Se & Pleasure?

Home Page Forums Spirituality & Philosophy Se & Pleasure?

  • Sander
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @bera @animal

    If contrasting pleasure and meaning is not intuitive for you, just use other words (like the more specific ‘exploring what’s beautiful vs what’s interesting’). And again, please don’t confuse Se with Se-users.

    Reasons to associate pleasure with Se:
    1) Pleasure is often used as the opposite of pain, and Ni eyes reveal a sadness/pain-complex
    2) Pleasure fits the Openness aspect of Openness to Experience, which clearly matches exploration/Pe
    3) Pleasure is often associated with addiction, and all the Se-leads I know struggle with moderation

    Openness items (R = reversed)
    Enjoy the beauty of nature. .43 .47
    Believe in the importance of art. .66 .64
    Love to reflect on things. .42 .48
    Get deeply immersed in music. .60 .44
    Do not like poetry. (R) .60 .51
    See beauty in things that others might not notice. .52 .47
    Need a creative outlet. .48 .40
    Seldom get lost in thought. (R) .40 .40
    Seldom daydream. (R) .38 .35
    Seldom notice the emotional aspects of paintings and pictures. (R) .60 .47

    Reasons to associate meaning with Ne:
    1) Meaning is often contrasted with pleasure, and conveys freedom from chores (matching Si’s fear-complex)
    2) Meaning fits the Intellect aspect of Openness to Experience, which clearly matches exploration/Pe
    3) Meaning was the last currency I discovered for my tradeoff planner (it’s too automatic for me as Ne-lead)

    Intellect items (R = reversed)
    Am quick to understand things. .65 .65
    Have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (R) .68 .55
    Can handle a lot of information. .64 .65
    Like to solve complex problems. .61 .51
    Avoid philosophical discussions. (R) .61 .45
    Avoid difficult reading material. (R) .58 .39
    Have a rich vocabulary. .61 .48
    Think quickly. .57 .65
    Learn things slowly. (R) .48 .55
    Formulate ideas clearly. .56 .60

    So far, CT generally ignores shadow functions, yet the shared Pe/Openness to Experience suggest that Se-leads are usually more Intellectual than average (just overruled by an even greater Openness). And also the opposite: Ne-leads will be more Open to pleasure than average (just overruled by an even greater Intellect). See my recent topic for theorethical background: cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/cognitive-functions-do-match-big-five-aspects/

    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    Meaning and pleasure are both intrinsic human needs. I’m not buying it. I love your enthusiasm @sander and I appreciate how much thought you put into this, but it sounds fantastical and does not add up to my lived experience of how actual humans operate.

    I would recommend taking a break from function-theory-lala-land and learning about general psychology.

    And this is what I see as a major difference between Se and Ne.  Ne leads are happy to run off on tangeants about theories, whereas Se will say “My real life experience tells me otherwise, and here is a more realistic way to dissect an abstract concept in a way that is MEANINGFUL.”

    😉

    Arguably, “meaning” has a different meaning to each type, but it still matters, one way or other.

    For example, from my point of view, you cannot separate “Se” from “Se users” since the whole concept of functions is predicated on dissecting how the human mind works.  This means the theory has to apply to the humans who fit its categorical criteria.  If we are to ascribe “meaning” to one function category, it would be “Ji”  – and this makes sense since all humans would possess Ti or Fi, according to the theory – so all humans would have a way to sort out what is meaningful.  And in my lived experience – as well as any theory of psychology that is predicated on working with actual humans –  it is generally assumed that we all care about meaning, one way or the other.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    Ivory
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    If contrasting pleasure and meaning is not intuitive for you, just use other words (like the more specific ‘exploring what’s beautiful vs what’s interesting’). And again, please don’t confuse Se with Se-users.


    @Sander

    Beauty is interesting and beauty has meaning. There is always a reason why something is beautiful. I find it a strange thing to separate meaning from these. It is intuitive to me to find meaning in beauty.

    Regardless, the association of ‘meaning’ to Pe (any) seems off. “Meaning” dictates boundaries and definition. It brings value to what is and what is not. These are qualities of Judging, not Perceiving.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Ivory.
    Sander
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal
    Your strawman: “Meaning and pleasure are both intrinsic human needs. I’m not buying it.
    What I just wrote: “CT generally ignores shadow functions, yet the shared Pe/Openness to Experience suggest that Se-leads are usually more Intellectual than average

    Take a deep breath and consider whether you want to recognize what drives others. If you do, wouldn’t it be useful to know more about psychological traits? Why not study the Big Five? That becomes only MORE important when you believe traits don’t match CT.


    @ivory

    Yes, beauty and interest are related, and yes, it’s surprising that the Intellect items fall under Openness to Experience/Pe. I also expected it under Ji, but the data forced me to adjust…

    I’m MINIMIZING CT’s assumptions; isn’t that helpful? Maybe all functions are running in the background, afterall. And if CT has a genetic origin, wouldn’t you expect a mix of all functions?

    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    @sander
    We must have talked past each other because – what I was saying is that studying psychology is useful. My parents are both psychiatrists 🙂 and I’ve had a lot of interest in psychology all my life. I’ve looked into Big 5 and much more. So I think we are in agreement but somehow our language crossed in a way that made it look like we aren’t?

    I agree that Se leads can be more intellectual though – I don’t really consider myself an intellectual… i’m more of an artist , visionary and channeler. (Visionary is not meant to boast, I mean that in the most literal way. I have big visions and actualize them.)

    Also I know what youre saying about all functions. I appreciate the Socionics model for this. I also appreciate that they got a little closer to a definition of Se that resonates for me in some ways, though Auburn got closer than anyone in others. (Flow, vitality, aesthetics, aphroditic and trickster myth… excellent stuff on his part.)

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    CandyDealer
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: l-l-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    Saender, but I am Ne lead and I love pleasure, I’m pleased to please myself with pleasure. I dream about pleasure, I want to live with pleasure, pleasure is my best friend and I invite it to hang out with me very often.

    Also, Celeste and Saender, I don’t think we have all eight functions, it makes no sense inside of CT’s theory because, for instance, because of its mere definition Ne excludes a priori the possibility of having Ni or even Se + Celeste, your argument “it’s dumb to think…” is self referential, to whom is it stupid? To you? Why? It isn’t stupid to me and I have a master degree in smartness of talks and speeches + I have been elected smart talker of the year, so it must be as I claim.

    + Celeste thinking of Fi as the function that gives you personal value/moral is a naive mistake and about this I suggest you to read the metabolic description of Fi.

     

    Guys, we are no goddam MBTI community, we have no memefied functions or types, put aside those very stupid thoughts.

    And now since I am Ne lead, I’ll go thinking of ultra crazy ideas and have adhd

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by CandyDealer.
    Sander
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal
    I agree and treasure my rare Se-experiences ?” (9 June)
    I appreciate you now believe I do actually agree 😉


    @candydealer

    If you want others to believe your T ego-fixation stop strawmanning: “but I am Ne lead and I love pleasure” although I wrote “Ne-leads will be more Open to pleasure than average

    because of its mere definition Ne excludes a priori the possibility of having Ni
    No-one is claiming they’re operating at the same time. And psychedelics can definitely alter your state of consciousness; as clear Ne-lead I’ve definitely experienced cosmic consciousness: https://cognitivetype.com/ni-behaviorism-mythology/#light-cosmic-consciousness

    And you conveniently ignore adressing my counter-argument: “And if CT has a genetic origin, wouldn’t you expect a mix of all functions?” And CT seems to have a genetic origin: https://cognitivetype.com/publication-vultology-parallels-among-identical-twins/

    CandyDealer
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: l-l-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    My mom believes I have a T ego, this authorizes me, according to CT rules, not to be believe by anyone else when I claim I am T ego, I strawmanned angels, I can strawman men.

    Your counter-argument is pointless: CT is a model and as such it creates structures that, in this case, serve for explaining human cognitive processes (and eventually behaviors), you decontextualized the genetic thing: it’s not like there is the Ni area of the brain, the Ne area and so on. Functions are mere models of some brain processes and, by definition, it is pointless to say – within CT – that a person has both Ne and Ni (and not necessarily simultaneously – which I have never claimed). Can one create a theory with all the eight functions? Ofc they can, actually as you will know, socionics works like that. As far as I’m concerned you can also create an extra-Jung model with 500 functions but it’s not the “truth”, it’s not like we have 4 or 8 or 500 different brain areas, it’s how we model them in order to create, hopefully, a coherent theory and as how this theory (CT) is made, Ne and Ni exclude each other.

     

    Now send me your ego certificate and the rank of holy angel warrior or nobody will believe in you and in your identity

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by CandyDealer.
    TBerg
    Participant
    • Type: NiFe
    • Development: l---
    • Attitude: Directive

    Since I believe that the Buddha was a polarized NiFe, I take real issue with the description of the essence of Se as pleasure-seeking.  CT, to me, seems like a description of cognition, not a description of psychological drives, so it seems strange to me to ascribe specific drives to a single function.  It seems like all types can want to seek pleasure at certain points in time, so I don’t know why we should single out a single function or type development to harbor this drive.

    Since I see the philosophy of Buddhism as a very Se-centric way of being, upon which Jelle has also remarked and also ascribing Se to phenomenology in general, that means that Se is WAY broader than pleasure-seeking and indeed may have nothing ultimately biasing it towards that drive.  As an extroverted perception function, it would be focused much more on the events and happenings (phenomena) pulling the subject towards more and more becomings of reality with direct interaction with those becomings.  It wouldn’t seem self-referential or driven by a certain psychological need, as I can see how Se allows for a great variety of perceptive engagements, not just positive ones but a whole kaleidoscope of them.

    A quote by the Buddha from the Pali Canon:

    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

     CT, to me, seems like a description of cognition, not a description of psychological drives, so it seems strange to me to ascribe specific drives to a single function.


    @Tberg
    – YES! THIS!  This was exactly what I was trying to say – and you said it so well!  That’s why I said that as an enneagram four, I need to transform my suffering and shame into beauty, and be admired for it. This is my most BASE drive, and that is what enneagram deals with. My cognitive functions give me the path by which I can realize these drives.

    Bera
    Moderator
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Auburn

    Here’s an idea:

    Pleasure – The real-time event or experience of happiness.
    Happiness – The state of being continually satisfied with one’s existence.

    I think you are right ! It didn’t occur to me because I don’t think I ever experienced a state of being continually satisfied with my existence. 🙂 There are some issues that make this state of being highly unlikely for me – the first is that my emotions are pretty volatile. And the second is that usually I am in a state of tension/ seeking. As if I was caught up in a quest. I don’t think I am unhappy underneath this tension but I also don’t believe I am truly satisfied with my existence. Maybe this comes with Pi development? It looks like senex energy, not sure why.

    Regarding the types of pleasure you mentioned, I consider them all enjoyable, of course, but I excluded some of them from my pleasure bubble :)) because I was not sure if they are indeed forms of pleasure or something else.

    For example in the case of love and victory, I also thought about them…and I guess there is an overlap with pleasure. Like circles that have some common parts and some distinct parts. But then…love is more active. It feels like you produce it constantly, there is a choice. Even if people deny it, there is. There is also some control, you can increase the amount of love you…create? emanate? shine out? Pleasure is quite different, you rather just surrender to it. It doesn’t feel like you create pleasure. It feels like it’s happening to you and you can just attune to it more or less.

    Victory is actually closer to pleasure, I can’t explain very well why I left it out. It seems to have a different “vibration” but it also just happens. Oh, there is pride combined with victory, I guess.

    So, I think there is overlap but this is basically why I didn’t mention them. I guess I am more S and F oriented, so for me if something doesn’t feel exactly like another thing, I put them in different categories. But logically everything enjoyable is a form of pleasure. 🙂


    @animal
    , very interesting idea, I will also post answers to your list of different types of pleasure.


    @sander
    – you mentioned many things, I will try to address the ones that I think are the most important :

    We consider Fi is connected to a wounded expression. I am not sure what you mean when talking about Ni sadness, please give more details.

    Also, I have to tell you I did the Big Five test and I am very high in openness. Close to 100. But these scores change and right now I am in this community of people who keep talking about philosophy, spirituality, physics, religion…I think it’s reasonable to think that the environment made my openness increase. By the way, I also suspect it made my conscientiousness decrease.

    These traits are not fixed and they change according to circumstance, as far as I know. But I think indeed high Ne and Se users would naturally tend to be high in openness (if you don’t take into account any other factors)


    @animal

    For example, from my point of view, you cannot separate “Se” from “Se users” since the whole concept of functions is predicated on dissecting how the human mind works.  This means the theory has to apply to the humans who fit its categorical criteria.  If we are to ascribe “meaning” to one function category, it would be “Ji”  – and this makes sense since all humans would possess Ti or Fi, according to the theory – so all humans would have a way to sort out what is meaningful

    Yes, when we talk about a function, it is to determine what is specific about that function (that is likely to show up in people who have that function 🙂 ). This is why we learn about functions in the first place. To see what there is to know about them and how it can be applied in our lives and in our relationships to others.

    I’d also ascribe it to Ji. Or to Pi. But anything could be meaningful. Staas once showed us a famous photographer who he typed as Se lead (probably Se lead indeed but he was not officially typed). You can’t really say he was not seeking meaning…using Se. The world around us carries meaning. Simply seeing it and showing it is meaningful.

    @candydrinker and @sander again – I just phrased the Socionics problem as a question because I don’t think it’s that absurd, but I have to say we believe anyone can have any experience using his 4 functions. So, anyone could experience something similar to cosmic consciousness by using a certain combination of his functions. (for example Ne, Fi and Si 🙂 ) I am not sure my explanation is good enough, maybe this should be discussed more.


    @tberg
    what you said is fascinating and I think it should be explored more but I am too tired, so I will try to do it one of these days. 🙂

    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    In Socionics,  there’s a highly specific view on pleasure or ‘sensual ecstasy’ as a focus, and it is ascribed to Si, not Se.

    Introduction to Si
    Introverted sensing is an irrational, introverted, and dynamic information element. It is also referred to as Si, S, experiential sensing, or white sensing. Si is associated with the ability to internalize sensations and to experience them in full detail. Si focuses on tangible, direct (external) connections (introverted) between processes (dynamic) happening in one time, i.e. the physical, sensual experience of interactions between objects. This leads to an awareness of internal tangible physical states and how various physical fluctuations or substances are directly transferred between objects, such as motion, temperature, or dirtiness. The awareness of these tangible physical processes consequently leads to an awareness of health, or an optimum balance with one’s environment. The individual physical reaction to concrete surroundings is main way we perceive and define aesthetics, comfort, convenience, and pleasure.

    In contrast to extroverted sensing (Se), Si is related to following one’s own needs instead of focusing on some externally-driven conception of what is necessary to acquire or achieve. So, whereas Se ego types feel capable to evaluate how justified others’ preferences are, Si ego types will try to adjust to them in any way possible (given that it does not extremely affect their own comfort), wishing to minimize conflict. In contrast to introverted intuition (Ni), Si is about direct interaction and unity (or discord) with one’s surroundings, rather than abstract process and causal links.

    Types that value Si prefer to spend their time doing enjoyable activities rather than straining themselves to achieve goals. They like to believe that if activities are done with enjoyment, people will give them more effort and time, and also becoming more skilled at what they are doing in the long run. They believe that goals should suit people’s intrinsic needs rather than shaped by the demands and constraints of the external world, and so do not try to force others into doing things they don’t want to do. They also try to be easygoing and pleasant, preferring peaceful coexistence to conflict, except when their personal well-being or comfort is directly at stake.

    Si as Leading Function
    A strong ability to recognize internal physical states in themselves and others, to understand how these states are reached, and to recreate and avoid these physical states. Individuals who possess Si as a base function are drawn to situations that satisfy their inner physical experience. Whenever Si base function individuals are taking part in something that involves recognizing, recreating, or analyzing physical states, they feel a great deal of personal power and enthusiasm.

    The avoidance of discomfort is one of the primary motivations of these types. Feelings of internal discomfort can arise from a tense psychological atmosphere, working too hard and sapping the body’s resources, being pressured by other people or by numerous “things to do,” and from unsatiated or oversatiated physical needs. These types tend to quickly recognize and be quite vocal about discomfort that arises and either take clever measures to dissipate it or simply get out of whatever is bothering them. They are very receptive to other people sharing feelings of discomfort with them and can help alleviate the tension and offer good solutions.

    Si leading types are constantly adjusting themselves to their environment (which includes the people around them), and rarely have any fixed ideas about what is “appropriate” to desire in a given situation. Thus they are willing to accommodate other people’s needs in an ad hoc manner. It is enough for something to “feel right” for them to justify doing it. This behavior may seem random to outside observers, since it is concomitant with weak Ni.

    And here is Se:

    Introduction to Se
    Extroverted sensing is an extroverted, irrational, and static information element. It is also called Se, F, volitional sensing, or black sensing. Se includes the ability to know how much power, force, or influence is latent or required. Types that value Se are much more comfortable with direct behavior aimed at making an immediate impact. This may at times be perceived as abrasive, particularly by types who do not value Se. There is usually a competitive edge to this style of group interaction, resulting in a more intense atmosphere than that of introverted sensing (Si)-valuing quadras. They appreciate contemplating possibilities only if they feel like they stand to gain something from it, or it has a perceived potential impact on “the real world”. Unlike Si, which is about one’s subjective sensory experience (how intense or enjoyable it is), Se is about achieving an object of desire. It gives one the ability to influence, bend, and push situations and people in order to achieve such an object, rather than to enjoy the situation one is in.

    Se as Leading Function
    The individual feels at home among people who are actively doing something and interacting with each other directly (visibly), and is able to organize people, move them around as necessary, and guide them in achieving a specific goal. He or she likes obedience and even subservience in others, since it allows him to “make things happen” more effectively. He is keenly aware of territorial conflicts and confrontational behavior occurring around him. He very quickly becomes confrontational when others try to make him move or get him to do something in an aggressive or confrontational way. He quickly recognizes when people are trying to get each other to do something or are trying to organize him for some purpose. He also spontaneously uses aggression to achieve his own goals.

    He wants to make all decisions himself about what he will do, wear, eat, look like, etc., and resents any attempts by others to make these decisions for him. However, he is willing to make use of other peoples’ ideas, advice, and creativity, as long as he plays the most visible role. He enjoys testing his will in challenging situations and views life as a sort of obstacle course, full of adversity and challenges, that must be weathered and conquered.

    Socionics proposes that we have access to all eight functions, as @sander brought up – but there is a specific way that the functions manifest.  According to the theory, Se leads must ‘ignore’ Si, because it conflicts too much with their main function. So, to give one example – Se has to sacrifice “comfort” and “pleasure” in order to get things moving and make a strong impression.  Since their first function, Se, also known as “F” or “Force,”  – is at the base of their ego — they cannot also focus on pleasure, as it would conflict too much with their main drive.

    This is how Se manifests for Si leads, as an “ignoring” function:

    Se as Ignoring Function
    The individual prefers to guide others by providing individual rewards and helping satisfy the needs of specific important people rather than through direct leadership or issuing directives. He avoids confrontation and collisions, but becomes fierce and unbending for brief periods of time if they are inevitable. He does not resonate with the idea of overcoming challenges or beating the competition, but prefers to listen to his internal desires and care for his own physical, emotional, and psychological well-being rather than doing what the outside world seems to demand or require of him.

    He is adept at perceiving fights over power of a confrontational nature around him and is very able to resist them or even actively participate in them if that is seen as unavoidable, but he sees no point in giving them priority over a sense of comfort and well-being. Participation in violent physical activities where such fights may take place, as in some sports, are motivated not by those fights themselves but by the stimulating sensations those activities generate.

    And this is how Si manifests for Se lead as an “ignoring” function.

    Si as Ignoring Function
    The individual is perfectly adept at evaluating his physical state and the quality of his sensations, but gives priority to the external act of experiencing and interacting with the world. He gets impatient with those who stubbornly focus on harmony and equilibrium when there are things to be done in the outside world. According to these types, the exploration of the sensations is something that should be done in private on one’s own time, but in public people should be ready to interact, get involved, and command situations without having to weigh out everything first.

    Now granted – these are very simplistic quotes from a website written about basics, and it doesn’t sound very human. I can find better descriptions but this provides easy access to the system’s basics. Also, I am not by any means advocating for ‘swallowing socionics whole.’ There are a lot of problems with Socionics and I think Auburn touched on them very well in his articles and writings. I had already been noticing many holes in that system before I came here. The problem is that it’s all very mathematical and pretty, but things aren’t always so ‘neatly lined up’ in reality.

    That being said, the general difference between Se and Si– being that Si is the INTERNAL experience of pleasurable sensations, whereas Se is more about INTERACTING with reality — makes a lot of sense to me, structurally.  The introverted functions are the ones that make an experience “internal.”  So on a structural level – why would Se indicate ‘enjoyment of pleasure?’  Wouldn’t a Se lead internalize their introverted functions, and externalize their extroverted functions?

    What that means is, structurally, it makes sense that a Se lead would use their sensory skills to MAKE AN IMPRESSION on others with their clothes, or interact with reality – whereas a Si lead would seek ‘sensory pleasure and ecstasy.’  In theory.

     

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Animal.
    Bera
    Moderator
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    This is amazing !!! And in line with what I said above, that I could not be in a continuous state of satisfaction with my life because I am always seeking something else. And that maybe this general contentment could come from Pi. ? I had no idea this is the view held in Socionics but it is pretty similar to what I experienced.

    I think we have a duty to make an impact on the world and that just enjoying pleasurable experiences can keep us from realizing our true potential. To me too much involvement in pleasing activities with no meaning (impact) is selfish and unproductive. I know it’s not (!!!) but this is exactly how it looks like from my perspective and I must make an effort of empathy to understand people who favor pleasure as in a pleasant life, good food, comfort, a good night’s sleep, high quality of irrelevant goods, a perfect home and all that stuff. To me these things are a huge waste of time. And what matters is indeed that we make an impact on other people’s lives.

    Other things matter too, for example knowing ourselves and understanding the world. Here I am just comparing the importance I give to sensual pleasure vs. our impact on the world.

    Now I would never boss people around (except for co-workers that really need it because they are even more indecisive and compliant than myself ?).

    But I see how sometimes interpersonal situations have a great potential for improvement ! ? And sometimes I can’t  keep myself  out of them. Because if I do, this potential gets lost. And things happen because people come together and make them happen. If you don’t put in some effort to energize or cool down the environment, nothing will ever happen. Or it will happen way slower.

    At the same time,  I strongly believe we should only act with good intentions and that our possible downfall  is in forgetting to always make sure our actions are right !

    What I don’t like about the Se description in Socionics is that there is a certain focus on personal  gain. We can very well try to make things move for others or for a certain cause, this is not about personal gain but about moving.

    Also, I am not aggressive and I don’t come off as abrasive (I hope). So, this part is probably written ignoring that  Ji actually is used to determine if certain actions are ethical and aligned to personal values or not…and then of course Socionics does not have the concept of seelie/unseelie.

    But I have to say my focus is indeed on impacting the world / other people and not on my enjoyment. My enjoyment of sensual pleasures is… irrelevant. I perceive it as distraction from what I actually want to accomplish.

    I actually read about a way to use our power in a spiritual way. It was on the Buddhism for Vampires site…or rather on an associated site. I will look for the link but I know it’s a bit hard to find. It’s a tantric view, about how to use energy and how to change meaning. One of the best ideas I ever read though I didn’t understand it completely.

     

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Bera.
    Bera
    Moderator
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    I found it ! The article about unclogging energy !

    This might look like a diversion but it’s not, I promise. I am trying to exemplify how Se can be used in a spiritual way. I think this could also work with Ne or maybe with other functions/combinations of functions. It is connected to what you guys said about the Buddha and about Se being also named F (Force) and being concerned with making an impact on the world.

    Here it is : https://vividness.live/2012/07/03/unclogging/

    Unclogging energy by uniting spaciousness and passion.

    Energy is blocked by fixed meanings: when narrowed perception insists that things must only go one way.

    There is high-energy stuckness and low-energy stuckness:

    Conflict can produce a high-energy stalemate. Opposing sides pour energy into a situation, each trying to force it to go a particular way. Each imposes a fixed meaning. Because neither can see alternative possibilities, the energy has nowhere to go, and just spins in turbulent vortices.
    In low-energy stuckness, the possibility of change is missed, and those involved continually drain or dissipate energy from the situation. This happens when they fail to recognize any meaning, or deny it. This stuckness is depressed, stagnant, flaccid.

    Energy is both “internal”—the energy of emotions, bodily processes, and sensations—and “external”—the energy of groups, situations, and non-human processes.

    To understand how this works, I have to define some terms 🙂 :

    Tantrika = a person who practices tantra, I suppose;

    Spaciousness = freedom from fixed meanings. (more here https://vividness.live/2012/06/21/spacious-freedom/ )

    Ok, now about how you unclog energies :

    High-energy stuck situations
    In a high-energy stuck situation, people have fixed ideas about what things mean. There are intense passions in conflict, and a spaciousness deficit. Here the tantrika feels for alternative possibilities that have been overlooked by the participants; for other meanings that can be found in the situation. Because the tantrika has no preconceived ideas about what should happen, his or her attitude is free of arrogance.

    Then, he or she jumps into the gap. Ideally, the tantrika finds a place to stand where applying a slight force at precisely the right time and angle causes the whole structure to settle into a new, more productive arrangement, using its own energy. <3 If you have ever played Angry Birds, you have the image of a little tap, in just the right place, setting off a chain of large rearrangements. Imagine that with flexible high-pressure hoses and nozzles and valves added. (Hey, maybe that would make a cool game…)

    Low-energy stuck situations
    In low-energy stuck situations, there is a passion deficit. Whatever energy flows into the situation is immediately dissipated, because potential meanings have been denied. Everything is flat and dull.

    Here the tantrika can liberate the situation by supplying passion and meaningfulness. <3 Again, this requires a detailed feel for the workings of the situation, and skill in intervention. The force of despair driving the dissipation of energy may be far stronger than you. Opposing it directly would fail. The tantrika reaches into spaciousness to locate a specific passion, latent in the situation, that can overcome the force of dissipation. The tantrika becomes the passion that is needed, and the situation reconfigures itself around that passion.

    This sounds very Se-ish to me. Both the part about applying force and that about reaching to locate a passion and embodying it, becoming it.

    But I think Ni use is necessary in order to find new meanings. So, it looks like you would need to use both.

    I don’t know how this would work for Ne-Si but it must, since every spiritual (? :)) ) practice has to be accessible for everyone in some way. But as a core idea, I think it is an Se-Ni one. And I think it is a possible spiritual path for us, which is important because Christianity does not provide much playground for our Se. It appeals to Fi and even this is not always true… And other Eastern traditions seem to encourage detachment. And only detachment. Which might not work for someone who has a lot of energy and the tendency to direct it to the world.

    Maybe this should have been another thread, not sure. It is connected to what you guys said but it’s not about pleasure. Or actually…:)))

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Bera.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Bera.
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    @bera

    I think we have a duty to make an impact on the world and that just enjoying pleasurable experiences can keep us from realizing our true potential. To me too much involvement in pleasing activities with no meaning (impact) is selfish and unproductive. I know it’s not (!!!) but this is exactly how it looks like from my perspective and I must make an effort of empathy to understand people who favor pleasure as in a pleasant life, good food, comfort, a good night’s sleep, high quality of irrelevant goods, a perfect home and all that stuff. To me these things are a huge waste of time. And what matters is indeed that we make an impact on other people’s lives.

    Other things matter too, for example knowing ourselves and understanding the world. Here I am just comparing the importance I give to sensual pleasure vs. our impact on the world.

    Bingo. This is exactly how it is for me too.  And Socionics would call this Si ‘ignoring’ – which applies to Se leads.

    It would be different for JiSe, according to their theory. Since they theorize that everyone has access to all eight functions, but only values four- each function has a specific place in each person.

    For JiSe, it’s easy for them to access both Si and Se – so they may theoretically be bigger pleasure seekers, because it doesn’t directly conflict with their FIRST function. The ignoring function for FiSe is Fe, and the ignoring function for TiSe is Te.  I think Auburn does a good job covering, in the Ti description, how they “ignore” Te – by thinking that outside impositions on their life are meaningless, like school and certifications —  because they don’t hold intrinsic value, and the Ti mind is fixated on their own internal ‘order’ and things they place value upon. Therefore, Te ignoring is spelled out in the Ti description Auburn wrote.

    But in the Se description, Se is mostly merged with Si stuff – and there’s no deeper explanation for how we don’t value Si, how we need to push that away in order to remain in our own “Se space” since this is our primary M.O.

    YOU spelled it out perfectly in this quote here.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 44 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
© Copyright 2012-2020 | CognitiveType.com
This website's articles, its reading methodology and practices are the intellectual property of J.E. Sandoval.
Animated GIFs, images and videos belong to their respective owners.