Se Realism, Ne Surrealism & Identity

Home Forums Model 1 Discussions Se Realism, Ne Surrealism & Identity

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #15854
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Anyway, I’m pontificating here, not claiming anything I say is correct except the stuff about myself haha. I wasn’t concise but I don’t think I can do better.

    I think you did plenty well. But for my brain I'm gonna try to summarize a bit of that's okay? The main points I got were:

    • Beta types excel at enneagram; questionable if (motivation/character/enneagram) is an Fi specialty.
    • Se/Ni appears most suited to pick up on natural law patterns
    • Se realism and Ni universalism use specific instances, but as demonstrable of widely applicable patterns - so they are not clinging narrowly to specifics but trying to convey the universal through a specific.
    • And the two should always match, because every specific instance is an expression of the universal. If they don't match, one is wrong, so no data is an 'exception' to the imagined "average" (average is a false idea); the concept must be wrong or in need of modification.

    And from Ivory:

    • Ivory/Synthetic (Beta Revisers) appear more suited to enneagram motivational tracking, while Animal (Gamma) excels more at cognition.

     

    Revision

    If I were to shift my interpretive structure, accounting for these new data-points, I get a rather different outcome. Character-motivation and cognition may be tracked equally well by either Fi or Ti, and instead the level of agreement or disagreement with systems of self-description (typologies) comes from other variables.

    • 1) The lack of realism of the descriptions; a lacking description of real people.
    • 2) The divergence between the subject's own reality and their self-perception, which Ne is more prone to.

    Under this hypothesis, Se's realism provides an attunement to the facts of what 'is', giving both Ji functions the raw material from which to accurately measure the situation.
    And in the case of Ne, the trade-off from realism to possibility opens the doorway for self/other concepts to form that are less attuned to 'what is' and perhaps more hopeful of what may be desired/wished-for, or to a caricature that is more malleable to the whims of personal re-construction.
    It has indeed been Deltas, more than Gammas, that display their idiosyncratic beliefs in a way that seems out of tune with reality. ( I summon thee, @zweilous ) And I do see that Gammas are rather quick to orient themselves to something like CT if it can be shown -- because it can be shown (CT is rather Se-friendly in that the data is real and available), while Ne+Fi can struggle a bit more to accept the constraints (Ne dislikes constraints!) to reality and what the self can be imagined as being or not being.
    This broader interpretive potential is what leads to larger typological disagreement, and perhaps even an in-built resilience against tangible counterpoints to the contrary.

    ----

    I'll leave this here for now, I have to think more about it. (This is not something I necessarily believe in atm, but I just wanted to frame an argument, to see what others think of it?)

    #15862
    EpicEntity
    Participant
    • Type: SeTi
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Directive

    @Auburn

    This broader interpretive potential is what leads to larger typological disagreement, and perhaps even an in-built resilience against tangible counterpoints to the contrary.

    What if in the future CT had multiple introductions and base-points to suit either each quadra's or 1024 variants inherent way of seeing the world.

    #15866
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @auburn
    Excellent Summary! Yes, I think you got the meat of what I was saying and what I gathered from Ivory's post.  I really admire that organization of thought. 🙂
    I'll read this whole thing more carefully later and address other points made, like @teatime 's post which was just excellent.

    #15906
    Hrafn
    Participant
    • Type: SiTe
    • Development: l-ll
    • Attitude: Seelie

     

    And in the case of Ne, the trade-off from realism to possibility opens the doorway for self/other concepts to form that are less attuned to ‘what is’ and perhaps more hopeful of what may be desired/wished-for, or to a caricature that is more malleable to the whims of personal re-construction.
    It has indeed been Deltas, more than Gammas, that display their idiosyncratic beliefs in a way that seems out of tune with reality. ( I summon thee, @zweilous ) And I do see that Gammas are rather quick to orient themselves to something like CT if it can be shown — because it can be shown (CT is rather Se-friendly in that the data is real and available), while Ne+Fi can struggle a bit more to accept the constraints (Ne dislikes constraints!) to reality and what the self can be imagined as being or not being.

    I actually relate to these Ne traits 100% (even though I know it's more Deltas, it seems like the focus here is on the P-functions). It feels like Ne can give sort of a whimsical or aspirational quality to how I experience self-concept or self-image...although I do often feel a tension between this and a more sober view of things. Needless to say, I don't think this aspirational quality inherently worse (or more pooerly adapted) than Se's view of things--like a lot of what Ne does, this is oriented toward a certain kind of visioning.
    This characteristic of Ne and self-image is part of why I often feel reflexive discomfort with absolute or 'metabolic' distinctions (as I mentioned in my post above). I don't want to be socially defined/constrained any more than necessary, and I don't want to take away from others the ability to figure out (through trial-and-error, or however) who they really are by prejudging them any more than necessary. (By the way, it seems like part of what Fe does involves recognizing these sort of social definitions/constraints, but how it responds/relates to them depends  a lot of from one Fe user to the next).

    #15907
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Hrafn
    I know you were responding to Auburn but he was responding to me, so I'll clarify: I definitely don't think Ne/Si or Se/Ni is 'better' or 'worse.' I just have an easier time describing Se/Ni with nuance. I have only the vaguest idea of how Ne/Si actually does what it does, and it still continues to astound me. So if my descriptions sound like I devalue it, that's not true -  it's just that I can't explain what I'm seeing, that's all. 😀

    #15921
    Hrafn
    Participant
    • Type: SiTe
    • Development: l-ll
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal I understand--I didn't get the impression you thought Se/Ni was 'better.' My comment was more along the lines that I was thinking to myself, what's the upshot of a Pe function that's less sober & realistic?...and I could kind of picture the advantages but was struggling to articulate it, even though of course I feel like there's certain ways in which Ne is very natural & function. Who knows, maybe I have an NeSi inferiority complex, lol.
    There's one unrelated thing I feel like clarifying from my above post. When I wrote,

    It feels like Ne can give sort of a whimsical or aspirational quality to how I experience self-concept or self-image,

    I still understand a possible difference between myself, here, and what I've sometimes heard Ne-leads describe. Namely, my self-concept is relatively stable; it can change gradually, but not very fast. (And this is something I'm fairly confident is a realistic assessment because I'm often told seem like the same person regardless of the situation). So I guess the long & short is this is an area where I feel tension between Ne's divergent-dreamy quality on the one hand & Si earthiness/conductor forwardness on the other. It seems like this topic also connects to the ethereal & ephemeral quality auburn has ascribed to Ne...which is something I can relate to in some certain ways, but as an Si-lead, in many ways not.

    #15966
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    split from: https://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/the-evaluation-of-identity-fi-vs-ti/
    I split this tangent into its own thread (though I was conflicted as to whether to do it or not) not because it doesn't relate to the original discussion but because the main thread was tackling too many topics at once, and I felt this could better facilitate discussion.
    (Hope that's okay with you guys. )

    #15971
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    I kinda picked up on the imbalance undertone above too, even though it wasn't intended. I wrote a little something that I feel might be worth sharing:
    One quibble I have with the above hypothesis is that framing anything in CT in terms of certain types better approximating truth (if reality = truth?) and others not, automatically presents a social/political problem. Fortunately, I'm not inclined to side with an equalist philosophy of cognition - heh!
    However, egos aside.. I'm a high-Ne user and exist as a counterpoint to the notion of Se realism being necessarily more privy to what 'is' with regards to typings at least, and I consider my own functions to be capable of using specifics as echoes of universals too. Indeed, that is how CT has been formulated.
    Also, we see plenty of Delta (and Alpha) types as the leaders in science, which is the domain making "what is" the most explicit. In this sense, there's an accuracy in reality-measurement that Deltas bring (though perhaps through Si+Te?) which acts as a counterpoint to that which is brought up by Beta Ti+Se. Following this path of discussion, we can quickly swerve into the realm of philosophy and debates about "what is real."

    What is Real / Ontology & Functions

    But thinking about it more... I think the problem here is in the generality of "is", and Se realism has to be defined in a more nuanced way. All functions attempt to approach some ontological reality, but they have different definitions and criteria as to what that is.
    I have a very general sketch below that might be of some use for discussion, even though I'm not certain of it myself. Here goes:

    • Si (what has been up to now) + Ne (what could be from now onward)
    • Se (what is now) + Ni (what always has been and will be)

    It seems to me that the two are framed differently, so I made a diagram trying to parse it out more:

    For the Ni portion, Se is embedded within Ni, so that the 'now' is a direct reflection of the timeless. In this sense it gives Ni an ontological reality with the same sobriety and gravity as the present - because one is the expression of the other.
    This is not the case with Ne, which more readily admits that what it views is a brainstorm of multiple possible futures. This creates an asymmetry in the epistemology of the two axes, where Si/Ne can admit to what is (and has been up to now (Si)) while having an open question as to what might come next. The starry-eyed unknown. And this open question can include the future (futurism), the self (multi-potentialite), multi-identity, etc.
    This is reflected even in the eyes, with Ne/Si having naive & confused eyes - which admits to a level of, well, naivete and confusion. While Ni/Se eyes are sharp and 'knowing' because even the N domain (the unknown/unseen/trans-real) is in some way bounded in parameters and an outgrowth of what is now evident.
    p.s.
    This indeed gives Ne/Si users less constraints to the present -- which we can either take as an ego blow for our idiocy (heh!), or we can also take it as a gift of flight (Icarus on one hand, Genie on the other) -- that can go places unimagined and bring into being things wholly outside of previous (real) parameters.
    Me and @bella have talked about how there is some grief in our experience of reality for not being what it could be, both in a moral sense (Fe) but also just in an infinity-cut-short (Ne) sense. We talk about how we spent much of childhood escaping from 'what is' into a fantastical realm where the 'what is' could be suspended or manipulated. This is part of the daydreaming aspect of Ne, I think.

    #15977
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Auburn

    However, egos aside.. I’m a high-Ne user and exist as a counterpoint to the notion of Se realism being necessarily more privy to what ‘is’ with regards to typings at least, and I consider my own functions to be capable of using specifics as echoes of universals too.

    This isn't actually how I see it either. I hadn't had a chance to answer your post in full yet. There were a few things you said which didn't exactly reflect my view, and the one that stood out the most was this:

    Se/Ni appears most suited to pick up on natural law patterns

    I don't believe this and never did. You have obviously picked those up, and yes, science is a good example of this too and I think the Ne quadras on the whole are better suited for it. I mean, I have always thought this even before I came here. To me it's self evident.
    I didn't mean to imply Se was better at picking up natural law patterns overall. What I was saying was more along the lines of, Se picks up patterns similar to Enneagram which are based on things right in front of them, and that there's a seeking of the universal in that TOO, even if it doesn't immediately appear so to you or other Ne users, due to the use of specific examples. (I think you are framing it well now, though!)
    So I think that was a misinterpretation of my post. As I elaborated later, I'm not good at understanding what Ne is doing, so that's why I put more weight on trying to convey thoughts on Se, but I definitely did not mean to imply Ne can't do that.  And I'm not saying this out of some hope of being egalitarian. I've been pretty open along the way, that I had no idea what the point of Ne was; but by now I get it, I just can't articulate why or how that matters. In my world, science, medicine, out of space exploration etc -- matter -- but open ended possibilities just feels like a waste of thought and extremely unsatisfying too.  If I imagine myself doing that it feels like I don't exist.  It makes me feel cold, lost and purposeless.  Also, of all the open ended ideas Ne users come up with,  only some discover something that 'holds up' and has any bearing on the real world or humanity at large. (You are one, and your sense that Ne is superior may also be because you're smarter than most people.)  The "100-120 IQ" Ne user can feel to me like they childishly refuse to accept the reality they are in. They're always bored by having to be present, and escaping. Which is fine morally, but just seems boring to me, like erasing your own existence.
    However, I can appreciate that this way of thinking leads to some amazing things in society at large, which is why even though I don't understand it, I can say -- I see what it's doing and I'm glad they're doing it so I don't have to. 😀
    I agree completely with the differentiators in the second half of the post and the diagram. But it's funny that your language is so revealing and I wonder if I can explain my pov on this. It might have to be a little later as I don't have much time atm.

    This is not the case with Ne, which more readily admits that what it views is a brainstorm of multiple possible futures. This creates an asymmetry in the epistemology of the two axes, where Si/Ne can admit to what is (and has been up to now (Si)) while having an open question as to what might come next. The starry-eyed unknown. And this open question can include the future (futurism), the self (multi-potentialite), multi-identity, etc.

    It's funny that you phrase it as "admit to what is."  I would just never say that. It's as if you have to surrender something in order to "admit" that things "are."  😀 . That's just the implication I caught in the phrasing - correct me if I'm wrong.
    But I have observed that hesitancy in many Alphas. It's a little different with Deltas in my experience but again Im not sure how to articulate this, I'll try later.
    For now I will say, beauty always has been and always will be, and it makes me sad that some people find it so boring that they walk outside of it instead of dancing with its rhythm and being saturated in its energy.  It feels to me like an empty life, to always live in some other non-existent possible scenario, which is why I'm happy others are around to do science so I don't have to. 😀 . That said, I also live in my "home planet," but it's not the same because it parallels and expresses reality through symbolism. Although I technically write "fantasy" books, the relationships and themes echo my real life and the universal principles that reveal themselves to me, making it feel very real.
    Sorry if that sound vague but it's the best way I can think to phrase it right now. More later.

    #15982
    Aletheia
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Great post @auburn! I really like the way you describe how Se is embedded in the timeless worldview of Ni ^^ Your lovely graph helps me make sense of the holism and inevitability that emerges in Se/Ni, vs the compartmentalization and changeable possibility seen with Ne/Si 👌
    You mention your and Bella's proclivity to escape the imperfect real world into a fantasy realm.. I relate a lot with this too 🙂 I think I mentioned before how I constructed an alternate world called Unisis, and spent much of my childhood daydreaming of being part of that realm where fantasy creatures existed and everyone was immortal ;p This kind of daydreaming reminds me of:

    I want to mention though that I've had discussions with @animal about this topic, and she describes having a very similar experience! Her world of Erosia parallels my Unisis in a lot of ways, and we both were motivated to build these alternate realities to escape the pain and unfairness of real life.. We also both have had a deep desire to find our 'tribe' or 'kin' who we felt were others from our world. So I think it's not just Ne that does this sort of thing, it seems to me that it's a product of imagination - and perhaps Pe in general as it relates to the process of imagining..

    #15985
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Alerith omg. I absolutely LOVED most of your post and agree with you saying we wanted to find our kin, etc. But then there was this ONE THING haha.  This post got so long I need to divide it into sections.   😀 It all starts with my reaction against sentiments like this:

    Her world of Erosia parallels my Unisis in a lot of ways, and we both were motivated to build these alternate realities to escape the pain and unfairness of real life..

    1. Human Nature, Enneagram, Psychology
    I have never viewed Erosia as an 'escape from reality.' There is a lot of pain, unfairness, even ultimately EXILE - in Erosia. My stories are very realistic in how they parallel real life and human nature. Other creatures like aliens and fairies parallel this TOO in my world. So for instance, even the sun and the stars have an enneagram fixation and represent it with their energy. As above, so below.
    The modern idea that you can 'escape your enneagram fixation' is a product of Russ Hudson and Don Riso. Hudson has been typed as an Alpha. This was never the point of it however. It was to understand your humanity and others, and illuminate paths to redemption through awareness, not to 'escape it.' The enneagram originated with  Gurdjieff, followed by Ichazo. I'd bet Gurdjieff is a Beta and will put him up for typing soon.  His idea is that we all are 'asleep' and thus a mechanized slave to our own ego, but we must become aware of our inner workings.  Escaping the machine means operating with the awareness of fixation and its control over the psyche.
    Gurdjieff quotes:
    "There is only one kind of magic and that is doing."
    "Without self knowledge, without understanding the working and functions of his machine, man cannot be free, he cannot govern himself and will always remain a slave."
    "Sincerity is the key to self-knowledge and to be sincere with oneself brings great suffering."
    Riso & Hudson completely ruined the foundation by taking out the 'sins' from their work and making these cartoonish descriptions of different types of people (such as 'fours are artistic, sevens like to party, twos like taking care of kids'), which now have taken over the field. Various groups across the internet have been working hard to unravel this.  When they got pretty far on Russ's forum, Russ took down the whole forum, doing away with decades of work that honored his own contributions while still restoring more meaning to the enneagram. His work would have become obsolete if he didn't get with the program, so instead of getting with it, he took the forum down. He is also blatantly mistyped, a subject of much conversation among the enneagram savvy.  Yet these 'cartoons' have spread far and wide, birthing a whole school of teachers teaching cartoons and pretending it's psychology. Where Riso & Hudson shone was in presenting axioms, such as triads. (Frustration triad, attachment triad, etc.)  However, others have come up with better names and descriptions since then. But the axiomatic principles of these "groupings" originated with RH, and made a positive impact.  Health levels was a great contribution too.  Still, with all of this, the foundation was muddied so badly that it's all but lost to the general public.
    To me, enneagram is not there to 'escape from' but, rather, a language through which to reveal natural law.  I have no interest in escaping human nature or laws of nature.   Art allows me to express it more honestly and thus transform cathartically, burning away my lower potentials to make room for me to rise.  Stories and songs write themselves through me and present symbolism that helps me to see myself bare and thus process my suffering. The art is a mirror exposing parts of myself that I otherwise might not have seen, or wouldn't have wanted to see. But there they are. So I FACE myself. This is why on my website's first page, it says  "The prefix Xen- means foreigner or stranger, and the suffix -Ne means ‘not.’  We are strangers to ourselves until we face the mirror and meet the eyes of humanity. "
    2. Fiction in General
    My work parallels GOT, in that even the most well-intentioned characters like Dany will end up falling victim to the most destructive parts of their nature (fixations) if the right seeds are planted and they 'fall asleep to themselves.' There's no "Hand of God" rescuing you from yourself. The only way to become a person that is acceptable to you, is to face your hardship and challenge yourself. And you still might fail, but at least you didn't go down without a fight. You forge yourself out of the fire.
    When I was a child I was obsessed with Les Misérables, and that was what inspired me to get serious about singing. I went quite far to study Eponine in many versions of the book and musical in other languages; I loved the portrayal of her downfall, which ultimately ended beautifully as she gave up her life to save the man she was in unrequited love with.  The other musicals I loved around that time were Phantom of the Opera and Miss Saigon (which ended in suicide). Phantom was the most similar character to me that I found. His music was beautiful but his face was unlovable and he was rejected by society so badly that he became a possessive jealous killer, all because of his envy and shame. None of these stories ended well, but there were characters whose spirits and integrity prevailed.
    The best book I wrote in my early teens featured a prostitute whose father killed her mother with his bare hands, and it showed her dark psyche unfolding until she became irredeemable. It was set in another galaxy because this gave me more freedom with history that I was not interested in studying.  I find specific incidents in history rather replaceable; the same patters always repeat. It's more honest for me to just express the general pattern I perceive anecdotally, in a world of my own making.  So people might say "Fantasy! Escape!"  - but the story emerged to deal with my suicidal ideation.  I was ugly and wanted to be beautiful - and the protag was astoundingly beautiful, but her beauty became her downfall. This helped me resolve some of my shame, which was making me suicidal, since I wanted to make it in music and attract my crush, but who would ever want me?
    Stories like Alice in Wonderland never caught my interest. I still haven't seen it in full. I have addressed my issues with Tolkien and Rowling, although I do love their work - but I can sum it up here.  Basically their work was revolutionary, presenting in Rowlings case, a "what if??" and in Tolkein's case, an intricate world of peoples, languages and maps. Both have major darkness in them, but it comes in the form of 'absolute evil' vs 'absolute good.'  I see this as a Ne/Si thing, not a Fi or Ti thing. Based on my own observations, many Betas absolutely excel at revealing and understanding the inner psyche, but compared to Gammas, summarize the overarching trend more concisely because the Ti helps with archetypal organization. Peterson, for example, knows full well that there's a shadow inside all of us - a potential for both good and evil. People are not divided into good ones and bad in some ultimate way; rather, certain ways of life, choices and outlooks are may bring us down.
    In Tolkien and Rowling's work, the setting is exciting and the age-old battle between good and evil is covered well. However, that in itself is unrealistic - who is fully good or fully evil? I have yet to meet anyone like this.  When you try to discuss how an enneagram fixation (or any deeper psychology) plays out through a Rowling or Tolkien character, it's not particularly fruitful. On an archetypal level, Rowling characters do portray more complex psychology  than Tolkien, but still.... by comparison to GOT, she misses the mark.  In GOT, each character has a mixture of social influence, family values vs personal values, potential for rising up or downfall, fluctuating... both reacting to the world and addressing their human struggle.... this is HUMANITY!!!  The siblings have complex relationships with each other which are challenged, fall apart and then heal!! Just like real life! As far as "fantasy" goes, it's not very revolutionary. But WHO CARES? It's so visceral, so real.... it inspires complex thought about politics, morality, ethics, family. Though there is some 'absolute evil' like the night walkers, the characters show the good and evil in all of us - and show clearly that neither category really exists among people, groups, or cultures. There is always another side to the story. Characters like Sansa, who were good and innocent, were hated by the audience until they became tough to get ahead in this crazy world. Once she got some rawr, she was more interesting.
    In HP, you can tell that the author values retaining innocence and childhood naivety forever, and that Harry's loss of it is tragic.  I do find that tragedy beautiful and relatable, don't get me wrong - but those are KIDS.  In the new HP movies, the characters are like adult children.  There's just no love for meeting the challenge of adulthood with an iron fist; it's more like, Harry had to do this because he was met with evil, and he was heroic, giving up his innocence to fulfill a destiny he didn't want. By contrast, in GOT, Sansa's ascent from princess to 'queen' was portrayed in the best of lights. While it was sad that she went through so much trauma at first, there was this feeling among the others like "she deserves it, she's weak."  When she became strong, her badassery was given the glory that it deserves. She was not longing to go back to the past, where she was weak, naive and dependent. The author valued the act of growing up and meeting reality with a vengeance, while retaining moral integrity.
    3. Realism and Surrealism
    I'm not suggesting that all Se users are as "dark" as me or that Ne users can't be "dark." But when Ne users are dark it's like...hmm.. sort of like Heretic, whose name says it all.. 😀  there's a theoretical edge to it, like a reaction against an abstraction (religion, good vs evil, etc), and a need to reconcile this philosophically.  Whereas a Beta NF like Peterson may be very philosophical but he is focused on the darkness within himself and other real people, and how that causes us to fall prey to the discord in society. Thus he offers "rules for life" so you can battle your own shadow through concrete actions, which is not too different from my own emphasis in my work, nor Gurdjieff.
    With Se, even with the lightest ones who can appreciate different kinds of art, theres some element - in their own work, no matter how fantastical at surface - of "fight" and "realism" of the human experience rather than a fundamental escape or departure from it.
    So, while I agree with @Auburn 's diagram about how this works, I find it interesting that it does what Ne often does: "Why not do both? Why not do everything? Ne can do ALL the things, while Se can only do one thing." Am I supposed to think that makes Se inferior?  Me personally, I find great value in staying in my lane and developing it to the fullest. It's obvious that Ne people are better at science, new discoveries, and so much more - so why not let them do it and appreciate that from where I sit?  But many Ne users want it both ways.  "Type me, but don't limit me."  Russ Hudson wanted it both ways - he wanted enneagram to be real and also be something you escape from. Thus his descriptions of types veered away from reality to uphold this lie - devolving into 'cool types vs uncool types' etc. He thought he could expand and stay true, follow it and depart from it, do it all - but he ended up reducing the essential meaning to a state where people are using his cartoonish caricatures to abuse each other and create exclusive "typing clubs," which is exactly what Gurdjieff and Ichazo warned against.  According to them, this study was not for everyone - and they were right.
    And this may, perhaps, serve to explain the argument on natural law.  Yes, both types can see it, because divergence is just as natural as holeism.  Se/Ni might come to see things one way and believe, this has always been and will always be 'how it is,' blinding themselves to real alternatives.  Ne/Si users might struggle to believe they are not limitless, while effectively blinding themselves to real limits, including their own.
    [SPOILER]
    Ack, I've been editing this post for like 6 hours.  I'll refrain from long posts for a while. I find Se/Ni and Ne/Si differences so damn fascinating and I’m looking forward to responses or reactions from anyone who has the patience to sift through this. <3 [/SPOILER]

    #16054
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Alerith Just so you know, I edited that post for like 8 hours! I said I'd stop after six but kept going. These ideas, I've been percolating for months and struggling to verbalize. I saw you liked the post. The main edit after that was the "Part 3" at the end. *hides*
    I find this so hard to articulate. I do feel that you understand human nature, and also your limits, and I wonder if that's because you've been forced to face your own limits due to trauma?  Or am I offbase and you do struggle with the idea that you can't do/be everything? (Maybe you can?) 😛 .
    Anyway, feel free to rip my post apart and be scathing - words really do not come easy for me, yet I want to explore this.  Do you think I'm wrong about the basic gyst?  Also how does catharsis manifest for you in art? Is it mostly through escape? What does 'Alice in Wonderland' or other fantasy do for you? What about other Ne people?  @Teatime ? Really curious about all this.  Also, do other Se users resonate with this, or have contentions?
    Done posting now. I swear. 😀
     
    Edit: I just saw your response Alerith, (following this post!) ... and I'll come back to it because I don't want to overcrowd the thread, but in short I agree with EVERYTHING you said, I think. Also I just saw @vive has joined and I want your input vive! (Sorry about the length of the posts) . You are a Ne lead who was very quick to pick up enneagram and its principles so you'd be partially a counter to what I said, but I'm curious for your crit/reactions about Ne. I am really trying to understand and willing to be wrong on absolutely anything regarding Ne.

    #16073
    Aletheia
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    lol @animal I totally understand wanting to edit your post until it says what you want it to say! XD I'll hafta re-read part 3 again.. rn I'm finishing up a design project but I promise I'll respond to all your wonderful thoughts as soon as I can! <3
    For now, to answer you briefly:

    I have never viewed Erosia as an ‘escape from reality.’ There is a lot of pain, unfairness, even ultimately EXILE – in Erosia. My stories are very realistic in how they parallel real life and human nature. Other creatures like aliens and fairies parallel this TOO in my world. So for instance, even the sun and the stars have an enneagram fixation and represent it with their energy. As above, so below.

    ^ oh I'm so sorry I misinterpreted you in this way! >.< Perhaps, would you describe your stories more as a place where you can process what lays on your heart about real life and its tragedies?.. I know for me Unisis was a characterization of my subconscious/internal world, and I initially developed relationship with my Animus and kind of 'played out' my guiding narratives through the story. Is this anything like your experience with Erosia?

    I do feel that you understand human nature, and also your limits, and I wonder if that’s because you’ve been forced to face your own limits due to trauma?  Or am I offbase and you do struggle with the idea that you can’t do/be everything? (Maybe you can?) 😛 .

    ^ Yeah I still struggle with awareness of my limits like.. A LOT 😅 This is actually one of the topics I've discussed with my boyfriend, our Fe/Ne double-extroverted outward focus on others, our relevance to humanity and our ideal of what we want to do/be gets us into the continual pickle of biting off more than we can chew! XD We're both overwhelmed and have been most of our lives, tbh. But the drive to "become better" and push our limits (as well as that 693 shape-shifty adaptation - I do believe he's the same etype as I am) motivates us to expand our capacity/develop those extroverted functions to greater degrees, rather than dropping any of what we've got going on ;p
    I think what you may be picking up on with me is that I've let go of my 714 perfectionist Shadow over time. This is equivalent with my recovery from depression. It took many years, but I shifted mindset from comparing reality to projected ideals - Peterson calls this the experience of the "Unbearable Present" - to embracing reality for what it is and surrendering to the fact of the matter. I don't feel reality needs to be anything anymore, and actually find a deep beauty in the impermanence and rawness of *what is*. I think my heart valued certain narratives and contrived ideals more than truth before.. but now I feel that Truth really is the highest value to me at a core emotional level.. I suppose this can be summed up as my development of equanimity; there is a profound ground of peace in just bein' ok with things as they are! ^__^

    Anyway, feel free to rip my post apart and be scathing – words really do not come easy for me, yet I want to explore this.  Do you think I’m wrong about the basic gyst?  Also how does catharsis manifest for you in art? Is it mostly through escape? What does ‘Alice in Wonderland’ or other fantasy do for you?

    bah! Your words are fine my dear! <3 Really, I'm always struck by how well you explain yourself. I envy how capable you are of generating content too! As I mentioned in another post I made last night, writing isn't the easiest thing for me, especially extensive explication.. and lol I've got a lotta 9 ;p if you want me to be scathing you'll hafta try to goad me into it XD
    But anywayz! You seem to have several main points in your post, and I agree very much with most of them! You're quite right about the misleading and empty characters in enneagram - this is similar to what happened with the MBTI types as they were derived from Jung's initial work. (hmm, I wonder if Myers and Briggs were Ne users 🤔 have we typed them?) From what you wrote above about Gurdjieff's thoughts, they really parallel Jung's analytical psychology, and I resonate very much with his and your sentiment: "Escaping the machine means operating with the awareness of fixation and its control over the psyche."
    We cannot escape our human nature, nor the particulars of our ct, etype, etc. which are innate or otherwise permanent aspects of our personalities. Awareness and mindful, intelligent decision on how to interface the machinery of the self with the fact of reality is the way out of a fixative loop (i.e. neurotic tendency). "You own it or it owns you" is a very apt adage methinks!

    In GOT, each character has a mixture of social influence, family values vs personal values, potential for rising up or downfall, fluctuating… both reacting to the world and addressing their human struggle…. this is HUMANITY!!!

    ^ I love this kind of story telling as well! Characters who have all the aspects of a real human being are engaging, they have depth.. One dimensional characters - like the pure 'good' and 'evil' you mention - ultimately they are convenient for portraying the struggle we all face in dealing with the archetypal polarities. But they aren't really interesting beyond their role in communicating an archetypal aspect and moral of the story - these characters have short lifespans, and become boring when there's more than one sequel lol XD This is funny in light of the fact that they embody timeless human themes, but then one cannot build a relationship with a theme in the multi-dimensional way one does with a whole human!
    One last thought for now, the thing you write that I don't know if I agree with is about Ne's darkness.

    But when Ne users are dark it’s like…hmm.. sort of like Heretic, whose name says it all.. 😀 there’s a theoretical edge to it, like a reaction against an abstraction (religion, good vs evil, etc), and a need to reconcile this philosophically. Whereas a Beta NF like Peterson may be very philosophical but he is focused on the darkness within himself and other real people, and how that causes us to fall prey to the discord in society.

    I can't speak for other Ne users, but I relate to *both* these manifestations actually! The type of truth I value most is the obscure 'dark' side of humanity. I revel not only in the exposure of this truth and deep awareness of it, but in acceptance and integration of it into life and personal experience. You could say I'm an advocate for the Shadow, an embodiment of it really, and I want to reconcile the fractured aspect of humanity back into wholeness in order to initiate the healing we collectively so desperately need.. This is why Nietzsche's quote resonates so deeply with me: "Amor fati: let that be my love henceforth! I do not want to wage war against what is ugly. I do not want to accuse; I do not even want to accuse those who accuse.." All that which is socially labelled as 'ugly' by society, that is what I want to embrace most and prove its rightness and beauty to the world <3
    I dunno if that makes sense? Is this an example of what you were referring to with Ne, or do you relate to what I'm describing as well?
    To answer your question about Alice, actually I don't really like that story much anymore! ;p When I was a child though, my environment was so toxic that I preoccupied myself with thoughts of a more ideal world, and related with Alice in that she ran away into another realm that was more pleasant and interesting than daily life and banal society..

    #16086
    Bera
    Moderator
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    I think the chart is pretty accurate !
    I also use escapism, so it's for sure not only an Ne problem... But I do see things very well before my escapes.:) I sometimes look at life with the intent to see everything that could be defective and rotten beneath the pretty and shiny surfaces and then, after seeing it, I get into escapist routes.
    But I believe my tendency to look for what is wrong and dark and disturbing is pretty new. I can not say I was like this as a kid or teenager or younger adult. I used to be pretty hopeful and naive...until I lost that. At this point I think wickedness could not surprise me anymore. Someone showing his darkest side wouldn't surprise me, because I probably already considered it myself. Because I see...and this is sad, but here it is, I see a pattern of evil and selfishness and materialism in humanity as a whole. Also, a pattern of deceit.And then someone new doesn't even have to do anything suspicious, I am already checking what is rotten about him by default. :))) Of course, I exaggerate a bit but there is a pull in this direction that I can hardly control.  And I do believe people usually have good intentions and a positive agenda and that the flawed character of humanity is just there and undermines them. 🙁
    And here come 2 possible ways to handle this (because I have to say naivety sounds like a bad thing and "knowing" (?) sounds better but this is a wrong perception, "knowing" is NOT better or at least there are huge challenges in both cases ) :
    - Escapism...for example I can play video games instead of listening to people telling lies about themselves and others - at least video games are fun. I don't imagine a whole inner world though, I don't have this gift of being able to construct inner worlds and complex narratives. I jump into already made worlds, being perfectly conscious I want to escape from this one. Which means Se users can be escapist too. But maybe we prefer to escape to places where we can have  intense experience going on in the here and now. Playing a game is like this. Daydreaming is a bit different and I do it too but I really can't say my daydreams are unusual, never heard of scenarios, where I put together totally different ideas and images and create something new...nah, not really :)) They are pretty much short romantic stories, nothing extraordinary.
    - Dreamworld extended - so, this is different from escapism. Life becomes part of dreamworld and every event in real life can be connected to events in dreams, symbolic content I have recently seen or thought about or someone else has mentioned, tarot cards I or other people drew, planet transits, Moon phases, events in other people's lives, other people's dreams...it never stops. There are associations linked to new associations linked to new associations. I hate to use the word web but it looks like a web. I can not prove this is not all created by myself. I don't know if it's created or perceived. It has a surrealistic vibe, but it doesn't happen outside of real life, it's a merging of reality and fantasy. Probably with a some effort I could create a narrative/mythology containing all that I see as being connected, but right now I am just living this in the moment because - as I said above, I can see the defective underneath and the most beautiful experiences hold beneath them the most potential to turn into something awful. So, I am trying to walk carefully, the ground is thin and shaky and there are monsters underneath. 🙂
    Anyway, dreamworld can be confused with an imaginary place in the mind and I believe the imaginary place is rather an Ne thing and dreamworld rather an Ni thing.
    By the way, I noticed recently I started coming up with all sorts of concepts to help express myself condensing a longer explanation in one word. :)) Dreamworld is used here for this purpose, it's not a psychological concept or anything like that. I needed to say this because I felt someone thought my 3 layer idea was a real acknowledged thing. 🙂 Hey, maybe it is and I took it from somewhere without realizing, anyway, I know this will sound hilarious:)) but the purpose of these words is to make sentences and paragraphs and explanations shorter !
    In dreamworld I don't think what could be, going forward..I think ok, what happened today that matches this pattern that I assume is here ? In my mind it's a sure thing something already happened (!) that is a piece of a puzzle that conveys a specific personal meaning. I find it thinking about the concrete moments and images I saw in the past. I don't really "imagine" anything else but that there are connections between real objects and events. If I imagine it and don't see it, which is not clear to me at all. (which is the danger and the thin ground issue 🙂 )

    #16091
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @alerith

    ^ oh I’m so sorry I misinterpreted you in this way! >.< Perhaps, would you describe your stories more as a place where you can process what lays on your heart about real life and its tragedies?.. I know for me Unisis was a characterization of my subconscious/internal world, and I initially developed relationship with my Animus and kind of ‘played out’ my guiding narratives through the story. Is this anything like your experience with Erosia?

    Oh don't worry! I don't think you drastically misinterpreted me by any means. You always get me. 🙂  It was just the use of the word 'escapism' got my motor running because I've been sick and busy, and storing up all these ideas about Se vs Ne, but it's still a process for me, trying to understand the differences. So your post was a jumping off point for those ideas.
    What you just said here is exactly how I experience it, yes. Animus and all.  😀

    Yeah I still struggle with awareness of my limits like.. A LOT   This is actually one of the topics I’ve discussed with my boyfriend, our Fe/Ne double-extroverted outward focus on others, our relevance to humanity and our ideal of what we want to do/be gets us into the continual pickle of biting off more than we can chew!

    Makes sense. Perhaps this is related to Ne vs. Se, then.  My father is Ni lead 7, but he doesn't do this. He's pretty focused on his one path and not overwhelmed with possibility - but his thoughts are expansive, as he takes information in that covers the 'whole world.'  So it's not 7 or your 7 wing alone.

    But the drive to “become better” and push our limits (as well as that 693 shape-shifty adaptation – I do believe he’s the same etype as I am) motivates us to expand our capacity/develop those extroverted functions to greater degrees, rather than dropping any of what we’ve got going on ;p

    Hehe. Not surprised about his type! We've found 369 tritype is pretty common for Ti leads. :O And also, some minor alterations like 539, etc. (Not suggesting it's limited to this, however. We don't know yet.)
    That makes a lot of sense about the shape shifty and expanding your capacity. :O Wow, it sounds like a lot to me, but I'm seriously impressed that you manage to do that. I would literally lose my mind, but Ne is more elastic in this way. (Or maybe it also has to do with my tritype, which is strong on its own separate identity and vision, but not very adaptive.)

    I think what you may be picking up on with me is that I’ve let go of my 714 perfectionist Shadow over time. This is equivalent with my recovery from depression. It took many years, but I shifted mindset from comparing reality to projected ideals – Peterson calls this the experience of the “Unbearable Present” – to embracing reality for what it is and surrendering to the fact of the matter. I don’t feel reality needs to be anything anymore, and actually find a deep beauty in the impermanence and rawness of *what is*. I think my heart valued certain narratives and contrived ideals more than truth before.. but now I feel that Truth really is the highest value to me at a core emotional level.. I suppose this can be summed up as my development of equanimity; there is a profound ground of peace in just bein’ ok with things as they are! ^__^

    That is beautiful <3
    Hm, I'm trying to think how the unbearable present might apply to me. I have this over-autonomous mindset where I am wired to feel like my destiny is in my hands and it's all up to me to forge myself out of the fire. Illness should have challenged this, and it did in some ways -- in the sense that it gave me much more direct empathy for those who felt powerless. I was always protective of such people in my life, not hateful toward them, but after this I really felt, on an emotional level, why they might feel that way. Trauma gave me insight to that. However, it only strengthened my resolve to forge myself from the destruction; to redefine my concept of what I am -- not merely a singer, but a vessel through which passion emerges. This encompasses singer, but still keeps my goals and identity very specific. (The fun part about that is I could take that same archetype in my Animus in Erosia, and he can be a magic-trained martial artist channeling his own passion as it connects to the will of God, and it's no different from what I'm doing in essence. He doesn't need to be 'a singer' either, provided he's a vessel through which passion emerges.)
    Being ok with things as they are is a beautiful 6-9 integration, CT aside. My integration is toward the high side of 1 perfectionism, serenity and integrity, not so much about being ok with things, but having the serenity and wisdom to know the difference between what's in my control and what isn't... etc.

    bah! Your words are fine my dear! <3 Really, I’m always struck by how well you explain yourself. I envy how capable you are of generating content too! As I mentioned in another post I made last night, writing isn’t the easiest thing for me, especially extensive explication..

    Purr *blush* . I wish I generated less content but more exacting. 🙁 But I do really really appreciate that, it means the world. I've worked so damn hard on it.... <3 Btw, I'll give you my book draft soon. It got delayed due to illness.

    and lol I’ve got a lotta 9 ;p if you want me to be scathing you’ll hafta try to goad me into it XD

    Lol. Perhaps it's wise to stay on your good side then. 😉 😉 😀

    But anywayz! You seem to have several main points in your post, and I agree very much with most of them! You’re quite right about the misleading and empty characters in enneagram – this is similar to what happened with the MBTI types as they were derived from Jung’s initial work. (hmm, I wonder if Myers and Briggs were Ne users   have we typed them?) From what you wrote above about Gurdjieff’s thoughts, they really parallel Jung’s analytical psychology, and I resonate very much with his and your sentiment: “Escaping the machine means operating with the awareness of fixation and its control over the psyche.”

    I'm glad you didn't think I was totally off base. The differences in how escapism is handled, are hard to get into words - but I think @Bera touched on a good distinction. I do wonder what's up with the enneagram stuff. There's one NeFi ( @vive) who I knew right away would catch on to the enneagram stuff well, and so far he has. And you have been really good at it too, once we went over a few basics! But overall I've found more resistance or "unable to get it/ see its value" in Ne people rather than Ti. Some who don't resist and who become teachers kind of distort it to meaninglessness.   I'm curious about Meyers & Briggs now too...this is a whole interesting project.

    We cannot escape our human nature, nor the particulars of our ct, etype, etc. which are innate or otherwise permanent aspects of our personalities. Awareness and mindful, intelligent decision on how to interface the machinery of the self with the fact of reality is the way out of a fixative loop (i.e. neurotic tendency). “You own it or it owns you” is a very apt adage methinks!

    So so so true <3 I resonate with it so well also.

    I love this kind of story telling as well! Characters who have all the aspects of a real human being are engaging, they have depth.. One dimensional characters – like the pure ‘good’ and ‘evil’ you mention – ultimately they are convenient for portraying the struggle we all face in dealing with the archetypal polarities. But they aren’t really interesting beyond their role in communicating an archetypal aspect and moral of the story – these characters have short lifespans, and become boring when there’s more than one sequel lol XD This is funny in light of the fact that they embody timeless human themes, but then one cannot build a relationship with a theme in the multi-dimensional way one does with a whole human!

    So incredibly well phrased. "The value of one dimensional characters is in portraying the archetypal polarities.' YES! This is why I enjoy that work, but could never really see myself as part of that world or resonate with the characters with the depth that I do in GOT. Do you think a lot of Ne authors might get past this and write deep multifaceted characters?  I bet you would.
    And I feel this is an apt time to mention 😛 some Se users can be shallow too. I think this goes without saying. But the major famous big shot authors, Rowling and Tolkien - are BRILLIANT, truly - and they represent 'the best of the Delta crop' in fantasy writing. Although maybe there's another genre where character development happens differently. (Maybe Si causes the Delta writers to stick to tradition in having fantasy characters be more archetypal?)  Maybe it's also unfair to say Ne when I'm referring to two Deltas. Although I see similar reduction in , say, Russ Hudson  - but his "types" are purely cartoonish, and this is very different from writing fiction. I find Auburn's short stories about types and archetypes amazing, and they don't pretend to be another genre. They are what they are and he does it incredibly well, with symbolism etc.  So maybe this is where Alphas excel, but I'd be curious if any have crossed over to the "deep individual characters" - that you know of.  I'd imagine it's less likely. As long as I live I could not dream of writing such concise, symbolic short stories like Auburn did; and I'm no slouch. I think GOT is far ahead of me, and makes me ask myself, why do I bother writing? - but I can also see my own POTENTIAL in it.

    I can’t speak for other Ne users, but I relate to *both* these manifestations actually! The type of truth I value most is the obscure ‘dark’ side of humanity. I revel not only in the exposure of this truth and deep awareness of it, but in acceptance and integration of it into life and personal experience. You could say I’m an advocate for the Shadow, an embodiment of it really, and I want to reconcile the fractured aspect of humanity back into wholeness in order to initiate the healing we collectively so desperately need.. This is why Nietzsche’s quote resonates so deeply with me: “Amor fati: let that be my love henceforth! I do not want to wage war against what is ugly. I do not want to accuse; I do not even want to accuse those who accuse..” All that which is socially labelled as ‘ugly’ by society, that is what I want to embrace most and prove its rightness and beauty to the world <3
    I dunno if that makes sense? Is this an example of what you were referring to with Ne, or do you relate to what I’m describing as well?

    Oh I completely relate too. This must be extraneous to type, and it's why we are from the same planet or sister planets (Unisis and Erosia) <3 <3

    To answer your question about Alice, actually I don’t really like that story much anymore! ;p When I was a child though, my environment was so toxic that I preoccupied myself with thoughts of a more ideal world, and related with Alice in that she ran away into another realm that was more pleasant and interesting than daily life and banal society..

    Makes sense. I guess in this sense, you could classify my own delving into Les Mis, Phantom, Miss Saigon etc - as getting 'beyond' the banal boring routines and exploring something more intense. For type 4, intense emotion and its expression IS the addiction or escape - you could say they're gluttons for emotional intensity. So maybe it's not Ne and Se here, but just my enneagram causing me to choose such dark subject matter - but our need to get beyond the mundane was similar.

    @Bera

    But maybe we prefer to escape to places where we can have  intense experience going on in the here and now. Playing a game is like this.

    Makes sense.

    Dreamworld extended – so, this is different from escapism. Life becomes part of dreamworld and every event in real life can be connected to events in dreams, symbolic content I have recently seen or thought about or someone else has mentioned, tarot cards I or other people drew, planet transits, Moon phases, events in other people’s lives, other people’s dreams…it never stops. There are associations linked to new associations linked to new associations. I hate to use the word web but it looks like a web. I can not prove this is not all created by myself. I don’t know if it’s created or perceived. It has a surrealistic vibe, but it doesn’t happen outside of real life, it’s a merging of reality and fantasy. Probably with a some effort I could create a narrative/mythology containing all that I see as being connected, but right now I am just living this in the moment because – as I said above, I can see the defective underneath and the most beautiful experiences hold beneath them the most potential to turn into something awful. So, I am trying to walk carefully, the ground is thin and shaky and there are monsters underneath.

    This is much closer to how I 'fantasize' or experience another world. There's a merging of reality and fantasy. Exactly! The reality becomes symbolic of something which is paralleled in some fantasy expression. I also connect it to dreams etc.  As for the monsters underneath, that's exactly why I express myself in art - to release them. This happens in my dreams too. When I say "I let my demons dance with my angels" this is what I mean. I don't want to suffocate my demons or they will get too hungry, too big.

    Anyway, dreamworld can be confused with an imaginary place in the mind and I believe the imaginary place is rather an Ne thing and dreamworld rather an Ni thing.

    That makes perfect sense to me :O what do you think, Alerith?

    In dreamworld I don’t think what could be, going forward..I think ok, what happened today that matches this pattern that I assume is here ? In my mind it’s a sure thing something already happened (!) that is a piece of a puzzle that conveys a specific personal meaning. I find it thinking about the concrete moments and images I saw in the past. I don’t really “imagine” anything else but that there are connections between real objects and events.

    Agree completely, I do this too. This is consistent with Auburn's diagram, which I agree with.

    #16099
    EpicEntity
    Participant
    • Type: SeTi
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Directive

    In Conclusion
    ...was probably the hero of the second world war and the 21st century. A man of ethical courage, a man of spiritual perception and good intent. A spiritual soul who cared – cared about all life forms, all cultures, about goodness and Light and ultimately about Truth.

    Where there is darkness I can choose to search for the light.
    If there was one dark aspect of being an Se lead it might be that I can get caught up in hits of stimulation with others in a multitude of different ways. It could just be short a interaction through an exchange of jokes, banter, and accidental wit; or it could be a long-term project in which we set out to find hidden anomalies. During the short interaction both parties usually get a stimulation hit and move on. During the long interaction chances are only I get the hit and leave without thinking about the other parties. After that leave I probably haven't thought to distinguish between a mutual gain or an abandonment. I am starting to think that if the unspoken mutual gain wasn't achieve there is a risk that the other party might feel used and understandingly bitter; at worst, worry of many others doing something similar to them. I wouldn't be surprise if this was an Se vigor and drive kind of thing, but I feel I also have to be prepared for the unpleasant reality of underdevelopment as in Se or Pe lead.
     
    I can get caught up in doing my thing with my own social constructs. Where as others may want to continue using established social constructs. Then others may decide it isn't a big deal to try out my social constructs as kind of a loose agreement. As we have an interaction through this loose agreement there are a lot of things being accepted that wouldn't usually be tolerated. Now what happens once that taboo interaction is declared finished and then I make a comment about it in the terms of established social constructs? My best guess is that the other person could redefine everything in that completed interaction in the a very self-destructive way. Being SeTi older male had identified the other as NiTe younger female. Conclusion: My Se or Pe may have been too loosely associated with previously set terms when it comes to Ni or Pi leads.
    All in all I probably just need get a real social life..... NEVER!
    PS: With no intention of making a statement or being rude I made in illustrated inquiry out of someones 3 layer model... I'm waiting for an answer!!!


    #16105
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Auburn
    I love the diagram and Ivory and I had a whole conversation about it 😀
    I told him I'd view it this way so I figured I'd share it...

     
    A circle represents "what has always been and always will be." The beginning is the middle is the end; etc - but the 'boundary' is dividing it from the world outside it.  Specifically, what's "outside it" would be the type of 'divergent possibility' that I think Ne experiences.
    I have always pictured my mind as being more... spherical.  I've only found one image that comes close to how I'd describe it, years ago.  It's not perfect by any means and if I made it myself it would be more even on all sides of the sphere, but what I liked about it was that it came close to 'visualizing' the moment-to-moment experience - exactly what you have put into perfect words here 🙂
    This image should be "thicker" and more concentration of light in the middle, and so many other criticisms. But it gets close to the 'fluctuating perception' which is spherical and pulls this data into and from the center.

     
     

    #16122
    Vive
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    [QUOTE] It has indeed been Deltas, more than Gammas, that display their idiosyncratic beliefs in a way that seems out of tune with reality. And I do see that Gammas are rather quick to orient themselves to something like CT if it can be shown — because it can be shown (CT is rather Se-friendly in that the data is real and available), while Ne+Fi can struggle a bit more to accept the constraints (Ne dislikes constraints!) to reality and what the self can be imagined as being or not being.[/QUOTE]
    I'm NeFi and I appreciate CT, because it can be shown. Without something concrete to hold on to my mind never stabilizes. If I wouldn't have been typed with the help of a bunch of people agreeing on my typing (both in Enneagram and Jung-related systems) along with CT I still would be changing my perspective every so often. The more 'objective' way of typing has actually helped me stabilize my view. I appreciate that. I actually think it's much better than me continually re-appraising myself. Re-appraising myself is usefu,l, but I think there should be a limit to how much I should do that. There are things about me that rarely/never change and I want to have a good view of those things too.

    @Animal

    I've seen your posts, I think I will respond in a somewhat fragmented manner as there is a lot of information here.
    [QUOTE]Why not do both? Why not do everything? Ne can do ALL the things, while Se can only do one thing.” Am I supposed to think that makes Se inferior? Me personally, I find great value in staying in my lane and developing it to the fullest. It’s obvious that Ne people are better at science, new discoveries, and so much more – so why not let them do it and appreciate that from where I sit? But many Ne users want it both ways. “Type me, but don’t limit me.” Russ Hudson wanted it both ways(...) he ended up reducing the essential meaning to a state where people are using his cartoonish caricatures to abuse each other and create exclusive “typing clubs,” which is exactly what Gurdjieff and Ichazo warned against. [/QUOTE]
    For me personally I don't really think I'm limitless. It's more, I see potential and I want to start working towards actualizing it NOW. Then you come across a new thing, which is also interesting and you see how it can be useful to you start working on that too. Then another thing comes along and another and another. Before you know it you are tangled up in many things and if you keep going you will be spread so thin you cannot do any of the things you've set to do. Without any proper focus on what's real you will lose your grip and drift away with every wind that comes. If you would truly want to explore something I think you should do so with intend while keeping the things that ground you in mind. Remembering what is most important to you and also what your weaknesses are in order to ground you. So, when the worst winds come, you can stay grounded. Perhaps Russ Hudson let the winds take him too much.
    [QUOTE] In my world, science, medicine, out of space exploration etc — matter — but open ended possibilities just feels like a waste of thought and extremely unsatisfying too. If I imagine myself doing that it feels like I don’t exist. It makes me feel cold, lost and purposeless.[/QUOTE]
    I must honestly say that I also find just chasing open ended possibilities to be extremely unsatisfying. It often leads nowhere and even if it leads you somewhere you need to properly hone in on what you've discovered and dive into that deeply, otherwise you might waste a good opportunity.
    [QUOTE]I have no interest in escaping human nature or laws of nature. Art allows me to express it more honestly and thus transform cathartically, burning away my lower potentials to make room for me to rise. Stories and songs write themselves through me and present symbolism that helps me to see myself bare and thus process my suffering. The art is a mirror exposing parts of myself that I otherwise might not have seen, or wouldn’t have wanted to see. But there they are. So I FACE myself.[/QUOTE]
    I don't think I ever desired to escape reality either. I mean I wasn't very connected to the present moment, but I always saw my fantasy as an extension of myself and a reflection of myself. In fantasy subtext can become corporeal, a living being or it can manifest as some type of energy. Anybody's fantasy is full of symbolism. I love that stuff. Other than that I often looked towards the future to see what I could do/can be, but it didn't include a desire to escape what is or a disappointment with what is. Just as much as I looked forward to what was ahead, I also agonized over it. Being very worried about whether I could handle what would come next. Compared to my fantasy and imagined potentials (be it negative or positive) reality can often be a relief. I often find myself thinking 'Oh, it isn't that bad' as I am a negativist by nature.
    Se seems grounded in the moment, when Ne isn't at all. If you are grounded that's fine, but it's important to see that sometimes things aren't as straightforward as they seem. Ne is prone to a sort of untetheredness and a lot of speculation, so I think it is best if those with it learn to find a way to ground themselves, so they know when to grab onto things and keep their feet on the ground.
     

    #16135
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @vive
    Thank you for your response!  Paired with @alerith 's response, this makes a lot of sense:

    For me personally I don’t really think I’m limitless. It’s more, I see potential and I want to start working towards actualizing it NOW. Then you come across a new thing, which is also interesting and you see how it can be useful to you start working on that too. Then another thing comes along and another and another. Before you know it you are tangled up in many things and if you keep going you will be spread so thin you cannot do any of the things you’ve set to do. Without any proper focus on what’s real you will lose your grip and drift away with every wind that comes.

    This idea - which Alerith also touched on - gives a lot of nuance to my developing understanding of Ne (which is the function I've struggled most to understand, so I really appreciate it).   It's not about being limitless or wanting to 'escape,' per se, because perhaps all humans on some level need to escape; it could be argued that people like me and George RR Martin are doing that too. @Bera offered a helpful distinction between two types of escape which I really resonated with. 🙂  But what it's about is seeing potential and since you're not grounded in the 'now' but rather attuned to what 'could be,'  you might follow too many potentials and end up spread thin.  Whereas Se, even if a specific Se person has a short attention span, they don't tend to jump from one possibility to the next, they work with the thing in front of them, because theyre viscerally present with it.

    Se seems grounded in the moment, when Ne isn’t at all. If you are grounded that’s fine, but it’s important to see that sometimes things aren’t as straightforward as they seem. Ne is prone to a sort of untetheredness and a lot of speculation, so I think it is best if those with it learn to find a way to ground themselves, so they know when to grab onto things and keep their feet on the ground.

    Yes, this is basically the conclusion I had in my long post... that Se has more potential to get stuck in one way of seeing things while Ne has more potential to see too many until none are 'actualized.'  Or something like that.

    #16204
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    I thought of one way to frame this "train of thought.."
    Today on facebook there was a mature discussion about politics. I wrote this comment:

    That's me too! [I'm neither right nor left.] Since I live in NY, people think I'm SO right leaning. I don't watch ANY of those news stations. I learn from real life experience, talking to real people about business, health etc; reading people's posts on facebook and being on forums where people from all over the world share experiences; reading the articles they post and find important. I don't let the news sort that out for me. And so I've never been 'swayed' to one side. I also grew up with my parents arguing - my mom leftist, father right... they have adjusted a bit now... but I was forced (thankfully) to think for myself.

    Granted, there is Fi bias here too, in communicating through people's personal experience and sentiments. But I'll see if I can articulate this.
    With Pe, I pick up 'pattern recognition' with things that happen 'out there' in the real world in front of me (Se).  I believe this is what Jung means by "realism" for Se.  He took it further into indulgences and refusing anything abstract. Well, it's not THAT simple.  But anyway, "Realism" is the automatic mindset that "I don't need fake news statistics and averages to tell me what is happening in the real world, so I can't be brainwashed."  As I mature, I find the ways in which this state of mind falls short: for instance, no matter how many real people I talk to and how easily I pick up real trends, there is always more to take into account.  Alpha NT's for instance are better at taking all that stuff distantly and making order out of it. But then the SeFi's will say "yeah but that doesn't match real people." And somewhere in between, there is "the whole picture."  (Of course, any pair of socionics 'conflictors' could probably say the same, but I'm talking about my own type in this particular post.)
    I can't promise that all Se leads, or all SeFi's, would have the exact same mindset as me - but what I sense would be similar, is the trend of picking up a lot of information from 'reality' as it is lived and experienced, and being quick at putting that information into patterns or trends. Which is why Se leads can be good at being ahead of the trends and things like that. For me, something like clothing and makeup trends isn't my focus; but political or psychological trends etc. Although my clothes, growing up, were always one step ahead of the trend; I did not do this on purpose. It was unconscious I guess.  I would make/alter my clothes and then a year or two later they'd be selling exactly THAT in stores.  From my pov, I was just expressing myself. But maybe even when a Se lead isn't consciously paying attention to something like this, they just 'pick it up' in a way.... the reality around them gets imprinted. People who aren't Se heavy can just naturally become 'off beat' unless they CHOOSE to pay attention to trends, and perhaps that's why they look at Se leads and think "All of you care about trends." No.. it's just that we can't not pick up what's going on around us, whether we care or not.
    Anyway, my main point was that "realism" can lead to a strong emphasis being placed on picking up things 'with your own eyes/ears/feels' and putting together trends on that basis. Thing is I'm not necessarily wrong. I've guessed the results of every election for example. I know when the polls were full of shit about Trump, because so many people told me privately that they were voting for Trump but they were afraid to tell anyone; so I figured the polls would not reflect people's secret views. Things like that are just obvious; so I don't pay much attention to statistics ---- OBVIOUSLY this has a downside, I'm not denying it. But Se 'realism' is "I've seen it, I've heard it, I've put together the trend of what it's indicating, and that is reality."  It's beyond just "the couch is brown" and into the realm of "people with strong SP in their enneagram instinct stack are more likely to have brown decor."

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
A forum exploring the connection between Jungian typology and body mannerisms.

Social Media

© Copyright 2012-2021 Juan E. Sandoval - Use Policy
searchhomecommentsenvelopegraduation-hatbookearth linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram