MindFacets

Portraits through Contrasts

Now that the acronym housekeeping is out of the way, I think a great way to quickly get a feel for the perceiving processes is to compare and contrast them with one another, by discussing differences that I have already mentioned for M vs W and N vs S, as well as new ones for internal (i) and external (e) focuses.

I like to be concise when explaining the basics of personality to keep things to the point, but don’t mind being a bit repetitive in examples like this if it gives different angles and ties things together, and helps round out a feel for things. If you’d like more or less examples, feel free to leave a comment.

Contrasting We and Wi

I vs E

There are two kinds of webbers (people who like to web): the brainstormers, who see the web as an opportunity to make new connections within the web or to grow the web, and problem solvers, who see the web as situation to be solved. The brainstormers are looking outside the currently known information, or in other words have an external (e) focus, and are therefore using We. The problem solvers are looking within the situation, to try to see the bottom line of the web, and their introspective (i) focus means they are using Wi.

N vs S, Openendedness vs Closure, Spontaneity vs Tradition

We, as an N process, doesn’t care so much about any particular idea, like an S process (such as Wi) would, but instead enjoys the process of seeing connections and making new ones. To We, the web is an open-ended collection of connections. In contrast, to Wi the web as a whole is a set thing, a problem that is usually defined by its solution.

To Wi, it is not important how the problem is solved, but simply that it is solved. We, on the other hand, may appreciate the creativity involved in solving a problem. We may be bored by solving simple problems, but Wi may take satisfaction in having an ordered and serene environment in which all problems are solved.

If the web consists of words and music to a song, the Wi solution is to sing the words in order. If a song is started, the solution is to finish singing the song – seeing it through to its proper end can bring satisfaction. To We, the words and music may be seen as an opportunity to change part of the song to relate to the present situation in a funny or clever way. Success to We is to relate to the song somehow, or to relate the song to something, and if this involves changing things up a bit, it can seem like a good thing, whereas Wi is more likely to see tradition as valuable and sacred.

When We tweaks something, like a song, there are now two similar ideas that are different somehow. We, as a divergent process, tends to appreciate this, but Wi feels more comfortable with convergence, and can sometimes be more bothered by many instances of things that are almost the same, but not quite. Because of this, Wi is good at contributing order and predictability, and is a good complement to the randomness of We.

Personal vs Impersonal

The We process may be used to appreciate cleverness, the value, or the humor of connecting ideas, contrasting with how Wi appreciates the significance of a particular idea. However, We, since it is an extraverted process, it is actually an impersonal and does not appreciate anything on its own (an introverted Judging process has to team up with We to do that.) With this in mind, We is strictly speaking just an impartial “noticer” of ideas that come and go, while Wi creates a sort of inner encyclopedia for understanding the world.

People like to understand things, so people who use Wi like it when ideas can be understood in terms of their inner encyclopedia, and don’t like it when definitions of things are off or distorted somehow. Therefore, Wi has a subjective opinion of what a good way to understand the world, and likes it when it others use it as well, since it establishes a common ground for shared internalized understanding (something that has been coined “inter-subjectivity.”)

Summary