Re: Type Reading - Aggregation
@
cheese - oh, drat. i'm wondering if i should re-upload it. perhaps before i do, does anyone else see any other error i can fix while i'm at it? o.o (thanks cheese!)
@
Ink - We seem to be differing a bit less now in opinion, I'm glad.
If the signal is strong and evident I can type a person in a couple seconds.
But for these videos, I'm being more cautious, of course. I've probably watched about an hour+ of film for each?
It doesn't take that long if you've already spent months around people of that type and identified the signature of their behavior. Y'see it's not just a list of signals, there is a reason to each signal and that reason is tied to a psychological cause. So reading a person's type visually isn't arbitrarily deducing, but just a much more honed version of the type of reading we all do by instinct.
You can read when a person is upset, or happy, or confused.
I can read when a person is contemplating their worldview, or assessing their moral/logical compass.
I can see when a person is emitting an interpersonal smile for the purpose of impact, or when their smile is giddy and accidental.
It is not all that different from the way humans draw associations in every other area of study. A person shrivels their face a certain way and somehow we know that they're "angry". We weren't born knowing what angry faces appear as. How we know this is because in times past we've seen that face and observed that hostile actions or violence follows. That association was made. It's the same here with this theory.
Mentally understand at least one person, however many months that takes you, and then observe them in action. Try seeing how/why their psychology is giving rise to their countenance. See them in varying states (excited, sad, happy, neutral) and learn the general threshold of their expression's variation - and what signals they most emit, never or rarely emit, and what it means.