid, everything would fall into place.
And I believe the only thing that is confusing is that Ne is described clearly as what it is...but the Se description is more ambiguous. There are many examples like aegonomics, addiction, luxury, delinquency, being a vixen...which seem to suggest we are talking about a grown up. That the Trickster is some kind of a Devil figure - seductive, greedy, provocative. I think if we just read it thinking of the Trickster as being a kid, it all starts to make more sense.
Indeed I pursue experience for experience. I try to feel everything and to see everything. To live life to the fullest. But it's all from a child's perspective. It's like Ne but you are not floating on a cloud but running through high grass, crawling through branches, hiding behind a tree, giggling, jumping at a target, tickling the target, running back, trying to climb the tree, not really managing to do it, falling down, laughing, running after another target, losing track, forgetting about it, laying down on the grass and whistling while it's getting dark.
I don't have any issue with the lack of organization. I just feel the Trickster is not an adult. It does have horns and hooves but it's just as playful and forgetful and easily distracted like his Ne friend. And this actually shows in some parts of the article. It can actually show in the whole article, if you read it exactly like it's written and just imagine a trickster kid in all the situations that are described. I think this is the right way to read it because of Auburn's drawing of the Trickster and because of his representations of us (I mean me and @Animal) in the thread about how you see a member on the forum.
But please correct me if I am wrong, of course.
Cause yeah, talking about aergonomics and aesthetics - the trickster kid can see something pretty and like it, why not. He can find a perfectly aergonomic and aesthetic stone in the woods and play with it for hours. Also, about addiction - he can somehow find some weird mushrooms and try them and think they are the most awesome thing ever and stay where the mushrooms grow for 200 years (while he remains a kid because he is immortal and forever youthful) and after that he just sees a bird and starts running after it and forgets about the mushrooms. All these possibilities exist.
The thing is the examples in the article are more serious and some are even pretty dark. Because we are considered to be connected to reality. But I think Se is just a terrestrial version of the Puer Aeternus. At least for me this solves the problem that made the article less palatable for my Fi. 🙂
And this is not shallow at all. Living life as it is is actually a sign of realism, of being grounded and realizing this may be all there is. We are here to live our lives. There is nothing wrong with it.
Now, about the spiritual dimension...getting in the flow is a spiritual experience. I think this is suggested in the article, but it's a bit harder to express it fully because we don't have that many Se spiritual practices that are popular right now. We can get pretty easily in an ecstatic state of mind, so maybe following this idea might help. I will think about it a bit more because I did not find my spiritual path yet, so I can't give a good answer without more analysis of the article and of possible spiritual paths.

[Animal]

@Bera
I don't know - the article doesn't describe me as a kid. Most other kids are more similar to it than me.
But I wasn't suggesting putting "hard work" or purpose in the article. I get that those are Je. I need to consolidate my thoughts better 😛

[Animal]

Moreover, I don't think that having a description of a 'typical child' is very illuminating when it comes to understanding how functions work.
This suggestion is basically saying:
Ni is shaman, Fe is hero and Se is 5 year old.
To me that's not very illuminating nor is it true. I see plenty of immature people of other types, and mature Se leads who do adult things. It doesn't line up with any reality that I am part of.
The parts I do see in real Se people are the sensual, sexual, even the criminal parts; the parts that jump over boundaries. I do see the idea of conductors having sage energy while Pe leads have more 'fountain of youth' energy. But to me that's more like teens/20s energy rather than 'bored 5 year old.'  Except insofar as we all have a child inside of us.  But as a kid, for example, I was known to be very precocious. The two Se leads I know who are now dead from drug overdoses, were also very early to have sex; one lost his virginity at age 8.  If we're going to talk about Se lead children, we have to acknowledge also that they can be precocious in jumping right into 'the ways of the world.' Just like any function can be precocious in its own domain.

[Animal]

I'll try to answer this one bit at a time because I really liked it @bera 🙂

I don’t have much to say about organization to attain a purpose or about the ability to lead people. I also see these as Je things but there might be some Se attributes that could lead to these directions too (the focus, the realism etc)

Yes I agree, I don't think leadership or organization needs to be thrown into the Pe article. I was talking more about mastering skills for the thrill of challenge and the cathartic release of doing something well, and the obsessional quality drawing you back to your field of interest, which is why there are so many Se-lead sports & music virtuosos. Those virtuosity skills don't happen overnight; and I think Se leads can get obsessive and intense about accumulating skills and meeting the next challenge. It doesn't always have to be about open-ended newness or "doing whatever catches your interest in the moment."
I also find Ne leads are much more likely to change and switch hobbies, since they see so many alternatives at all times; whereas Se leads are much more likely to see an obsession through, and push at it over and over in a physical way. Master that instrument, that skateboard, that dance; whatever. This isn't the same as organization and rules.

So, Se leads are basically Pe leads who are embodied and who think in a convergent manner. And our myth is the Trickster Myth. I honestly think if you drop all the ideas that suggest Se is …an adult :)) and just read the article as if Se was represented by a kid, everything would fall into place.

As I said in my post above, any kid can be precocious. I doubt that any Ni lead was born as a shaman or any Fe lead was born as a hero; let alone any Te lead being born as a king 🙂
We all have to grow up to fulfill and embody our own myth at its highest forms. The roots are there as children and in those ways we will show precociousness. As a Se lead myself I showed a lot of precociousness in breaking boundaries, thinking out of the box, going my own way, marching to my own drum, figuring out music theory and testing with really high scores, songs writing themselves through me. As a kid I was called a prodigy and a virtuoso, because I spent so much time being drawn to this one obsession. Nothing else outside of that felt 'fun' or fulfilling. The exciting thing was to return to music and master the next thing, and the next and the next. I was a vessel through which music emerged.
I have seen so many Se lead artists and musicians with similar stories. I also know people I'm sure are Se leads who are more 'normal' and not as weird and obsessive as me :p but they were still precocious; like they were the first to try out that skateboard trick or lose their virginity or try some drug. They find the way to explore what they want in the world, to not only 'get their feet wet' but dive in, full body style.  Whatever it is they want, they just go and get it. The thrill of the challenge is real.

There are many examples like aegonomics, addiction, luxury, delinquency, being a vixen…which seem to suggest we are talking about a grown up. That the Trickster is some kind of a Devil figure – seductive, greedy, provocative. I think if we just read it thinking of the Trickster as being a kid, it all starts to make more sense.

Well.. I don't know about you, but I was more that way when I was a kid even than I am now! I was a little vixen to the max.


If you take out the vixen and delinquency then there's nothing left for me, since I was basically born that way.
As a child, I simply could not wait to grow up. I hated other people being able to tell me what to do when. I didn't want to live with parental figures breathing down my neck; didn't want to justify my choices to anyone. This is why I started saving up and working early, aside from my passion for what I was doing. I wanted all bullshit barriers removed so I could be in the flow of life, not restricted by authorities and arguments.  But I understood why the restrictions were there, as my father explained it in plain words:
If you live in my house, you follow my rules. If you want to make the rules, get your own house.
This made perfect sense to me and I gave up most of my childhood aiming toward getting the hell out of there, not because I had a bad family but because being a kid felt like being a slave or a pet. My autonomy is paramount, and children don't have any real autonomy.
I do feel the trickster myth captures the idea of autonomy quite well, now that I think about it. I don't relate to 'free flowing with open ends and exploring' because I have always had strong ideas of what is me, and what isn't. Some methods of exploration feel like tainting who I am. (For instance watching tv, sleeping with basic men or doing heroin.)  So the idea of free, open-ended exploring makes me cringe. But the idea of being free to do what I want, and take it all the way, without justifying myself to anyone - well, this is how I've always lived. The Je helped me to earn my freedom.  But I'm autonomous - because I choose what I will do, when I will do it, and where my morals will apply.
I absolutely hated the constraints around being a kid, and was very driven to work hard to escape it.  The work I was driven to do, was also my passion - music - which for me was a cathartic release of anything that was bogging me down inside; thus giving me more freedom to move with the flow, and not to be clogged with my own inner poison. Music was the storm, releasing the pressure, cathartically emptying the extra weight so I'm light on my feet and can fly toward my destination, unhindered.
So the freedom, release, autonomy- I relate. The parts about being 'open ended' -- I just cannot see it. It's more that I'm caught up in the thrill of the chase and releasing myself from anything that stands between me and my desires, including anything inside myself.  My desires just happen to be huge, lifelong challenges. The moment to moment stuff can also qualify as desires (for instance if I want a certain food I'll drive anywhere to get it), but that's not fulfilling because it's too easy.

Indeed I pursue experience for experience. I try to feel everything and to see everything. To live life to the fullest.

I don't feel that I'm living life to the fullest if I just 'experience everything' indiscriminately. I mean let me ask you this. Do you sleep with any guy who happens to hit on you?  Do you try any drug that any person on the street offers to you?  Do you take the first job offer, regardless how much you hate it? Do you stay friends with people whose actions disagree with your morals?
If not, then you're not just experiencing everything. You're making selective choices based on that which you feel is true to yourself. Just like me 😉

I don’t have any issue with the lack of organization. I just feel the Trickster is not an adult. It does have horns and hooves but it’s just as playful and forgetful and easily distracted like his Ne friend. And this actually shows in some parts of the article.

Yeah, Organization isn't my concern.
Pe is a Catalyst.  I'm not sure why 'catalyst' isn't being used to describe it. Also, as @teatime pointed out, "Hunter-gatherer." This allows Pe people to be  kids, and also adults. It shows how this childlike quality of chasing your target and giggling about it, can serve as a tool and even a spiritual quality for an adult, too.
It gives us some integrity, rather than just indiscriminate 'filling up the space' because we're bored.  Some Se leads may just fill the space because they're bored, but there's also the potential of relentless chasing after something specific, fueled by passion and the thrill of challenge. This is pure Pe, since it's about motion, fuel and desire. I personally would love to see both potentials highlighted in the description.

But I think Se is just a terrestrial version of the Puer Aeternus. At least for me this solves the problem that made the article less palatable for my Fi.

Making it a 'child' and taking out the realistic manifestations of it in people, makes it a lot less palatable to my Fi. 😉  I do appreciate the childlike qualities being part of it, but really it's about fertility, renewal and being a catalyst. It's not about staying in the womb.
In ancient Greek religion and mythology, Pan (/pæn/;[1] Ancient Greek: Πάν, Pan) is the god of the wild, shepherds and flocks, nature of mountain wilds, rustic music and impromptus, and companion of the nymphs.[2] He has the hindquarters, legs, and horns of a goat, in the same manner as a faun or satyr. With his homeland in rustic Arcadia, he is also recognized as the god of fields, groves, wooded glens and often affiliated with sex; because of this, Pan is connected to fertility and the season of spring. The ancient Greeks also considered Pan to be the god of theatrical criticism.[3] The word panic ultimately derives from the god's name.
In the late 18th century, interest in Pan revived among liberal scholars. Richard Payne Knight discussed Pan in his Discourse on the Worship of Priapus (1786) as a symbol of creation expressed through sexuality. "Pan is represented pouring water upon the organ of generation; that is, invigorating the active creative power by the prolific element."[46]
You can't divorce the (symbolic) sexual aspects from the Trickster because this is what it means to be tied to fertility and renewal, catalyst... hunter-gatherer, and in the flow. Remaining a child forever is going against the flow. In reality, we grow up.

And this is not shallow at all. Living life as it is is actually a sign of realism, of being grounded and realizing this may be all there is. We are here to live our lives. There is nothing wrong with it.

"Realizing this may be all there is" - is a more panoramic view that I would ascribe to Pi.

Now, about the spiritual dimension…getting in the flow is a spiritual experience. I think this is suggested in the article, but it’s a bit harder to express it fully because we don’t have that many Se spiritual practices that are popular right now.

I can think of many spiritual practices that are popular now that I see as Se:

• Provocative animism - embodying the energy of something through sexual or provocative costumes.
• Sports, music, mastering or exploring any particular physical feat, making a lifestyle of this.
• Challenging yourself in nature - mountain climbing, etc.
• Giving up your belongings and living free

We can get pretty easily in an ecstatic state of mind, so maybe following this idea might help.

Yup. Pan, Dionysos etc; this is where the erotic energy also has its part.

[Shelley Lorraine]

I don’t feel that I’m living life to the fullest if I just ‘experience everything’ indiscriminately. I mean let me ask you this. Do you sleep with any guy who happens to hit on you?  Do you try any drug that any person on the street offers to you?  Do you take the first job offer, regardless how much you hate it? Do you stay friends with people whose actions disagree with your morals?
If not, then you’re not just experiencing everything. You’re making selective choices based on that which you feel is true to yourself. Just like me

@Animal, I'm pretty sure @Bera 's comment was hyperbole. Besides doing things one does not want to out of a sense of duty (there's that Je again 😉 ) no one goes out of their way to experience anything that doesn't align with their interest or morals. I too have said I enjoy fun for fun sake and experience for experience sake, but as I questioned in discord, I'm wondering if we mean different things by this.
I go out of my way to seek new experiences not as a bratty bored child, but as a spiritually mature adult. Even as a Pe lead, I can become complacent with the status quo. I try to be mindful of when this happens and seek out new experiences. They are not always something I "want" to do, but that I I feel I need to do for spiritual growth. I want to keep my mind open and my experiences diverse in order to understand the world more fully, to have an open mind, to empathize better with others, to be able to embrace the unknown without fear. I read books that don't interest me if they are significantly representative of a particular time or culture (I'm reading the Bible now for that reason), I will seek out new places to hike even though I may feel safer sticking with the tried a true, explore unfamiliar parts of the city to get a feel for the different micro-cultures and diversity, force myself to be spontaneous simply for the sake of expanding my awareness. I want to feel as one with the bigger picture. Part of why I wonder if I am truly Ne-lead is because spontaneity doesn't come naturally to me; I have to actively remind myself to be spontaneous once in a while (with, should go without saying, discretion -  I'm not going to spontaneously sleep with some stranger or accept drugs from a seedy guy on the street corner).

[Animal]

 I try to be mindful of when this happens and seek out new experiences. They are not always something I “want” to do, but that I I feel I need to do for spiritual growth. I want to keep my mind open and my experiences diverse in order to understand the world more fully, to have an open mind, to empathize better with others, to be able to embrace the unknown without fear.

@shelley-lorraine
To me, this sounds like J. Because you have a certain morality inside you that says you should do things you don't want to do for the sake of spiritual growth. Your particular morals around spiritual growth, include newness and keeping an open mind.  Mine don't. My morals are more about single-minded focus and discipline.

I have to actively remind myself to be spontaneous once in a while

I am as spontaneous as I need to be. I would never want to be more spontaneous. Your language here says you "have to" remind yourself -- this is more of a super-ego, or a J function. Some compass inside you telling you that you should be spontaneous. That isn't Pe at all.  @Ivory is Ji lead, and he (as a 6w7 like you) also tells himself that he should be more spontaneous.  But I don't, because I don't have any particular moral affinity for spontanaeity.

Besides doing things one does not want to out of a sense of duty (there’s that Je again   ) no one goes out of their way to experience anything that doesn’t align with their interest or morals.

I am actually not very big on duty. I figure out what I want to do with my own life, and nobody else tells me what that will be, or how to achieve it. The only thing I have a duty toward is my inner compass, which includes the promises I have made by choice, like marriage.  But I keep those to a minimum, and I married someone whose catlike personality provides an exciting chase.
Things like 'school and work' allow me the resources to fulfill my own sense of purpose. I avoided having children or taking on any dependents, because the idea of living a life centered around duty toward others is horrific to me.  I live in service of my sense of purpose, and it's up to me to decide what that is and what I will do to fulfill it.

[Animal]

I'm going to post something here from Auburn's arcane series.

Coyote; The Scout of the Unknown The Pe process is not as negative/critical as the Judgment. It sees potentiality, it searches for resources and that's another way of saying it seeks for life force and vitality. In nature, the Explorer --the scout-- process would be the one to discover food resources. To find better tools. To discover ways of entertaining oneself or others. Pe adds energy, humor, vibrancy and flow. But it has another half, where its imprudent opportunism can lead to hedonism, to infidelity, to broken families, to gambling, drunkenness and ruin. Pe is the chaos of chance. It leaps before it looks. And so in its haste it may fail. The archetype of Pe is the Fool. The Pe process has no loyalties, and can just as easily give as it can take away. The winds blow where they blow. Sometimes it's in your favor. Sometimes not. The clever scout knows how the winds blow, and flows with the winds elegantly to better opportunities. But it cannot be tied down. It refuses to be restrained. It is a vagabond and cannot be trusted to be anything but changing. It will trick you if it's to its immediate benefit. The fool needs no reason; it will do things "for the hell of it" - and in needing no reason, it is also unpredictable. And in its unpredictability it destabilizes Order. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for worse.

@Faeruss just sent this, and I remember having read it long ago, in the past. This was my reaction:
I love this!!
This gives it humanity
this is what Tea was saying about it being "hunter gatherer"
which i strongly agreed with
and what i've been saying basically about the life force and vitality
"The clever scout knows how the winds blow, and flows with the winds elegantly to better opportunities."
this is what i felt was missing from the Se description.
The description is also very similar to my response to @Bera - both in language and sentiment.  Check it out 🙂

[Animal]

I am good at finding the resources needed, even for something complicated, in the short term. I'm not as good at Je stuff like duty & long term security. To me the resource gathering is Pe. And you do that because you are moving in a specific direction toward a purpose, even if that purpose is short term, like feeding yourself.
I always thought if I were homeless I'd be well fed because I'm so resourceful and no matter where I am I can find the opportunities I need without overthinking.
Allow me to draw a parallel with my Fe lead friend.  He is FeNi - very obvious easy typing. (I've checked against the FeNi's in the database; I'm quite certain of his type.)  He lives his life on the road.  He and @ivory went on a road trip together, and parked outside of a hotel because they had to use the bathroom. They had a long conversation about how to pull this off. "Look like you have a room there. If someone asks you a question, say XYZ."  Then one of them looked to the other and said: "You know what [Animal] would do?  She would just walk in."
That's right. I don't take that extra 10 minutes to plan my steps. I just walk right in, and handle the problems as they arise. I always find a bathroom to use, something to eat when I have no food, some way to get back home to take my pills on time and then go back out, even when I don't have a car. There's always some opportunity to get where I'm going, to reach my destination, to keep moving in some direction. And it doesn't require any planning at all. It requires just flowing with the environment and taking the opportunities that come up.
But it's still not open-ended, because I have an idea of where I'm headed.  There's a forward-moving momentum there.
I don't think I'm more open ended than the next person, in terms of goals, long or short term.  I always know what I want, how I want it.  I would posit that "go with the breeze" open-endedness is more about someone's personal morals and their position in life, than it is about type.  But the line between me and a J lead with the same conscious functions, is that both of us will find a way to get what we want; but I am more likely to just bust in to chase something in the moment, without planning my execution.

[Shelley Lorraine]

Oh my gosh @Animal, just seconds ago I just texted my husband that for every one of his reasons why not, I find a way. I am exceptionally resourceful.
And I love that quote faeruss shared with you! Incidentally, Coyote is one of my closes spirit companions. My soul is Owl, but my sidekick is Coyote. Part of my semi-structured exploration is to find new resources, new potential. I don't only look for ways when I need them, though I excel at that too, but I am eternally curious about what might be regardless of immediate need.

[Bera]

@animal - I didn't want to say that a person who is an Se lead is necessarily childish. We all have the other functions too and maturity also depends on life experience, so I wouldn't say that. (though I am an Se lead and I am a bit childish)
I was just saying that for me the Se article started to make more sense and to become more relatable when I imagined that the Trickster could be a child, like the Puer Aeternus in the Ne article. (I can basically see him - with the horns and fur and hooves, with a playful look. I think he is 9 or 10, something like that.)
The main problem I had was that this article looked dark compared to the others.
And every function has dark sides and light sides. Only that with Se I perceived significantly more darkness than light. With the others, usually you have the darkness only in the dark aspects section. In Se's case, when I first read it, it felt like it was everywhere.
And I know everyone's perception is of course subjective. I might see it dark and you might see it light and Auburn may see it as being balanced. I am just talking about what I saw and in the end I am a person who judges stuff like this from a seelie Fi point of view. It could look different to someone with other functions developed or to someone unseelie or to SeTis.
I realized there were some parts of myself that were actually described by it..but not fully or not from the same perspective I was looking at them. It both felt right and wrong and I am not that good at expressing myself in words, so I couldn't say WHY. 🙂 What was right about it and what was wrong.
And then I naturally looked for a balancing solution, that would make it completely right...or mostly right. And this was the only one I found, I couldn't think of any other (which does not mean that a better one does not exist).
Since the Ne article is wonderful and I have no issues against it and Ne is an explorer function too, I tried to see what was it about the Ne article that seemed right and about the Se article that seemed wrong. And I realized the Ne article looked right 🙂 because it is quite innocent, which the Se article is not. But then - assuming the Se article is darker - does it have to be ?
I don't think exploration mixed with S must necessarily be dark. There should be a..starting point, a pure untainted Se :)) and it should work in a similar way to Ne. This is where the idea came from. That the Trickster could be an eternal child too, just one  that lives on earth and can not fly. Which is basically said in the Pe article :

In mythology, the explorer function is symbolically represented as the Puer/Puella archetype; a wayfaring eternal god-child that carries no shackles or responsibilities to life. The Puer roams the world freely, always on the move and on the lookout for new subjects to dally with. Because of this nomadic nature, making contact with this god is always a chance encounter, and can signal good fortune or the beginning of chaos. One example of the Puer can be seen in the story of Peter Pan, whose arrival foreshadows great adventures filled with magic and wonder. Another example of the Puer can be found in Pan, a half-goat Greek god of fertility and sex who roams the fields while playing music on his pipe and who incites crowds into mirth and dance.

Pan can't be really a child and the god of fertility and sex because of obvious reasons...but because we use these representations to make functions easier to understand and not because these images are set in stone, for me it was easier to just drop the sex and fertility part and imagine him as a goat - kid. 🙂 A teenager could work too, thinking about it, my Trickster God looks like he could experiment with sex. Oh, he can play the pipe to make people horny. That's a thing he would do. Problem solved.
But when I say child, I don't mean spoiled brat or bored 5 year old. What I want to say is exploration of the environment without a damaging attachment tied to it.
You mentioned sensuality, so I will take this as an example.  Sensuality is just a way of being open to sensual experience. It can be used to make your partner happy; it doesn't have to have any complicated, weighty.. dark implications tied to it. We should decide what we do using our J functions. Se itself just tends to explore stuff, it does not decide on important matters (hopefully).
Regarding mastery of a skill - I also felt frustrated about the whole idea of Se leads winging it 🙂 instead of working to achieve mastery of skills. I don't believe people who are very good at sports or music can be truly "winging it". They work hard and they sometimes get in the flow. I also look like I'm winging it in some cases at work...after working like crazy and staying overtime every day for almost 10 years. This happens when you are into exploration and novelty and at the same time have a certain skill set. You focus more on finding out new things than on disciplining yourself to do what you already know in a perfect way. Which has advantages and drawbacks...
Also, being able to master skills at a decent level without other developed functions might not only be because of conscious Se, but because of a certain mixture of Se with other functions. This issue exceeds my knowledge.
Regarding free - open ended exploring - I think Se's aim is this but it also easily gets focused on one thing or another. And in case of us SeFis - Fi makes us establish what exactly we explore and what we don't. But this does not make Se less of a free exploring function, the question is if it can win a fight against Fi or not. In my case it usually can not, my Fi is FIerce, Se is laughable compared to it. But in other cases it probably can, as we see lots of people who are addicted to drugs or who cheat to be able to buy luxurious things.
Since I am an Se lead and in my case this does not happen, I assume Se in itself is just aiming to explore stuff but if an Se user lets himself get caught by this tendency and truly gets to the point in which he values sensual exploration more than their moral compass  - this does not show something inherently wrong with Se but something lacking in this person's use of Ji.
You mentioned many more ideas but I think I have to go to sleep now; I will return tomorrow. 🙂

[Author]

Posts