Well, so last time we spoke of the concept of physical beauty as an inborn trait that helps in the battle for the best mating opportunities.
It is a quality that can’t really be changed that much, especially at the level of something as primal as scent. But, that is a little off topic, because I was speaking of physical appearance.
And so I was mostly talking about sight and visual appraisal. Sure, the world of appearance has other implications for other senses such as touch, scent, and so on. But, I will mostly be confining myself to the world of sight to stay consistent with this metaphor that has been developing of Appearance and Beauty.
It is my intuition that extraverted sensation and introverted intuition deal mainly with the sense of sight. Mainly.
Notice some of the keywords for introverted intuition: vision, having visions, being guided by a vision. I would say Vision is the top keyword for Ni.
Also, the primary way extraverted sensation manifests itself in the human kingdom is via the sense of sight. Scanning the environment and visual appraisal of objects, including human objects, because that is the way Se sees people —objectively, and as an aspect of the world that is manifesting as pure appearance.
I will be talking about Ni as a reaction to Se because I believe that all introversion is a reaction to extraversion and that you can’t have a subject without an objective background for this subject. However, don’t take this too literally, because there is an important caveat to this. I can already see introverts getting upset. They say, “At least if we are going to be pushed around in this objective world we can at least say that we have come first.”
Ah, consolation. Well, don’t worry too much about this. Introverts are prone to taking things too particularly. Just fucking relax.
So, extraverted sensation comes first for the purposes of discussing the dilemma that introverted dominant intuitives have. And for these purposes we will be examining introverted intuition as a reaction and retort to extraverted sensation as a primary objective reality. I have already stated in my article on the intuitive function that I think that intuition comes before all else. So, it presents a bit of a paradox but what I’m saying is that it might be more fruitful to observe Ni as a reaction to Se, because, in practice, Ni types do react in a specific way to Se imperatives.
So, here we go.
She Look Good!
Extraverted sensation is the world of appearance, which brings with it the concept of the quality of that appearance via beauty, or that lack thereof. One of the functions of this surface appearance is to quickly signal to prospective mates what the situation is with one’s general health and genetic influences. In humans, this is a much more visually-based activity than it is for much of the animal world.
Se-type behavior is driven by the quality of Instinct, which cannot easily be questioned and so the game has been played out for many millenia that the quality of physical beauty is an important instinctual indicator whether this beast that one is evaluating for the purposes of physical reproduction is fit enough to do a satisfactory job of making the strong and beautiful babies.
We can’t really help whether we find someone beautiful or not. We can rationalize other reasons why that person has other good qualities such as intelligence, humor, good personality, kindness etc. but it is amazing how difficult it is to get past this initial impression we receive about a person’s fitness via sighting them out. Also, this is a more consciously masculine quality, this world of sight. The female equivalent of this same behavior is introverted feeling. And these two functions are a pair in the male/female struggle for ascendancy in the natural world. Fi is a later development though. In the beginning it was the cavemen who were like, “There go beautiful girl!”
Clunk! Drag home. Boink!
Women’s biological imperatives didn’t gain any ascendancy until later in the game.
So, we have these man-pigs who are scoping out woman’s reproductive fitness via the sight of her features, particularly her childbearing ones such as width of her hips, clearness of her skin, plumpness of her lips and so on and so forth. So, this behavior went on for a long time and everything was going just fine. Babies were getting made. Strong and beautiful babies. The babies that didn’t have these qualities would have less reproductive opportunities when they grew into full-scale sexualized adults, and therefore, their genes would wither in the reproductive pool, leading to a curtailment of their features in future generations.
And all was going along fine until one fine day along stepped onto this scene the introverted intuitive.
What is She?
And as I said in previous articles of this series, we could expect the first thoughts of this Ni type to be, “What the fuck is all this shit? Why does it have to be this way? Why are you Tarzan, me Jane (or vice-versa)? Why do we have to reproduce ourselves? For what purpose? Where is all this survival of the human species going? Why should we survive as a species? For what reason?”
And we could expect that these introverted intuitives would eventually track down this quality of female attractiveness and call it by a name of some sort. They called it BEAUTY. INFJ and INTJ types abstracted this quality from the actual reality of nature and had this quality of Beauty sit in isolation as a thing-unto-itself, so that eventually this abstract quality came to be pondered on as an important preoccupation of these philosophical Ni types.
So, the next time that a beautiful girl appeared on the scene proffering her wiles, the Ni type would just sit there rather inertly and go, “What is it about her that is so attractive? Why do I feel compelled towards her in this characteristic fashion of natural impulse?”
And because the INFJ and INTJ didn’t want to be just another cliché (horror of horrors to them), they decided to wait it out. They decided to let the moment pass. They decided not to act.
And lo and behold, a whole new world opened up with just this very simple refusal to obey one’s natural instincts. It was as if a whole new species had been born on the earth at that very moment.
Instead of acting out the whole man-woman reproductive charade for the umpteenth time, the introverted intuitive decided to forgo the experience to instead think about the meaning of all this.
In short, they asked the question, “Why?”
And this is where beauty became BEAUTY. Hell, this is where beauty became a thing that could be called by any specific name at all. Because up until that point, no one was aware that there was any such thing at all.
And as you can probably imagine, this is where the birth of ART came from. All art is a reminiscence on BEAUTY. All art is an abstraction from and a variation on the theme of beauty.
So, it should come as no surprise that it was this natural response of the introverted intuitive type to the Se world of appearance in abstracted beauty that has become their particular playground and invention as a way to deal with the primal dilemma that having inferior extraverted sensation represents. They could not accept the world as it was. And so they began to abstract the world. To drag the woman into themselves rather than into a cave. To devour instead of propagate. To reconstitute the presented world inside themselves so that they could have any hope of living in the world as it was. Eventually, they would learn to give forth and reproduce in their own way.
O, To Know…
And on this beautiful note, I will leave off in the hopes that your curiosity about what beauty is may become such a predominant instinct that you will have no choice but to send me your beautiful money such that I may grow rich and strong enough to want to tell the tale of such a thing.
Think I’m kidding? Try me.
If you haven’t donated to Stellar Maze before but have been enjoying (or the nearest facsimile thereof) these wonderful, highly original and indispensable articles, then, now may be the time to consider contributing. If nothing else, because you are feeling guilty at partaking of a luscious banquet without the slightest consideration at what it takes to make such a venerable feast.
I don’t care if you feel guilty. All I want is to see is the tangible proofs of your declared love for this site’s generous offerings.
And of course, as always, you can tell me how great I am in the comments section. I mean, that is just the least you could do.
Also, don’t forget to spread me like a venereal disease onto your lovely and highly slutty networks.
Previous Articles in Series:
Extraverted Sensation in INFJ and INTJ: Part 1
Extraverted Sensation in INFJ and INTJ: Part 2
Extraverted Sensation in INFJ and INTJ: Part 3
“And of course, as always, you can tell me how great I am in the comments section. I mean, that is just the least you could do,”
I should say something to deflate your ego instead, but it would be all lies. Your post was entertaining and funny. I’m laughing in the computer lab at school, and I don’t even care.
Ah, that’s good to hear. Laugh away silly girl.
This is super interesting! Although often, inferior Se is takes over and the result is something much earthier, crazier, and completely unsustainable: http://infjwritersplan.tumblr.com/post/115381071376/inferior-se-the-monks-inner-libertine
I would donate but strongly prefer to remain anonymous – any alternatives to PayPal?
Yeah, the pendulum can swing to the opposite direction in an overcompensatory movement to inferior Se from dominant Ni. They are on axis. So, if an Ni dominant is really introverting hard core, then, eventually, their will be a reaction from the inferior and it will tend to be strong and explosive. But, then, it will quickly settle down (because it is unsustainable as a point of inhabitation) and the Ni dominant will go back to their natural mode. And this Se will manifest itself more in a challenging fashion like, “Yeah, see, I can participate in all these thrill-seeking behaviors to the max just like any other Se type person.” And it is true. An INFJ will sometimes out-Se the Se folks. But, this is all indicative of someone who is not truly at home in that world. For one thing, there is a lack of sustain. And for another, true Se types are generally more moderate in their Se behaviors. They just take them for granted and don’t trip on it.
As for anonymity in donating I am not aware of any good alternatives for this. However, if you are concerned about me putting you on some mailing list to solicit further donations from you, I WILL NOT do this. I totally understand the concept of privacy and anonymity and would be loathe to bug anyone in that regard. I think if you have a Paypal account there is an option of hiding your mailing address from the recipient of the donation if there is no shipping required. But, Paypal also states in their privacy policy the following:
So, I wouldn’t count on Paypal to absolutely never do this. But, as for me, I assure you I will maintain the privacy of your address and email information if it shows up in my Paypal account. And I will definitely not put you on any mailing lists in an attempt to solicit further donations from you. I consider that to be in incredibly bad taste. If I request money from my readers I will do so in a general message through Stellar Maze. I don’t solicit any given individuals. It is totally up to each person what they want to do.
That being said, I could definitely use the money. It does go towards producing further articles on Stellar Maze and it is really up to my readers if they want me to take the time to produce the lovely beastly articles that they so adore (or not, as the case may be). It’s really just an economics thing. The more money I have the more I will devote myself towards article production on this site. It certainly is the activity that I would most prefer to do. But, well, you know how these things go…
Thanks MB and Blake for this additional input.
I actually came to this series of articles (as an INFJ) to get more insight on my Se swings and this explains it nicely. I have noticed that if I get too locked into an introverted Ni-Ti mode then inevitably an extraverted Se-Fe alter-ego bursts its way out and shits all over the place… soooooo much fun but soooooo draining. It’s unsustainable and ultimately ends up back in Ni-Ti mode.
Yep, I know, the answer is totally Ni-Fe (which feels so great and balanced) but the Se-Fe dream of being a pornstar still lives on inside of me. I don’t want to completely abandon my inner wild child… but I don’t want the hangovers anymore. Just struggling with the moderation thing at the moment. I dunno, maybe my inner child will grow up someday.
” then inevitably an extraverted Se-Fe alter-ego bursts its way out and shits all over the place… ”
Laughed out loud. I think mine wants to do this right now and I ain’t having it …
*riding the wave*
I believe Se-dominance could represent shortsightedness whereas Ni-dominance would represent far-sightedness.
Also, Se-dominance implies physical robustness, athletic and healthy body. It also implies a hunger for physical sensations and delights, hence promiscuity, gluttony, alcoholism, drug abuse etc. as well as tendency to get physically aggressive and sort things out thru physical intimidation. In that sense, I believe Se-dominance is an end result (implication) of high testosterone levels both in women and men.
Ni-dominants on the other hand has inferior-Se, which would mean they have lower than normal testosterone levels for their gender, making the phsyically unhealthy and sexually and physically timid. Therefore, they do not let go of physical sensations but rather are not equipped to pursue them.
Being aware of this inferiority, they are drawn to Se-dominant, i.e. physically beautiful members of the opposite sex.
Hey. I’m going to argue with something in this series of articles. And that’s the focus on beauty being female/feminine.
I am not feeling nearly so loquacious as usual, so I will keep it short (and I would say sweet, but it may or may not be):
1. Rarely is it the female of the species whose beauty is the attractant. Rather, it is far more often the male. The females are usually drab, as it’s more practical for, you know, not being noticed by predators, especially so when you are raising young. Or when you are doing the hunting — the power work — like a lioness. There are exceptions, like, say, ducks, but in a great many species, it is the female gaze which is relevant and the female who chooses a mate.
2. To expand on that in human history… the same applied to us. Haha, you’re going on about cavemen noticing clear skin? Abducting females to impregnate? It’s a myth. Buddy, we were (are) all simian once. That means HAIR and MUSCLE. For everyone! It took a while for us to evolve into such extreme sexual dimorphism, and y’know, fundamentally, we still aren’t very. Same junk, slightly different configuration.
3. Makeup? High heels? Originally mens’ fashion… to enhance their *beauty* for female prospects.
A lot of people still don’t want to hear it, but there it is.
Abducting females to impregnate is a myth? This is still being done today.
Just watched a documentary on it. Not to mention, take a look at Youtube, gorillas mating. The silverback gets what the silverback wants. he’s twice or so her size. And curiously, men sometimes rape women or abduct them with a pal or more, just in case they are not strong enough on their own, I guess.
I don’t disagree that male beauty is relevant. Men can be breathtakingly beautiful. I’d just say that the more intelligent of the species are looking for more than just a pretty face. Other species are showing off their physical skills as well. Birds swoop, sing, dance, build nests for the females, I think, it is not just looks.
Sorry, I by no means meant to imply that it isn’t happening today! It absolutely IS, and the mentality behind it is why, in my opinion, it’s a myth to say “it’s always been this way.” Blake has even spoken about it in another more recent article of his — the idea that women are property to be taken by any man who wants them is primarily a product of the dawn of agriculture. To say that “that’s just human nature”, when it’s really more of a result of the development of the concept of possession, only contributes to the danger so many people are in right now.
That’s a fair point about silverbacks, but they’ve been evolving right alongside us, and IIRC humans are more closely related to the (all similarly sized and all similarly violent) smaller apes than the larger.
Respectfully, I still disagree. We are humans, we’ve been humans for an incrediby long time. Take a look at us culturally, over the whole world. Many different cultures, variations and traditions and yet we still have slavery, child brides, murders, art, music, closed marriages, polyamory, religion, the list just goes on and on. We always had all of these. People have always been in danger from others, as well as surviving because of them.
In some places, bad apples would be kicked out, often a death sentence, but if you look around, there are plenty of others that abuse power and where protection is minimal.
It is true that culture and tribe has been a safety for the, I will say women mostly, though I know men are hurt, too, more than is often thought. Culturally, we in the states and in a good many other countries are considerably safer in many ways, but the anonymity can also be dangerous.
I do think the whole agriculture and religious environment had a massive impact, and still does today, I just also think we’ve been much the same in many ways as well. And we’ve always been intelligent as a whole. Honestly, I think if you took a family from 2016 and one from 500,000 years ago, they would be much the same. Both would be utterly ignorant of the others time and skills, but the children, specially babies, would sort it very quickly, were they raised by the opposite people.
It did not take long for humans to realize that diversifying their genetics was necessary. But they will go about it just like humans, every which way.
There has always been the golden rule, do unto others, and there have always also been assholes.
I agree with @Undertow that the focus on beauty being a feminine issue and attraction/mate selection being essentially a one-way street is-
I don’t want to say “wrong”. But I do want to say it’s like the joke about the fish swimming along, and the old fish is like “How’s the water?”
Our cultural assumptions are like water. We think this is how it’s always been and how it will always be. But repeatedly we realize that our assumptions color our understanding. Recently I read an interview with the creator/showrunner of Transparent where she talked about realizing that most of what Hollywood makes is “propaganda of the self” that promotes and props up a really narrow vision of humanity, one where men are the lascivious gazers and women are the prizes, the ones who are looked at. The active hero vs the passive trophy. It’s so pervasive and we’re so trained to it from infancy, talking to ourselves in our cultural echo chambers, that most of us never notice the water we’re swimming in. We just think – hey, this is how it is! This is natural! This is the ground of human beingness. It has always been and will always be like this.
However, like @Undertow, recently I’ve been thinking about this water. I’m not a believer in the idea that cultures are static or that there is really a “natural” way for people to be. I definitely no longer think that we are evolving toward or away from something, or toward a fixed point of perfection somewhere in the future where we’ll have everything figured out. I think humans are the animal that adapts, the animal that has the extremely long childhood because we need the plasticity in the brain to be able to take on the full download of our particular culture.
It’s really remarkable to me to think about how women and girls in my culture and all cultures I have any familiarity with are trained almost totally out of having what we might call a “female gaze”. Females are trained into being the charismatic object, the “attractive nuisance”. Feminism has done much to unpack this dynamic and question it – for the good of all, I think, including men, for the majority of whom conventional patriarchies are also no picnic. But I think there’s a lot left to do in terms of asking questions about what women affirmatively want, how they want it, what does wanting look like in women? What does affirmative female desire pur sang even look like? It’s been neutered out of individuals, our art, everything.
I think subsequent generations will have interesting growth spirals around this topic: female desire, the female gaze, women looking at men in greedy, objectifying ways, women having sexual drives that are based purely on what they want instead of on trying to be the right kind of sexy for their male partner.
Things will probably get weird for a while!
(I basically take anything Blake says about “men” or “women” as a metaphorical yin/yang, Jungian collective kind of thing… I don’t have a lot of ideas about gender essentialism, personally.)
“Why does it have to be this way? Why are you Tarzan, me Jane (or vice-versa)? Why do we have to reproduce ourselves? For what purpose? Where is all this survival of the human species going? Why should we survive as a species? For what reason?”
I have asked this since childhood. I still question the reason humanity should exist at all. I stepped out of the gene pool and am just a branch on the human family tree that goes nowhere. That is okay with me, the world will go on just fine without my genetic contribution.. It is my hope to make some contribution to someone else who goes on to contribute to the gene pool and who will do something beautiful, other than make pretty babies. There are a lot of those but so many will not have pretty existences unless we do more than screw and reproduce.
My mother told me the other day that I hurt her deeply when I said at 5. “I didn’t ask to be born. Why did you have me any way? I hate it here!” I guess lots of kids say things like that but 5 seems a little young. She also told me I was forever getting sick as an infant with high unexplained fevers and she did not know if she would be able to raise me, because she did not know if I would survive. Maybe I was trying to bail out of existence early on? I don’t know. Well, here I am still, which is kind of a crazy miracle for many reasons, and I guess I will continue to do what I can to contribute to the human experiment in ways that are at the very least not destructive. Although I still wonder why we bother with the things we do and what is the purpose of the species? Human history seems like a meandering novel with lots of drama without much point sometimes.
Maybe the thoughts about why are why intuitives are fewer, while the rest are pursuing beauty for its own sake and entering into the genetic fray because of a strong impulse drive that is not questioned, but instead reigns supreme in the species. In fact that drive almost got me to succumb. Beauty and instinct operate on most everyone to certain behaviors, but those pausing to ask why may slow down or halt long enough that we become outnumbered and outpaced by those that run the life and reproduction marathon just for its sake with only the drive to participate and win without questioning the point or merit of the prize.