• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Breaking News from Pod'lair!

Oblivious

Is Kredit to Team!!
Local time
Tomorrow 5:21 AM
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
1,266
---
Location
Purgatory with the cool kids
Pod'lair in a sentence:

Pod'lair is an allegedly working product written in Latin, marketed to a Chinese audience, whose public relations consists of blasting Latin illiterate Chinese.

"If only those damn Chinese would learn Latin!"

You think the scientific establishment deserves criticism, that's fine. You then go on and put your brainchild in the same category as Scientology, not fine. There are other categories other then the last two.

I have no interest in listening to ranting when I want to learn about the human psyche. I went to the Pod'lair website and left after five seconds. Negative entertainment value.

You want something constructive Adymus? Here's something constructive.

Fix your logistics. Most of us on this forum came to this forum after taking an online quiz, read the description, and said "That's me!".

Why did that work? Taking a quiz did not cost much. Sifting through the new age mumbo jumbo for the gold, submitting a personal video without a privacy policy, and weathering the 'Angry' shit as you put it is a very very high price. In one sentence:

Price too high, dubious reward. You need to offer people something they might want, at a low cost.

Squarenix refused to listen to player concerns regarding FFXIV, which is now regarded as one of the biggest flops in MMO history. Are the players to blame? Better question: Who loses? I bought the game on release despite the criticisms, so I know it had a lot of potential, but the creation of an sprawling edifice without concern for its target audience left it a floundering product to this day despite it being free to play.

You keep talking about revolution, but like any war, revolutions require logistics. Your logistics so far is appalling. Fukyo mentioned lack of a privacy policy and the supposed blackmail involved in it. Adymus, if this is true, this is damning of Pod'lair as an institution. This is not about revolutionary ideals, this is a clear cut matter of accountability.

To fight a war you need people. Where are your people? Are you getting them? You can't convince them since they won't listen? Whose fault is that? Who loses?

As an organisation, I cannot consider Pod'lair seriously until you clean up its image. Right now I liken it to a fringe INTP who doesn't bathe, thinks people MUST understand him on his own weird terms, and hates and swears at the world because it doesn't.

You use expletives in your literature for God's sakes, and you want to be taken seriously?
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
@ Oblivious, very well said.

Since the people from Pod'lair know who I am when I send my stuff, did you all receive my current video? I have a thing where I mistrust email because it doesn't tell me if the recipient received anything at all, which sometimes, the recipient didn't receive anything, has happened at least three times. :D
 

thoumyvision

Mauveshirt
Local time
Today 3:21 PM
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
256
---
Location
Saint Louis, MO
Pod'lair in a sentence:

Pod'lair is an allegedly working product written in Latin, marketed to a Chinese audience, whose public relations consists of blasting Latin illiterate Chinese.

"If only those damn Chinese would learn Latin!"

You think the scientific establishment deserves criticism, that's fine. You then go on and put your brainchild in the same category as Scientology, not fine. There are other categories other then the last two.

I have no interest in listening to ranting when I want to learn about the human psyche. I went to the Pod'lair website and left after five seconds. Negative entertainment value.

You want something constructive Adymus? Here's something constructive.

Fix your logistics. Most of us on this forum came to this forum after taking an online quiz, read the description, and said "That's me!".

Why did that work? Taking a quiz did not cost much. Sifting through the new age mumbo jumbo for the gold, submitting a personal video without a privacy policy, and weathering the 'Angry' shit as you put it is a very very high price. In one sentence:

Price too high, dubious reward. You need to offer people something they might want, at a low cost.

Squarenix refused to listen to player concerns regarding FFXIV, which is now regarded as one of the biggest flops in MMO history. Are the players to blame? Better question: Who loses? I bought the game on release despite the criticisms, so I know it had a lot of potential, but the creation of an sprawling edifice without concern for its target audience left it a floundering product to this day despite it being free to play.

You keep talking about revolution, but like any war, revolutions require logistics. Your logistics so far is appalling. Fukyo mentioned lack of a privacy policy and the supposed blackmail involved in it. Adymus, if this is true, this is damning of Pod'lair as an institution. This is not about revolutionary ideals, this is a clear cut matter of accountability.

To fight a war you need people. Where are your people? Are you getting them? You can't convince them since they won't listen? Whose fault is that? Who loses?

As an organisation, I cannot consider Pod'lair seriously until you clean up its image. Right now I liken it to a fringe INTP who doesn't bathe, thinks people MUST understand him on his own weird terms, and hates and swears at the world because it doesn't.

You use expletives in your literature for God's sakes, and you want to be taken seriously?

Any successful venture needs 3 things: an innovation, a plan, and effective marketing.

No matter how amazing your innovation, if you don't have either of the other two your venture will fail.

We know Pod'lair has an innovation, and it has the potential to be awesome. There seems like there might be a plan, but it's not transparent. However, whenever marketing is brought up it seems like the Pod'Lair folks stick their fingers in their ears and go "NO, NO NO, LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
 

Jennywocky

Creepy Clown Chick
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,739
---
Location
Charn
Any successful venture needs 3 things: an innovation, a plan, and effective marketing...

What? You don't respond to, "You're stupid and we're much smarter than you -- let us enlighten you, you stupid git"?
 

Fukyo

blurb blurb
Local time
Today 10:21 PM
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
4,289
---
You guys are missing the point. Pod'lair is not just a model, it's also a culture and a community. It's probably a culture first and a model second, actually. They're not going to compromise because spreading the Pod'lair culture is their agenda.
 

Sijov

Redshirt already dead
Local time
Tomorrow 10:21 AM
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
36
---
Personally, I find Pod'Lair frustrating. They have a very exciting hypothesis, namely that the cognitive functions that we use show up in facial expressions, and the recognition of which is a taught skill. I find that quite compelling, that it would allow me to gain insight into the people around me. It will take a carefully designed experiment to prove, and probably not one, but several to do so satisfactorily. And even then, it cannot be taken beyond what it is; a model, and an empirical one at that (as opposed to theoretical models, which explain what's going on and why, Pod'Lair only seems to give the what's going on, which functions are being used and thus the type. There is only experience to back up why it works, not a sound theory. To be fair, the sound theory is practically impossible, given that we're dealing with the mind, which we can't understand it its totality). It will have its strengths and weaknesses, and deserves merit for the scope of what it tries to explain.

But there we come to the hitch; explaining it. While the hypothesis is interesting, the language is off-putting. Xyy means nothing to me. It has no meaning that I can connect to anything else. To read this thread properly, I need to have a key next to me, explaining what all the symbols mean (they do sound cool, but that is their only merit), which makes understanding the system so much harder. Why do you have this (largely unnecessary from my standpoint) barrier to entry? For instance, look at the MBTI system. The names of the functions correspond to what they do, more or less. Certainly there are specialised definitions, as Feeling doesn't quite mean what it means in daily usage (and there are a number of threads around that clarify and explain these distinctions), but there is a connection there, too. We are able to have an intuitive understanding of what's going on when we say that feeling is a dominant function. But when you say that you're Nyy'xai? Cool story bro. You've lost my interest by speaking gibberish.

Sop here I am, a prospective customer, willing to buy into your theory. Right now, you aren't selling it to me. You're making it hard, and there's also the prospect of a learned skill in there that I'll have to practice at if I'm going to be any good, which is another turn-off (though, admittedly not one you can do anything about, but be aware of it). I suspect that there is a great danger of someone learning all you have to teach, and setting themselves up quite nicely by selling all your secrets in plain english, using standard function names (ie MBTI, socionics types, no need to reinvent the wheel here, I can't see any major changes that you've made to them), and setting up a clear, easy to navigate website, and you bet that you could write a self-help book on this stuff (whether you could learn this stuff properly from a simple book is another question, but I think that scruples have been abandoned already in this hypothetical example); there is money to be made in selling this. Not to mention the impact that taking this to academia would have, I wouldn't be at all surprised if nobody has thought to look into this particular idea, there's lots to research and only so many doing the work. With a well designed experiment or two, you'd have hard proof and qualifications to speak about this stuff. Then let the book deals flow. But right now? You really aren't selling it to me. You look like you want to sell it to me, and spread your movement, but you have these incomprehensible barriers to entry.

As a side note, after a bit more time skimming around your site, I've worked out that you're applying a slightly different approach to the whole typology thing, coming at it from a slightly different angle. Something which concerns me slightly, is that you have nothing good to say about the other models that have gone before you. This is odd, given the similarities that Pod'Lair shares with MBTI and the rest. You read more as an evolution, rather than a revolution, or giving you the most credit, a re-thinking (by which I mean, you seem to have looked at it from the perspective of 'what can we see expressed that we can link to a cognitive process' rather than the more conventional approach that seemed to be 'how can we split people into personality groups'). The fact that you have found eight functions is a huge validation of the previous models; you've come up with something similar, even if the functions themselves are not quite identical as you define them. The fact that you have nothing good to say about the other theories, what they got right, where they fell down, what they sort-of-but-not-quite explained, implies to me that you haven't really considered their merits at all, all the while you're going about stealing them.

So that's my two cents worth, please forgive me for posting at 3am.
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
All this advice for Pod'lair and the only reaction I can imagine them having when reading the advice is spiting anger and irrational rage because someone stepped on their sand castle.

To Pod'lair people, from the videos, I am correctly assume you are all adults. So because you are all probably older than I am, please stop acting like children. It seems to me that this is the only community (intpf) that even cares about the idea outside your own. We only care because we are naturally curious. So it seems to me that the harshness and uncalled for hostility is directed at those of us that are part of the intpf community. That was worded odd I know. Just because we question you, why must you take is so personal? Makes me think you are actually all ESFPs, hell their irrational jump to illogical conclusions comes from their horribly developed Ni, and aren't most Pod'lair-ians INFJ? Which would mean you are running on Ni, so it just seems that your Ni is as weak as an ESFP... very sad I must say. So if this is all true, why should I believe you have the answers to develop my top function to better who I am? As it seems now, you have not been able to better your own top function, and I can see that from the ever present marketing scheme everyone keeps speaking of, just horrible wretchedness is woven into it all, may as well say, "FUCK YOU ALL, WE ARE BETTER SMART AND YOU ARE UNGOOD DUMB, WHICH MAKES US THE SMARTEREST OF ALL!" <-- that is what I am reading from the main page.

Which brings me to another point, the part that always pissed me off about my INFJ exgfs and various INFJ friends, they have this air of superiority about them, yet the ignorance is so wreaking I can smell it miles away. And when you show the INFJ up, beware, you life becomes hell, so you must tip toe around the little princesses because they are so fragile because they can't take cold logic, don't be that kind of INFJ, which from your examples, I have yet to see any other kind, sure you are always nice at the start, but when people start prodding and poking to find truth, hell I bet you would have damned Socrates to death.

Next problem I saw from scanning the stuff. It seems all the idea cares about is the INFJ. You are even making a book on INFJs? You have successfully confined most of society within the INFJ terms, so to make everyone the same as you, yet I am sure most of them are not like you are all. I saw claims that there are INFJs that have became so used to using their Ti that it becomes their normal cognitive function and they think they are INTPs, but that doesn't make sense. An INTP uses TiNe, not TiSe. But even so, if the persons dominate function being used is Ti, then they would be a Ti user not an Ni user. So if they are using Ti dominantly, then they would be either an INTP or ISTP with the corresponding complimentary function.

Also, where is your neurological proof that shows if someone shows Ni as dominate in their face, yet their brain is running on Ti, they are still an Ni user even though Ni would be third on the list? Where is the real scientific proof? Just because you see something on some people's faces and are able to connect it to functions, does not necessarily mean they are that dominate function. That is just as far of a jump as trying to get my type by a colour chart, hell I randomly guess at that shit and get the same results between INTP and INFP, once I got ENTJ and laughed. Seeing something on a persons face and claiming it IS their dominate function is not proof, where is the charts and readings from medical devices that I don't know the names to because I am not a medical major. Give us real proof and a better marketing scheme, and you would be surprised at how many people would jump to Pod'lair, hell, a better marketing scheme would do wonders, the proof could come later after you get enough real scientists that care enough to prove your theories correct or incorrect. But so far, you are just upsetting the scientists.

Anyhow I've ranted enough, later.
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
However, whenever marketing is brought up it seems like the Pod'Lair folks stick their fingers in their ears and go "NO, NO NO, LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
XD !!!

You guys are missing the point. Pod'lair is not just a model, it's also a culture and a community. It's probably a culture first and a model second, actually. They're not going to compromise because spreading the Pod'lair culture is their agenda.
From the point of view of their marketing, yeah I would say it is primarily about their culture. It's a strange culture, but I don't know that it's dangerous (which isn't to say it's not - the Anamelechian vision may turn out to be reality).

However, there is a model there nonetheless, which, if verified, will be a major advancement in Typology. Again, we need to sift out Pod'lair into these two basic constituent components and address them separately (at first, of course; duality is succeeded by synthetic monism).

Also, where is your neurological proof that shows if someone shows Ni as dominate in their face, yet their brain is running on Ti, they are still an Ni user even though Ni would be third on the list?

Seeing the cues indicates that the function is being used (there may not be a rigorous proof of this, but you are always free to show that contradictory cues show up in the same person), though just seeing it doesn't indicate position. There are various ways to differentiate beyond this, such as looking for other dichotomies (e.g. perception focused or judgment focused, values based or logic based) or looking at the energy gained by the used of the function, whether through an ongoing momentum, or a "charging up".

If it interests you, I would recommend just going in and learning the cues, despite the uncertainty in their validity. If you see inconsistencies after learning their method, then you can go and disprove it.
 

EyeSeeCold

lust for life
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
7,828
---
Location
California, USA
You guys are missing the point. Pod'lair is not just a model, it's also a culture and a community. It's probably a culture first and a model second, actually. They're not going to compromise because spreading the Pod'lair culture is their agenda.

^
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
@ Artsu Tharaz, what proof dictates that if you see a function on someones face, they are using that function?

So far the only argument for it has been that it has been seen many times via experience, but that still does not mean is that function, just because you see something, and give it a name, does not mean it is what is commonly known as that function. It seems to be a jump in logic, a guess, I see this so I will say it is this. So my question is, how was it first figured out that a function was specific things.

That is another thing missing. In real science, the experiments and all information is shown. Pod'lairians are only showing the results, where the hell is the other information? I want to see it all, all the research leading up to the assumptions made. You want to be real science, follow scientific procedures.

Also you are committing a logical fallacy when you say that you are only right because we have yet to prove you wrong. That is about three different fallacies at once, congratulations! :D

Also, the reason the intpf is having problems with it is because they naturally notice something is off, but unless they are versed with logic, which most probably are since lets face it, INTPs learn everything, they will just notice something is wrong. And there are too many fallacies in the presentation regardless of the curiosity held within the ideas.

Don't take me wrong, I like the idea, I am pointing these things out in the slim hopes that someone will get their shit together and make things right. If you want to grow the community, stop acting like children and act like rational thinkers, damn most of these arguments for Pod'lair reminds me of the idiots that argue against Richard Dawkins. Again I am not calling you idiots, just saying you are taking similar approaches they do. I like your ideas, but it was already here, you just moved it in a different direction, which was really different at all, just more successful.

Which brings me to anther point, you claim no other VI is as good as yours because they don't correctly VI in comparison to YOURS! That is another fallacy. Damn, come on don't you have an INTP working with you guys, I am sure I saw him in the videos?

Your logical argument.

I am right.
Because I say I am.
So if you VI something that is not like mine.
Then you are wrong.
Since you VI different than I do.
You are clearly wrong.

:elephant:
 

kibou

Member
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
93
---
@Dark

Sorry I'm not replying to everything on here, there's sooo much here so I'm replying to what I find interesting/stimulating to respond to ATM! But I'm reading everything in this thread =)

One of the amazing things about Pod'Lair as a theory is that it's completely internally consistent. One of the most important basic differences between MBTI Type and Pod'Lair Mojo Configuration is the idea of Momentum and Modulation. Basically (in a simplified way), your top two powers are the side that natively energizes you, and the bottom two drains you. Technically, everything other than your Source (Top power) drains you, because your Source creates the energy in your psyche, but your Source and Tandem (#2) are wired into each other, so using your Tandem is also energizing. The other tricky thing is people use their powers in very creative ways, and with development they do things that other people of the same mojo without development can't do. But the baseline is the same, that's why we can still read a highly developed person, they still are getting energized from their Source and modulating into their other powers, they're just doing it in a way that's very effective but the underlying pattern is the same. We can physiologically read this underlying pattern to an extremely nuanced level. That's how we keep a subject as complicated as human psychology and how mental processes are used in an internally consistent way.

The reason why a Nai'xyy ("INFJ") who uses more Zai ("Ti") than Nai ("Ni") is still a Nai'xyy and not a Zai'vyy (ISTP) who has Zai above Nai, is because it's still modulation for a Nai'xyy, and this looks clearly different. This sounds complicated but it's internally consistent, and that's the thing, people use their mojos in really complicated ways. Values-based mojos will use logic-based powers all their life, valuing it as the superior thing, and get very good at it, but their energy, the way their face animates, the way they use their mind, is clearly different from a logic-based mojo's way of using their logic-based power. It doesn't make one better or worse, but the process is different, and the proper advice to give for developing a higher amount of energy, using the powers more effectively, is also different. This is forensically based but you can also feel the difference.

I think when you say ironically "Makes me think you are all ESFPs", this points out one of the weaknesses of MBTI. Since the way of judging type is based on seeing or self-evaluating "traits", and MBTI Types are essentially archetypes (what we call "mah'zutes" in Pod'Lair, the social cloths that one wears consciously...like "I am a scientific person", "I am raver chick" kind of thing).

Also, MBTI technically judges Type based on what function is used the most, and calls it the dominant function. In PL you can use any conscious pod power as much as you want, it's the way you get energized and drained (and physiologically how it manfests on the face) that shows how you're *configured*. So in that sense, if MBTI and Pod'Lair were looking at the same function, while in MBTI someone using Ti the most is a Ti dominant, in Pod'Lair using Zai a lot means you use Zai a lot, but that doesn't mean you're a Zai'nyy. If you're a Nai'xyy and you use a lot of Zai, you're a Nai'xyy that modulates a lot to use Zai a lot. If you're a Zai'nyy, you're a Zai'nyy using a lot of your Source Momentum Zai.

Dark, I've seen your more recent video and (as the interns said after viewing your video) you are definitely an Nai'xyy (roughly correlating to INFJ). That isn't the same as an INFP or INTP, in fact it may be more accurate to say you are an INFP, INTP and so on in MBTI, because MBTI are archetypal and not how people really use their minds. So what you are might not fit into the INFJ archetype, but your mind does fit into how a Nai'xyy works, and actually your post is very characteristically Nai'xyy (people like Auburn's posts and her way of debating is much more characteristically Zai'nyy, even if we're talking observational traits). Whether you're debating on the side of logic or cults or MBTI or Pod'Lair, the passion and actually, anger toward stupidity (in your case, anger/rantingness toward the stupidity of how Pod'Lair adversarially presents itself) is characteristically Nai'xyy Nai-based dissatisfaction, especially in your deconstructionistic approach (Nai) and value judgments on social conduct in a detatchment way (Xyy flavored by Nai). Of course these traits aren't what makes you "typed" as a Nai'xyy in PL, but it is worth noting that your behavior in your post and your way of ranting & debating things is very characteristically Nai'xyy, in a more classic sense. Actually, generally speaking Zai'nyy tend to not be as concerned about making sure they're logical and come across as logical, they just breathe it and it's not an aspect of the self to be defensive about. The perfectionism to "making sure one is logical" is more commonly done by Nai'xyy, often because they consider it an important part of their development to not be thrown off by the speculative hypothesizing but non-logical theorizing of Nai. A lot of the hardass Atheist debaters in the public eye are very Zai-heavy (depending on the person, over-modulated in a suppressive way) Nai'xyy, but you can really see in them the kind of passionate anger toward the stupidity of other beliefs (like Christianity) that is so signature of Nai'xyy, hahah (besides the ones that are more secretive and cagey about their true opinions on things).

If your INFJ friends are Nai'xyy (and most likely momentum-heavy if they self-identified with Ni and Fe), that may explain why you get pissed by them - you've developed your Zai throughout your life so that you don't get an "air of superiority" and have your Nai lead you to "baseless", illogical speculations that can be wrong. I don't want to get into more specifics about your playing style in particular as a Nai'xyy on a public forum (unless you'd like me to) so I'm only pointing out things in your post in relation to the forensic read of your video as a Nai'xyy, but I can definitely elaborate to you one-on-one so that it makes more sense. I think PL is most easily understood through ourselves, rather than talking theoretically about Ti as a dominant function and so on like in MBTI. You are a living example of one way that a Nai'xyy uses their apparatus in a way that they wouldn't identify with their source power, or don't identify Nai detachment as Nai detachment when they're using it, and if you're interested you deserve a more indepth, personalized explanation of how this is possible and I'm more than willing to chat with you about it ^^ (cuz it's fun for me, hahah)

BTW, the reason why the interns were thrown off by your picture read and misread you as a Xai'nyy (picture reads are not consistently accurate enough IMO, there are thousands of more pictures in one 10-second video than a picture), was because you were in Zai modulation enough that your directive native side (Nai'xyy are Directives)'s signal was "muted". This looks different in a nuanced way from someone who is actually Adaptive, but in one picture (as opposed to thousands or in real-time), it can be too subtle to tell accurately. However, even from the picture, they got correctly that you were a Subjective (MBTI I), values-based (MBTI F in the four-letter type acronym) and interpretive-based (MBTI N in the four-letter type acronym). This is why we don't do picture reads anymore BTW, they're not accurate enough and we are held to high standards by both ourselves and non-Pod'Lair readers for the accuracy and nuanced depth of our reads. If you'd like we can talk on PM to look at a Nai'xyy who mutes their directive signal through Zai modulation and compare to say, a Zai'nyy or Zai'vyy on their momentum Zai and discuss the videos to start getting a sense of this difference more concretely. =)

I hope that's helpful - sorry if my message is too blunt, but I think it is easiest to understand Pod'Lair through the way we ourselves play (by viewing ourselves on camera - after all, we don't usually see how we look to others), rather than just talking in the function abstracts. I like you and I can feel you're trying to understand how all this stuff could be true or could not be true, and you seem passionate and willing to try to understand, so I wanted to go out of my way to make that easier (despite this very uh, fire-y environment hahah). :) If you'd like, I can talk with timestamps (privately or publically, whichever you prefer) about what you're doing at exact points with your pod powers and mojo on a much more nuanced level and how that relates to information you already know about yourself.

BTW, it's interesting you use L as your avatar, because L is very characteristically a Zai heavy Nai'xyy (fictional characters can't have mojos, but since they are made based on observations of real people, they can really consistently portray a particular mojo).


PS @Fukyo I actually agree with your point, but with a positive interpretation, hehe. Pod'Lair is definitely a wholistic system and has as much of a culture around it as scientists or painters, except instead from artistically driven people-reading. This is very different from the MBTI culture that uses a lot of scientific-y sounding stuff that's speculatively based (Jung is from Psychodynamic Psychology, after all - it's far from empirical science, even if it MBTI uses very technical sounding terms like ISTP).


and @Artsu Tharaz "If it interests you, I would recommend just going in and learning the cues, despite the uncertainty in their validity. If you see inconsistencies after learning their method, then you can go and disprove it." I completely agree, it's really hard to talk about this without actually directly talking about it and using it. The "Ti-Ni-shouldn't it be the dominant function" kind of talk is common in MBTI but it's too non-concrete and non-forensic of a basis to start with. The best way to prove or disprove Pod'Lair theory is by testing it, and when we have enough trained readers we will certainly test it in a lab environment as well, to see if the cues we are reading are indeed, even to the nuanced degree that they are, internally consistent enough that two readers separated from each other give a high consistency in their reads. I feel very amorphous about many opinions but that is one I'm very confident about. =) Meanwhile, feel free to study with us or PM me and we can definitely look over samples to study this art!
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
what proof dictates that if you see a function on someones face, they are using that function?
The difficulty in addressing the point of validity with regards to the functions, is that the notion of the functions has very poor empirical backing. It is basically a model of thought - as I mentioned earlier, an exercise in duality, by taking a model of a person and detaching it from physical reality to look at the ideas in themselves. When we type like this, then when typing a person, what we are doing is thinking about our impression of the person, and then seeing how it fits into our thought model, i.e. it is a process which takes place outside of empirical content, and thus may well have a deep truth to it, but will always retain a separation from reality.

Of course, this causes confusion with:
Which brings me to anther point, you claim no other VI is as good as yours because they don't correctly VI in comparison to YOURS!
So are they saying their procedure is Typing according to the same model as before, or a different one? How can they judge Keirsey as being ~20% accurate if they're not even trying to do the same thing?

There seems to be an underlying assumption that, yes, they are looking for the manifestations of the Typing system as predicted in the model we are used to, but they are doing so by looking at how people actually are, and not just how we think of them in the abstract. And as it turns out (thus essentially validating the basic principles upon which our 16-types model rested on), people really do emit signs of being Te+Fi vs Fe+Ti, or J vs P, or perception dominant vs judgment dominant, and the myriad of other resultant dichotomies - however, attempts to categorise people without considering this have not led to consistent results based on anything empirical.

So to maybe answer your question: the question of showing that the cues indicate function use is in a sense not well posed, because the functions were never well defined constructs in the first place. They form a model of thought, which is intuitively rich but lacking in true empirical content and can only be a guide in our attempt to determine how the types manifest.

So, while the question of the consistency of the model is readily able to be investigated, when looking at the foundations the validity in terms of our intuitive notions of the functions can't properly be demonstrated because there is nothing to demonstrate - all you can do is try to convince the other person that the notions can be carried over, or else to have them change their conceptual model.

What we have here then is an attempt to take Typology out of the abstract regions of thought, and into the real world, so direct assessments can be made, rather than indirect ones. The question then arises as to whether the model is actually useful. Maybe it is consistent, but you can't actually do anything with that consistency. Perhaps cues don't have any kind of predictive power, in other words, or if they do, this hasn't been scientifically verified.

This criticism seems, at least at the moment to be valid. Only when true predictions have been made and tested can this become a scientifically respected model. Basically what we have now is an artform, based on consistently recurring physical phenomena. And this is to be expected - afterall, any science will start out as an artform, based on heavy interpretation of the data, until the artform does produce empirical results as science requires.

When it's said that Pod'lair has proof of concept, what I believe that means is that they have outlined the methods in as much detail as is required that you can see what they mean, that it's consistent, and thus is -real-, usefulness aside. So, the concepts of the foundations have proof. Until predictive data is collected, you'll just have to learn the concepts if you're to determine their validity for determining personality.
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
@ kibou, why can't everyone else from PL be civil like you seem to be :D?

So I am a Ti heavy INFJ, interesting.

Also you point out some stuff I learned from Socionics, but in Socionics it claims that one would become fatigued if they constantly interacted within their bottom two functions, which for me, I become fatigued if I work in F and S. I am more energized through N than anything I know that. T also seem to be right up there, but I still have a fuzzy understanding what F means, I know it is ethical or value, but it still doesn't make sense completely to me.

Also something else confuses me, most INFJs I know see details... like wow, how the hell do they see details like that? I don't, I see the other side, the big picture. Or is this entirely different, I do know the INFJs I know are mainly left brain users, while I am mainly a right brain user. So the left and right brain would be something interesting to see in Pod'lair.

Also, I have never been able to iNtuitively read people like most INFJs. I just can't do it. Could that come from the heavy Ti? Though it could be explained differently. I read things differently, I may not be able to read motives or whatever most people do, but in a game or anything that requires thought, I am always a million moves ahead because I already know what they will do at any given time, except for chess because I have played like a whole 5 times. So the common INFJ is reading people or things via their Fe and I am using my Ti instead? Wow, if that is so I am a double introvert haha.

It could also explain in anther manner why my INTJ friend and I have so much in common yet we differ oddly. We both are using NT dominantly, her NT is natural, mine is not. Which my NxTi arrangement could be why I constantly came up as an ENTP?

Even with this information, it doesn't change how my brain works, but it is interesting to get a chance to learn more about my mind. If I am heavy Ti, it won't change anything for me, I'll probably always be that way because I am comfortable with it. I am not sure how I could use Fe. Though I do admit I sometimes come up with ideas via my N that I am completely unsure how I got them so I must evaluate it with Ti, sometimes they are complete fiction, but still interesting as hell.

Lately I have noticed that a lot of my ideas work off what is ethical. Like my what is real thread. I really think my functions are arranged in NTFS, but that could be completely possible right? Which would completely remove the labellings like INFJ or ENTP. What I have found most important since EyeSeeCold explained functions to me back when I joined the forum about a year ago, is that the functions matter most. So instead of labeling people via stupid names and dictating they are in only 16 possibilities, there creates many possible manners. So commonly NiFeTiSe is seen, but I feel more NxTiFeSx. Pod'lair says I am Ni so that would be NiTiFeSe for me. So that would create many possible types within each type. Which would mean for each type, I am going to assume they run on their dominate function regardless, so there would be four types for each type so there really are 64 possible type of people. Which if one could run on something other than their dominate function, which I doubt, the numbers can go up drastically.

It could make sense. I know I am N dominate, no one can argue that with me. But the reason for my Ti development could be because where I lived, I was alien, so many S dominates. So because of the alienation, my Ti takes over since my Fe is not doing things to interact within the world. But I do know when I interact it is energizing. I become an actor. Talking the camera was odd as hell to be honest. I intuitively play off others, I think am capable of fitting in almost any scenario. So has my Ni been making me think it was Ne because my Fe kicks in and I become alive and capable of swaying crowds and opinions? If I care about something, I can be very and I do mean very, charismatic. Which I think is the product of both my Ti and Fe working together. The Ti is so calm, so still, so posed, the Buddha and the Fe grabs the people, it shows them something and they feel what I feel, shit describing myself makes me think I am Hitler. I've made speeches in classes that I can see peoples eyes watering slightly, either I made such a shitty speech the T dominates are crying because of the horrible event, or I touched people without using the pathos method, instead of appealing emotion to them, I made them feel it and it was real to them.

I do know many people have told me I remind them of L, which is pretty much why that is my avatar. N kind of confuses me, I think his role was a little too forced, but according to Pod'lair theory, what would he be?
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
I become fatigued if I work in F and S
You probaby don't realise it, because it is just so natural to you, that you are -constantly- assessing things on an F basis, you just aren't actively doing anything with it (or so you think).

In socionics, INFj is Fi base - socionics i functions aren't used actively like socionics e functions are, so you'll generally not be as aware of it because you don't have as much control over its use. It's nonetheless a major part of your psyche, and actually is the main way in which you frame your conception of the world.

What you'll find with Ti in the tertiary, I think, is that the logic will be highly personalised. It will be consistent -to you-, but to others may be meaningless, and you'll have a hard time justifying it if questioned, and so will probably ignore your logic altogether and focus strictly on the unstructured ideas, and on the push and pull of how your ideas are being communicated to the other person.

And also, note that -what- you think about may seem to have more of a T character, but that doesn't mean you are using much T to process it. N is extremely versatile, and so for an N dominant, the type of things they put their energy into will vary widely. So, saying that you are NTFS probably stems from the assumption that because you are using N to look at T-like things, that you are using T, when really that T aspect isn't what you naturally look at, and is added separately.

If you have Ni dominance with Fe and Ti, Fe will always be the more natural accompaniment.

Also something else confuses me, most INFJs I know see details... like wow, how the hell do they see details like that? I don't, I see the other side, the big picture.
...sounds like they're actually ISFJs?
 

terraxceles

Fufufufu.
Local time
Tomorrow 1:21 AM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
148
---
INFJs are super-rare, except...

Clinton, Bill
Cronkite, Walter
Day, Dorothy
Denver, John
Einstein, Albert
Farrakhan, Louis
Gray, John
Harrison, George
Hillman, James
Jung, Carl
Kacynski, Ted
Kent, Corita
Landers, Ann
Lennon, John
McCartney, Paul
Morris, Errol
Mother Teresa
Presley, Elvis
Pryor, Richard
Shah, Idries
Shatner, William
Sheldrake, Rupert
Simon, Paul
Springsteen, Bruce
Walker, Alice
Wright, Frank Lloyd

Most of everyone you know is INFJ! Yeah. Now I understand why I've always felt so misunderstood.

---

Btw this is 26 out of 49 people listed in Lenore Thomson's Personality Types that Pod'lair has typed Nai'Xyy. So, assuming that the sampling is somewhat random, either the majority of famous people in general are Nai'Xyy because this type has a tendency towards being prominent in society, OR their model is specifically designed in such a way so as to accommodate the most popular, revolutionary, interesting, artistic, scientific people as Nai'Xyy, because Thomas wants to be the same type as the best of the best.

I personally think the latter is more likely, but hey...
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
...sorry for the double post, I tend to do this, but I think of more to add later haha.

I have read Adymus' thing on the many faces of the INFJ, and it gave me an idea. Maybe most people who typed as INFJ aren't really INFJ, they seem to jump to completely illogical conclusions like most S types do. Not a dominate N user at all. And they also follow the profile of ISFJ more closely than they do INFJs.

Also to continue that line of thought, I can find myself in almost all those faces of the INFJ, that is if I am an INFJ, I like to think I am a NTFS. Which Adymus' examples of them make a lot of sense. Xavier seems to be NTFS, same with Shawn Spencer, Lando and V. I am not sure about the others since they are outside my range of knowledge.

Which brings up another point I saw Adymus bring up a long time ago, that people who are testing themselves are only getting what they want to think of themselves. Many S types think they are good with N, they aren't, they are shitty. So that may be a reason why if I am an INFJ, I have a problem with a lot of self tested INFJs. They come off horrible not how I initially felt INFJ seemed. They tend to have no care to change the world, to be completely honest, I am now unsure if the people I know as INFJ are really INFJs. They seem more ISFJ. I know my own mother tested as INFJ, but her N is so shitty I can't believe it. She fits the profile of the ISFJ better and seems to run on SiFe. From an NxTi perspective, I don't understand it at all. The problem with self tests is that we can't truly trust our judgement of our own self. Mainly S types run into that problem all the time which I find hilarious with an S type jumps to some conclusion that is ridiculous. Reminds me of "Office Space," the jump to conclusions mat.

Anyhow, not able to finish my line of thought since I need to run off to class, ethics. Kind of nice to have logic and ethics in the same day, wake up, go to logic, have fun, then to ethics to have fun.

One of the main flaws with MBTI and the like is that they only tell what order the functions are probably in, like NTFS, so whatever order your funtions fall in, that is your type, so it is either ENTP or INTJ, so I assume they can tell Te from Ti and Fe from Fi, but discerning the Ns and Ss seem wrong. Where PL seems to have found out how to find N and S correctly.

In better words, that is what I think PL has been trying to say, but didn't seem to have the words. Just because I am NTFS, does not mean I am ENTP or INTJ. Just because I have NxTiFeSx make me have an extraverted top function. I am not doomed to have my top two functions to always be EI or IE, it can be II or EE, which I do think is possible, I had a friend that I was 100% sure was EE. Using an I function seemed to kill him all over. I think he was a S dominate, so it seems he was probably running SeTe or SeFe.

MBTI is flawed because it limits the possibilities, Socionics is flawed because well, it does this too but in a different way. PL is flawed because of it's presentation so we have no clue what the hell is going on most of the time. There is no possible way to escape a flawed system, we are human, we are always capable of getting better.

First thing I learned in my logic class, which it sounds completely logical, is that if someone can present a better argument, why hold onto old beliefs if they were refuted? That is illogical. So I know I am NTFS, but now I wonder if it is Ni instead of Ne leading the functions, and from kibou's explanation, it seem plausible that it can happen. I want to learn, I am not holding onto a religion or any thought of beliefs, if something can explain something to me better than anything else, why not give it a chance?

Also I think I know why PL uses such horrible terms for everything, like they said, it is different, but it also isn't. But it was never clear at how they are different, but I think I know. The funny terms are used to show that there is a distinction between INFJ and it's functions. Pretty much the INFJ, with the J and P bullshit, that stuff is just stupid I must admit. The functions are where the real truth is, and PL is the first to actually use it as the basis. PL and INFJ is NiFe in our language. But that just means they have NiFeTiSe. Which does not tell at all what the order is other than the fact that it is going to be Ni leading it. While MBTI says it MUST be NiFeTiSe, no other arrangement of functions is possible, while Socionics says, "Hold on you are wrong, Jung didn't say that at all!" Instead it is FiNeSiTe (INFP for MBTI). Which doesn't sit right with me because it requires some odd things saying that introverts are really two people, one that is the MBTI version and the other the Socionics, about as shady as the PL presentation and marketing scheme.

PL has a good idea but is going at it wrong in my opinion. We already have in place the names for the functions, why change it? NeNiSeSiTeTiFeFi, no need for weirdness. Also don't claim it is something new, it isn't, inspect previous sentence again. Also the slogan, "Everything is energy evolving," That is not new either, Einstein, ever hear of him? Everything is made of energy and energy is always changing from one from to another, couldn't that be a TM theft? PL is not really new, it is just tried to better organize known things, but did it horribly by trying to make people think it was new. I am saying all this because I want you guys to fix things. Your ideas are good, but they are already known, now use the common language and rewrite them, or shall I do that for you?

Also, it doesn't matter if this Thomas guy is the founder of the thing, it seems as though he is being worshiped, I don't like that. It honestly seems the blonde lady that is ENFP has more of the theory than anyone I've seen in the videos. At least it seems she knows how it really works in the world, but that is explainable since extraverts have more experience with interactions while introverts tend to sit back and watch as things unfold in their heads. Enough of my rant, time to do what I said I would do about half way through the thread :D
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
INFJs are super-rare, except...

Clinton, Bill
Cronkite, Walter
Day, Dorothy
Denver, John
Einstein, Albert
Farrakhan, Louis
Gray, John
Harrison, George
Hillman, James
Jung, Carl
Kacynski, Ted [fuck yeah \m/]
Kent, Corita
Landers, Ann
Lennon, John
McCartney, Paul
Morris, Errol
Mother Teresa
Presley, Elvis
Pryor, Richard
Shah, Idries
Shatner, William
Sheldrake, Rupert
Simon, Paul
Springsteen, Bruce
Walker, Alice
Wright, Frank Lloyd

Most of everyone you know is INFJ! Yeah. Now I understand why I've always felt so misunderstood.

---

Btw this is 26 out of 49 people listed in Lenore Thomson's Personality Types that Pod'lair has typed Nai'Xyy. So, assuming that the sampling is somewhat random, either the majority of famous people in general are Nai'Xyy because this type has a tendency towards being prominent in society, OR their model is specifically designed in such a way so as to accommodate the most popular, revolutionary, interesting, artistic, scientific people as Nai'Xyy, because Thomas wants to be the same type as the best of the best.

So they've developed a methodology of predicting if someone is likely to do something great then?

Well, that's pretty cool in itself, in my opinion.

Do you have any evidence that their methods are inconsistent, or otherwise misleading in some fundamental way?
 

terraxceles

Fufufufu.
Local time
Tomorrow 1:21 AM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
148
---
Do you have any evidence that their methods are inconsistent, or otherwise misleading in some fundamental way?

Not in any quantifiable way. I mean, if they see the cues, then there's no way to argue around it, but if they still use these definitions (or similar) for cognitive functions then it's possible to argue that the cues don't map up to the functions they claim they do.

For example, dark's posts above are too blarrghghggh wordy, spontaneous, within-the-moment brainstorming to be anything but Ne, yet Podlair claims he is Nai'Xyy. Does not compute.
 

Puffy

"Wtf even was that"
Local time
Today 9:21 PM
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
3,859
---
Location
Path with heart
INFJs are super-rare, except...

Clinton, Bill
Cronkite, Walter
Day, Dorothy
Denver, John
Einstein, Albert
Farrakhan, Louis
Gray, John
Harrison, George
Hillman, James
Jung, Carl
Kacynski, Ted
Kent, Corita
Landers, Ann
Lennon, John
McCartney, Paul
Morris, Errol
Mother Teresa
Presley, Elvis
Pryor, Richard
Shah, Idries
Shatner, William
Sheldrake, Rupert
Simon, Paul
Springsteen, Bruce
Walker, Alice
Wright, Frank Lloyd


John Lennon, Paul McCartney AND George Harrison. I guess that's why Ringo only ever got to write one song for them :P

But seriously, how could they have stayed together for so long :D
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
Dark is not convinced of anything. All the typologies now agree that I run on NTFS. For anything else, I am 100% unsure of everything. I only say okay tell me more because PL now shows me what I can intuitively see about myself that I run on NTFS, but explains it in their manner of speaking.

What I am, I still don't know. In my mind, if I run on NT for the top two regardless of the dominate and auxiliary, I am NT but maybe in a different sense. To plainly state it, I still know nothing, no more than I previously did, but at least PL is making more logical sense, that doesn't mean it is right though.
 

mainiac

Member
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
48
---
Sounds to me like your are stepping out side of the dogma of maine stream science and it is not being recieved well in some circles. GOOD FOR YOU! There should be more just like you. One day this false dogma that states that inventors like yourselfs are not worthy of attention only ridicule will find that they themselfs will be swept away and not heeded by anyone.

I see that sometimes to save their collective hides, these guys start to fall into line over something that they previously ridiculed knowing that if they dont do something soon they will look like even greater fools than they alreay are!
 

mainiac

Member
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
48
---
When I posted the first reply I didnt rwlaize that this is a marketing ploy with the end result to make money. If this is the case then I agree with the post that stated you better be careful less a better organized and smarter consortium or individual comes along and profits big time with all your hard work. What I find of value is when I person presents an interesting idea with nothing more than speaking his mind and that idea being far removed and found offensible by maine stream science.

As soon as profit is invoved I can no longer believe or sympathise with any ones idea for its just another sales pitch.
 

Cavallier

Oh damn.
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
3,639
---
I blame this thread for the site exceeding it's bandwidth for the month.

There. I said it. You know you were all thinking the same thing.
:D;)
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
Not in any quantifiable way. I mean, if they see the cues, then there's no way to argue around it, but if they still use these definitions (or similar) for cognitive functions then it's possible to argue that the cues don't map up to the functions they claim they do.

For example, dark's posts above are too blarrghghggh wordy, spontaneous, within-the-moment brainstorming to be anything but Ne, yet Podlair claims he is Nai'Xyy. Does not compute.

They don't really have to be able to frame their model in terms of how we typically think of the functions. All they need is a) internal consistency and b) the ability to make predictions based on the model.

If they're seeing cues that can be modelled in the same way that the 16 types have been so far, i.e. with cues basically corresponding to each of the four dichotomies, to function pairs, to the nature of the leading function, then that really is proof of concept for their model in my view. You can always supplement this with socionics, and that may be useful in its own right, but if they've found something, they've found something.

You'll need to be able to quantify some sort of inconsistency with their model, since saying that it doesn't match up 100% with our notions of the functions so far doesn't really mean much.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,180
---
Location
Anaheim, CA
INFJs are super-rare, except...

Clinton, Bill
Cronkite, Walter
Day, Dorothy
Denver, John
Einstein, Albert
Farrakhan, Louis
Gray, John
Harrison, George
Hillman, James
Jung, Carl
Kacynski, Ted
Kent, Corita
Landers, Ann
Lennon, John
McCartney, Paul
Morris, Errol
Mother Teresa
Presley, Elvis
Pryor, Richard
Shah, Idries
Shatner, William
Sheldrake, Rupert
Simon, Paul
Springsteen, Bruce
Walker, Alice
Wright, Frank Lloyd

Most of everyone you know is INFJ! Yeah. Now I understand why I've always felt so misunderstood.

---

Btw this is 26 out of 49 people listed in Lenore Thomson's Personality Types that Pod'lair has typed Nai'Xyy. So, assuming that the sampling is somewhat random, either the majority of famous people in general are Nai'Xyy because this type has a tendency towards being prominent in society, OR their model is specifically designed in such a way so as to accommodate the most popular, revolutionary, interesting, artistic, scientific people as Nai'Xyy, because Thomas wants to be the same type as the best of the best.

I personally think the latter is more likely, but hey...

We are not talking about INFJs, we are talking about Nai'xyy. Do you want to understand our theory? Then stop thinking it works exactly the same way as MBTI, it is just going to keep you confused. Nai'xyy only correlates to INFJ in a purely theoretical sense. In other words, what an INFJ should be if you had a proper understanding of how Cognitive configuration works, should amount to a Nai'xyy. But due to the fact that you have a very poor and limited understanding of how Cognitive Configuration actually works, caused by using an immensely flawed theory, then that creature that pops into your head when you think "INFJ" is not a Nai'xyy, you still have no idea what a Nai'xyy actually is.

Nobody in Pod'Lair ever claimed the Nai'xyy are the rarest of all configurations, again, you keep insisting that we are talking about MBTI here. INFJs being the rarest is an MBTI statistic, measured with the MBTI test, which is a completely retarded test even by your own standards. It is still beyond me as to why you are still taking that statistic seriously knowing full well how horribly inaccurate those tests are, but to think that it also applies to a completely different theory that doesn't even work the same way, is utterly asinine.

Yes the Nai Alpha are one of the most well represented in the mainstream media, this is just what our data is showing. Now I can give you an explanation as to why this phenomenon is occurring, but no matter how adequate you believe my explanation is, it is not the explanation that makes this true, it is the fact that this phenomenon is occurring, and our data is reflecting this.

Nai Alphas are extremely well represented in the data samples that we are using (which is very mainstream and famous), that is not a reason to doubt the methodology, because there is absolutely no reason that you should assume that Configurations are supposed to be evenly distributed across the board. As a matter of fact, I would say this is more of a proof of concept, because seeing configurtations clumped in areas actually make way more sense then having them evenly distributed everywhere like the MBTI thinks they are.

Lastly, and most importantly, this is just what the data is showing, and your feelings about this data is completely irrelevant to if it is true of not.

To think that you should deny something simply under the pretense that you don't like what it implies is complete disgrace to the acquisition of Knowledge. The truth is not dictated by your feelings, nor is it dictated by your ability to make sense of this truth.

If the evidence is showing a pattern, then it is your duty to understand what that pattern means, or why it is occurring, not go "Ewwww, that can't be right!", because there is no higher authority than the evidence.

If it is true, and it is, then that means you have a lot to learn if you were unable to foresee it, and you do.

Not in any quantifiable way. I mean, if they see the cues, then there's no way to argue around it, but if they still use these definitions (or similar) for cognitive functions then it's possible to argue that the cues don't map up to the functions they claim they do.

For example, dark's posts above are too blarrghghggh wordy, spontaneous, within-the-moment brainstorming to be anything but Ne, yet Podlair claims he is Nai'Xyy. Does not compute.

*Epic Facepalm*

A written description is one of the lowest forms of understanding there is. You can't expect a person to understand what sex is like if all you did is describe it to them in a small amount of words. Natural Phenomena are ineffable in there fullest comprehension, and in that same way, you could never expect a person to be able to identify Nyy accurately just by giving a very short description of what it is like, you actually have to see the real Nyy doing what it does, and if you can't read people, then you cannot do that.

I could write an entire book on Nyy alone, and it would still not truly capture it, so describing a phenomenon in a similar way as someone else most certainly does not mean you believe it to be the same things. Especially considering your understanding is nothing more than descriptions, and we could actually point out the real phenomenon, as phenomenon that is as organic as life itself.

Furthermore, regardless of our basic descriptions being similar, you are still not taking into the consideration the fact that when you add together an entire configuration of four conscious powers, the resultant is a human that can do and learn to do almost anything that any other human can do.

So if you see a human improvising or speaking off the cuff, then that does not mean they must automagically have Nyy as a conscious power, because there is no reason to assume that a Nai user cannot do what Dark is doing. You are basically suggesting that a Nai user cannot improvise, cannot brainstorm, and cannot speak in a stream of consciousness fashion, and if that was the truth, then up to half of the human population would be severely crippled, and simply put, mother nature is just not that fucking retarded.

This is exactly why you get those cognitive functions test people saying "I use both Ni and Ne equally"

These people are mistaken because they are doing the exact same thing you are doing, they are calling an activity a Cognitive function, when said activity can actually be performed by any human with any configuration.

As a matter of Fact, Nai itself is highly inventive and speculative which actually does yield many of the exact same characteristics that YOU are attributing to being Nyy exclusive. It is structured, but the fact the Nai simulator is an interpretive simulator, creates a randomness element to its speculations.

This is why MBTI, or any of the other Jungian models are irrevocably flawed, because they are all built on static assumptions on how functions and configurations are supposed to work, but they have no way of knowing or proving if these assumptions are correct to begin with, or if they are correct some of the time, and other times not, and when those times are, they are unfalsifiable assumptions. You NEED an to work with an objective standard, which is what you get with Mojo Reading to not fall into that pitfall.

Even if you are one of the more experience people on this forum and looking at the way I have corrected Terraxceles thinking "I already knew that," still you are bound to nothing more than a whole model of static assumptions, with no objective proof to set the records straight in anyway. This is why all MBTI/Jungian forums are just made up of eternal debate cycles, with no potential for natural law being discovered.

Dark is in no way acting in a way that his configuration, the Nai'xyy, is not "supposed to" act. There is no way that anyone of any configuration is "supposed to" act, and if you are only seeing Cognitive configuration in terms of what is possible/impossible for them to do, then you are just labeling people, and nothing about the real natural phenomenon will ever be learned.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,180
---
Location
Anaheim, CA
When I posted the first reply I didnt rwlaize that this is a marketing ploy with the end result to make money. If this is the case then I agree with the post that stated you better be careful less a better organized and smarter consortium or individual comes along and profits big time with all your hard work. What I find of value is when I person presents an interesting idea with nothing more than speaking his mind and that idea being far removed and found offensible by maine stream science.

As soon as profit is invoved I can no longer believe or sympathise with any ones idea for its just another sales pitch.
Im sorry, what?

Where did you get the idea that this was a marketing ploy, because there is really no reason to think that at all.

Not only are we offering People Reading training for free, we are also giving out our Ebooks for free. If this is all for a profit then we would naturally be doing thinks a lot differently.

At the moment, we are making absolutely no money off of this, actually we are losing money on it, in fact. Even in the future, any monetizing done will not be for the sake of making fat stacks of dough, it will be because in this system income is required to expand. And Expanding means being able to have access to better facilities, technology to quantify our theory, and produce more and better quality goodies for you all.

Your first reply to this thread had the right idea, I'm glad you understand.
 

alrai

Banned
Local time
Today 9:21 PM
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
124
---
Location
Leicester
We are not talking about INFJs, we are talking about Nai'xyy. Do you want to understand our theory? Then stop thinking it works exactly the same way as MBTI, it is just going to keep you confused. Nai'xyy only correlates to INFJ in a purely theoretical sense. In other words, what an INFJ should be if you had a proper understanding of how Cognitive configuration works, should amount to a Nai'xyy. But due to the fact that you have a very poor and limited understanding of how Cognitive Configuration actually works, caused by using an immensely flawed theory, then that creature that pops into your head when you think "INFJ" is not a Nai'xyy, you still have no idea what a Nai'xyy actually is.

Nobody in Pod'Lair ever claimed the Nai'xyy are the rarest of all configurations, again, you keep insisting that we are talking about MBTI here. INFJs being the rarest is an MBTI statistic, measured with the MBTI test, which is a completely retarded test even by your own standards. It is still beyond me as to why you are still taking that statistic seriously knowing full well how horribly inaccurate those tests are, but to think that it also applies to a completely different theory that doesn't even work the same way, is utterly asinine.

Yes the Nai Alpha are one of the most well represented in the mainstream media, this is just what our data is showing. Now I can give you an explanation as to why this phenomenon is occurring, but no matter how adequate you believe my explanation is, it is not the explanation that makes this true, it is the fact that this phenomenon is occurring, and our data is reflecting this.

Nai Alphas are extremely well represented in the data samples that we are using (which is very mainstream and famous), that is not a reason to doubt the methodology, because there is absolutely no reason that you should assume that Configurations are supposed to be evenly distributed across the board. As a matter of fact, I would say this is more of a proof of concept, because seeing configurtations clumped in areas actually make way more sense then having them evenly distributed everywhere like the MBTI thinks they are.

Lastly, and most importantly, this is just what the data is showing, and your feelings about this data is completely irrelevant to if it is true of not.

To think that you should deny something simply under the pretense that you don't like what it implies is complete disgrace to the acquisition of Knowledge. The truth is not dictated by your feelings, nor is it dictated by your ability to make sense of this truth.

If the evidence is showing a pattern, then it is your duty to understand what that pattern means, or why it is occurring, not go "Ewwww, that can't be right!", because there is no higher authority than the evidence.

If it is true, and it is, then that means you have a lot to learn if you were unable to foresee it, and you do.



*Epic Facepalm*

A written description is one of the lowest forms of understanding there is. You can't expect a person to understand what sex is like if all you did is describe it to them in a small amount of words. Natural Phenomena are ineffable in there fullest comprehension, and in that same way, you could never expect a person to be able to identify Nyy accurately just by giving a very short description of what it is like, you actually have to see the real Nyy doing what it does, and if you can't read people, then you cannot do that.

I could write an entire book on Nyy alone, and it would still not truly capture it, so describing a phenomenon in a similar way as someone else most certainly does not mean you believe it to be the same things. Especially considering your understanding is nothing more than descriptions, and we could actually point out the real phenomenon, as phenomenon that is as organic as life itself.

Furthermore, regardless of our basic descriptions being similar, you are still not taking into the consideration the fact that when you add together an entire configuration of four conscious powers, the resultant is a human that can do and learn to do almost anything that any other human can do.

So if you see a human improvising or speaking off the cuff, then that does not mean they must automagically have Nyy as a conscious power, because there is no reason to assume that a Nai user cannot do what Dark is doing. You are basically suggesting that a Nai user cannot improvise, cannot brainstorm, and cannot speak in a stream of consciousness fashion, and if that was the truth, then up to half of the human population would be severely crippled, and simply put, mother nature is just not that fucking retarded.

This is exactly why you get those cognitive functions test people saying "I use both Ni and Ne equally"

These people are mistaken because they are doing the exact same thing you are doing, they are calling an activity a Cognitive function, when said activity can actually be performed by any human with any configuration.

As a matter of Fact, Nai itself is highly inventive and speculative which actually does yield many of the exact same characteristics that YOU are attributing to being Nyy exclusive. It is structured, but the fact the Nai simulator is an interpretive simulator, creates a randomness element to its speculations.

This is why MBTI, or any of the other Jungian models are irrevocably flawed, because they are all built on static assumptions on how functions and configurations are supposed to work, but they have no way of knowing or proving if these assumptions are correct to begin with, or if they are correct some of the time, and other times not, and when those times are, they are unfalsifiable assumptions. You NEED an to work with an objective standard, which is what you get with Mojo Reading to not fall into that pitfall.

Even if you are one of the more experience people on this forum and looking at the way I have corrected Terraxceles thinking "I already knew that," still you are bound to nothing more than a whole model of static assumptions, with no objective proof to set the records straight in anyway. This is why all MBTI/Jungian forums are just made up of eternal debate cycles, with no potential for natural law being discovered.

Dark is in no way acting in a way that his configuration, the Nai'xyy, is not "supposed to" act. There is no way that anyone of any configuration is "supposed to" act, and if you are only seeing Cognitive configuration in terms of what is possible/impossible for them to do, then you are just labeling people, and nothing about the real natural phenomenon will ever be learned.

woah! deep breaths, usssaaahhhh. people are allowed to have different opinions, your thoughts are also subjective, disagreeing should never be a problem, at worst, we should agree to disagree.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,180
---
Location
Anaheim, CA
woah! deep breaths, usssaaahhhh. people are allowed to have different opinions, your thoughts are also subjective, disagreeing should never be a problem, at worst, we should agree to disagree.
Your thought being an opinion does not give it a free pass from criticism, there is no reason as to why I should stand idly by and let someone spread misinformation about our work, regardless of its disposition being "just an opinion."

EDIT: Maybe you haven't been on this forum when I was more active here, but that is kind of just my style, man. My Cognitive configuration is spec'ed to go deep when explaining one's incorrectness, and I proudly do that very very well.
 

kibou

Member
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
93
---
@terraceles -
On INFJs not being listed as rare in Pod'Lair:

Pod'Lair doesn't make a claim that Nai'xyy are rare, like MBTI claims about INFJs. Nai'xyy are about as common as most other mojos in the general population. Certain mojos, including the Nai'xyy, are more prominent in certain fields, especially ones in the public eye. There are many specific reasons why mojo distribution isn't the same in the general population as in fields with high prominence, which we talk about quite often in Pod'Lair, and will be mentioned in the free Nai'xyy E-Book we are releasing in the future.

@Cavallier I thought the same thing - sounds like Pod'Lair is controversial but at least interesting to think about XD

@mainiac On Pod'Lair eventually making products that are sold:

mainiac, if you "can no longer believe or sympathise with any ones idea" when "profit is involved", then you would have to hold the same position to MBTI as you would to Pod'Lair for this. MBTI IS a commercial product, they sell lots of products not only to counselors and individuals, but also to corporations to help productivity. As for Pod'Lair making money products, the way we officially state it is blunt, but it really isn't any more moneymaking than other psychological resources like Isabel Myers' MBTI. Actually, Pod'Lair overwhelmingly releases its products for free, and has near future plans to. All 3 upcoming E-Books that we are making, including 1000 celebrity sample reads, are going to be released to the public for FREE! Part of the reason we have a members-area is because we are creating solid products for the public to look at, such as the upcoming E-Books.
 

kibou

Member
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
93
---
@dark

Phew Dark (and others who are interested in understanding what PL's actual positions and statistics are on stuff), I hope you're ready to take a big Nai-style dive cuz my answer is really long! But I know there's a lot of stuff to sort out and I wrote this in hopes that it really will be useful for your understanding of what PL has to say on this, cuz I really think you are open to taking a gulp with this information and seeing how you digest it, rather than throwing it into the trash cuz it looks like Indian-Chinese fusion food XD

Here we go!


Hmm dark, when talking about Pod'Lair observations let's use PL terms because it really is different. For example, you are telling me statistics that are MBTI statistics that PL has completely different positions on, based on our statistics from observing and reading thousands of people. I'll use some new PL terms and mention the rough corrolary in MBTI and explain new terms, but I really need you to know that the data we've gathered is completely different from MBTI statistics done through self-assessments. Also, if we are going by PL's statistics (so Nai'xyy rather than INFJ), your reads are most likely off, actually it's very unlikely those people you're talking about are literals (sensors in MBTI) for many reasons, a # which will be mentioned in the upcoming Mojo Case Studies E-Book. =) So when we are talking about PL's positions on these things, we inevitably also have to talk about what statistics PL has observed based on its forensic system of mojo reading.

INFJs:
I've been part of both MBTI and Pod'Lair at different points, so I've seen many people's mojos (including some people on this forum) in Pod'Lair VS what they identify with in MBTI. For the INFJs, I have frequently seen Nai'xyy (~INFJ), Nyy'xai (MBTI rough corrolary ~ ENFP), Nai'zyy (~INTJ), some Xai'nyy (~INFP). What about for INTPs? A LOT of Nai'xyy, quite many Nyy'xai (believe it or not), etc. What about for ESTPs? A lot of Nai'xyy, Xyy'nai (~ENFJ), and so on. Quite a lot of MBTI ESTJs, especially the ones on online forums, are Nyy'xai and Xai'nyy. I don't really want to post on here but if you really want to study this stuff, we can look at videos together online in PM or Gmail and the like.

There are a # of reasons why using your values-based power ("F"), Xyy, (~Fe) and Vyy (~Se) is exhausting for you, although not for all Nai'xyy. (Actually, quite a lot of Nai'xyy don't like to identify in particular with their Xyy, ESPECIALLY among the straight male Nai'xyy.)

1. Xyy is quite a lot of work for general for Nai'xyy, even though it's on their Momentum side. All Nai'xyy have differing degrees of HSP (wiki it), which is more obvious when using Momentum side powers. Both Nai and Xyy are very intense powers, and for Nai'xyy, the Xyy is also very selective (this comes both from being Nai alpha ("IN_J") and being Subjective Directive ["I__Js"]). Nai'xyy Xyy has many fantastical qualities and tends to prefer projecting itself into art rather than people, and when it's projected into people, the conversation and the interaction has a more artistic, often performance-like quality (this is part of why Nai'xyy are overprominent in fields which require masterful, charismatic oration). Many many Nai'xyy use their Minor Modulation to their Offside ("tertiary function") Zai (~Ti) to stabilize their system and not let both the intensity of the Nai and the hypersensitivity and selectiveness of their Xyy throw their psyche all over the place. This often becomes a lifestyle and is done at a pretty early age. When this is overdone and becomes a lifestyle, the Nai'xyy gets used to the lower amount of energy in their system (compared to if they flowed through all their powers in a non-obtrusive way), thinks of Xyy as "tiresome", "hypersensitive" (because it increases the HSP, which if it's not channeled or used right just turns into telegraphed nervousness), etc. The Zai feels very strong, like armor, because it is reactive (like Xai/~Fi), and has a very concrete, yes/no true/false quality to it. It is very good for helping use the Nai and the Xyy masterfully, but if it's used to escape the hypersensitivity of the Momentum side of the Nai'xyy, that causes Faux Zen, a habitual lifestyle of reduced energy that the person thinks is normal. Using so much Zai, it probably feels even more like the Xyy is a more "draining" power for you but it's actually not, it's draining because you don't trust yourself to use it as successfully and you don't have as much experience using it in a way where you're rewarded for it. For example, if you use Xyy to put down innocent people and your Xyy realizes that, you will experience a drain; or for example, if you're using your Xyy sensitivity to intuitively observe the relational dynamics in a social situation and feel inclined to say something but you hold yourself and keep yourself reserved (Xyy wants to move FORWARD as an Objective Discernment), this will cause you to feel "drained" even if you're using Xyy because you aren't fulfilling Xyy's agenda of structuring the external dynamics in a values-based way (the holding back actually is done through Zai). Same with giving a speech or a musical performance, which is very much Nai being channeled into Xyy - your performance has to connect to people for the power to be rewarded (by fulfilling the power's agenda).

Also, Xyy and Xai are very different and might be easiest to learn separately. Either way, Dark, you have Xyy, and Nai'xyy Xyy on top of that (which has a particular orating-like quality and prefers one-on-one interaction or "monologue-style", even in art), so that is the values-based power you want to understand first to understand PL's view on this better.

2. Yes, using too much Zai as a Nai'xyy will make you not trust your Momentum side Nai & Xyy intuitive people-reading judgments. People-reading, especially as a Nai'xyy, is very similar to the process of "intuiting art". Often, in this pro-scientific world, we only allow ourselves to use non-logical processes (at least "officially") when we are judging something we consider subjective, like whether we like a piece of art or not. At that point, we might allow ourselves to space out into the art, just absorbing, percolating, seeing "how do I feel about this?" This "how do I feel?" and feeling empty inside is a very very Nai thing - Nai needs to detach from its present assumptions to work, which gives it a very "Yin" quality that gets mistaken for Adaptive (~___P) in its early phases (if Nai is flowed through effectively it later takes on a very Directive style). One of the really confusing things for Nai'xyy is even though they're values-based, they often feel very cold inside...Nai likes to detach from present environment and assumptions and Zai is the other Subjective ("I") power, this creates a very cold world inside, and a hypersensitive nervous energy style (unless channeled into things like speech or overmodulated) on the outside world. Many many Nai'xyy relate to Nai and Zai but not to their Xyy (especially going all out with Xyy), because it makes them feel weak and sensitive and nervous, lots of adrenaline pumping in the body.

3. For the people you're saying are INFJs and INTJs, honestly, we'd have to mojo read them for me to give you the answer. One thing we've found is people new to Pod'Lair or in early training stages get really inaccurate reads with mojo configurations, and in general, even trained readers have the hardest time accurately, objectively (through forensic evidence) correctly reading mojo configurations of people they know or are personally involved with. The degree people project traits onto other people they don't want to associate with themselves is enormous - that's why it's actually more typical than untypical that you complain about the manipulativeness of INFJs - these traits, especially the Xyy, which discerns and structures the external environment through values-based discernment probably seems overly controlling, judgmental, irrational, manipulative, etc - I also didn't want to identify with Xyy for a while, even when I realized I was a values-based mojo, because I saw a lot of people, especially guys, use it badly, in a way that's untactfully pushy and coersive, bullyish. Xyy can just as easily be used to be gentle and make people feel cared about and safe. However Xyy for Nai'xyy increases their hypersensitivity a lot and at first (without proper experience) makes you feel really moody and like you're out of control with your emotions - like one thing easily sets you off and so on. Nai'xyy's Xyy without maturity feels like it has serious anger problems toward really random things in the world ("triggers") which is why most Nai'xyy end up Zai'ing up too much after they had a bad experience where they really lost their temper, and wow they really lost it when they did!

4. Your mojo doesn't change, but you can alter your development, and you can definitely change how you use it. It's like your body, you can build muscles, become more flexible, less flexible, but the size of your bones are still the same. If you pull a muscle badly, unless you go to a chiropractor to have it fixed, you will have that muscle continously in the pulled position, but it isn't the way it naturally is, and it doesn't have to be that way - neither is it the most effective, natural position to be in. You are a Nai'xyy so the most momentous way to use your powers is to start with your Nai, and the channel that into your Xyy, then channel that into your Zai, then channel that into your Vyy. Thinking your function order is NTFS goes against this order, and it's why you don't have as much directive energy and energy in general as you could if you allowed your powers to flow better. Are you familiar with the psychology concept of "Flow"? This correct use of your powers, which we call "Peak Pathways" (another Pod'Lair unique discipline) is basically "good flow". What allows for "good flow" is different for different people, this is because they have different mojo configurations and different development. For example, in your case, you wouldn't just want to use more Xyy, you want to allow yourself to trust it and learn to use it in better flow. Learning to trust it is like learning to trust your instincts when playing an effective improvisatory solo on an instrument, or doing a backflip, you need to prepare your mind in a way that gives you good flow, so you don't doubt in the middle of your backflip jump and end up falling on your back. I know this all sounds like hot air right now, but even within a couple months, we could work on this and if you record yourself on camera throughout those months, if you are developing those powers more I guarantee you will have higher energy and your mind will be generating stuff with more creative intensity. Your speech will have more charismatic, persuasive qualities that many people around you (especially the well-developed ones) will pick up as charismatic, and actually, "more you"! This is because we really do look more natural when we are using our momentum powers, and flowing them into our modulation powers through our natural Peak Pathways. It's the whole "just be yourself, man!" - it's just with Nai'xyy, often "ourselves" is such a tremendously confusing thing (it comes with being Nai alpha) that it takes a lifetime of self-exploration to understand what our "selves" are, and that we do indeed, have a "self" under all those different "personas" that we've played throughout our life and discarded.


On different configurations:


Based on Pod'Lair's physiological observations, there are only 16 inherent mojo configurations. These are configurations that DON'T change throughout a person's lifetime, ie, even with different developments, if you show a high-level PL reader a video of someone when they were 14 versus 30 years old, the read still gives the same mojo. Development can alter tremendously over the course of a lifetime, but it's still the development of that particular mojo. You really start to see the truth of this when you see different playing styles of the same mojo, or know several people who are confirmed by a high-level reader that they aree the same mojo as you: there will be lots of really uncanny similarities on a very elemental level, that feels really weird when the other person has had a very different life or social upbringing (for example, scientist VS super-religious home). You can start to see past the "scientist must mean logic-based, super-religious must mean values-based" stereotypes, and see underneath all of that, what people are really doing. You can use Zai in religion, you can use it in science, it's still Zai. You really start to realize on a nuanced level what Zai really means, on a human, experiential, "my own life" level. =)

^but to do this, you need accurate reads in the first place. When I say Nai'xyy, it should be noted that almost none of the people that MBTI would call "INFJ" are Nai'xyy - they are more often than not, NOT Nai'xyy. So to observe this, you would have to observe it based on good Pod'Lair readings, which I'm willing to help with people who are seeking to understand this system better. I think you are definitely trying to understand this better, Dark, in your own very Nai'xyy way, hahah - I see a lot of similarities with the way I think and I sympathize, which is why I'm taking my time giving such an indepth explanation here to answer some of your major questions ;)

Literals (~Sensors) and Interpretives (~Intuitives):
Overmodulation and Mojo:


Based on Pod'Lair statistics, the distribution between literals mojos and interpretives are about 50/50, in contrast to MBTI's (which ranges depending on the source but goes down to even 20% intuitive, 80% sensor). The main reason why there is a discrepancy in self-identification is because Interpretives tend to be overmodulated, including ones that rarely use their interpretive power...this can get really bad, because this is what we call "stress lock", where you have a permanently pulled psyche muscle, and you tend to suffer from not being able to make enough energy on your own ,and in result wanting to be passive-aggressive or even punish people who aren't doing the same as you, or are generating lots of energy successfully. Many interpretives and also values-based males tend to overmodulate their Offside ("tertiary function") to the point of stress-lock, this isn't unique to Nai'xyy but TONS of Nai'xyy do it. As crazy as this sounds, the majority of Interpretives are overmodulated to varying extents with the interpretive and values-based mojos getting hit the worst, there are a lot of not-great-energy not-very-happy people out there.

According to Pod'Lair's forensic method of mojo reading, there is a huge discrepancy in which mojos tend to have more people who are stress-locked or overmodulated, as well as which mojos tend to suffer from underdevelopment (because they never modulate, so they never learn to modulate in an effective way...if modulating ineffectively, that leads towards overmodulation or stresslock, if modulating effectively, that leads towards good development which makes you a more powerful person capable of doing more things). This is the very different results we get from MBTI because we have found a physiologically consistent way of reading innate configuration, no matter how overmodulated or differently the person is using their mojo compared to their Peak Pathway (the most energizing way to use your mojo configuration).


Freakout factor when people discover their Mojo:
- Misidentifying one's own mojo -
- Why do Interpretives ("N"s) so frequently misread their own mojo configuration?

This is also why there's a freakout factor with learning Pod'Lair, once you start to really realize how people are using their powers by seeing these cues and seeing how people are using their systems, realizing how many people are stresslocked, are in denial about how they actually work (adamantly saying they are "neutral and simply logical" when even non-people-readers can see they are clearly hypersensitive people), and then you view yourself on video and you can actually see for yourself what you're currently doing effectively and what you could be doing in a way that rewards yourself better with energy, what you could be doing in a way that doesn't punish yourself for doing things in a sensitive way...well there's a lot of freakout for that, especially for mojos like Nai'xyy that are used to wearing so many different social cloths, often self-aware of the different social roles they feel, feeling quite empty inside and confused about their "real" self-identify, to see empirically what you're doing by looking at your own face, remembering what was going on in your mind when you were doing those things with your face and talking about those things, and then realizing what exactly it means, experientially, to be using Nai, to be using Zai modulation, and so on. It's a lot to take in and you need to have a strong taste for detaching from your present assumptions of yourself and observing, observing!

This freakout factor causes a lot of people who are not so self-aware (ie metaphysically looking at themselves in the mirror) to potentially get really defensive and flip out into troll mode. I'm telling this to you Dark cuz even though you might not identify with Nai'xyy, I think you're on your Momentum side enough and self-aware enough that even though thinking of this possibility causes mental transition, it's one that can & and you're willing to make sense to you. People literally have flipped out on us for simply telling them their mojo, not even telling them of their current development and what exactly they're doing in their videos - some people work very, very hard to not admit to themselves what gives them energy and what requires obsessiveness to do well. I know in my own life too, I rarely like telling people their mojos unless they're on their Momentum side or are peaking through all their powers through their Peak Pathways (in which case they're really doing Momentum and Modulation at the same time, with the energy level of being on the Momentum side...an awesome thing to experience!), because it's about as comfortable for most people as being told the current state of their physical fitness & health and how they aesthetically come off to others. But like actors who are willing to watch themselves on camera while staying sensitively observant, the people who are willing to look at themselves in the mirror and not look away, not staying attached to the image they have inside their heads...those people will become very strong, they will develop themselves very quickly. Phew that's a lot of metaphors but I hope your Nai and Xyy enjoys them and gets the Zai principle that I'm getting across through the Nai & Xyy example =P ;)


PS: Near's character wasn't really full-blooded enough for me to get a clear sense, but he's very similar to L and *could* be another Nai'xyy with heavy Zai (actually, the way they draw their faces kinda has that look to it too, which is really observant of the artist, to emulate the same human observations we're making). Light is very characteristically Nai'xyy, but in a very different style to L. In fact, Death Note itself (to the author's credit) points out the underlying similarity between Light and L, despite their seemingly opposite characteristics - didn't the wife of Raye Penbar who knew both L and Light mention that Light reminded her of L? Death Note's author is illustrating an observation that Pod'Lair has noted as well, through artistic observation (essentially people-reading in its own right) - that even with these two very different archetypes of characters, the way they are innately wired, the way their system's energy, priority, motivations, flow works, is actually very similar to each other. =)

PPS: Adymus, the end of your last post (right above mine) has some awesome awesome polar Xyy. Humor is such an awesome demonstration of Xyy powers XD
 

dark

Bring this savage back home.
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
901
---
I haven't read anything past alrai's last post, and I must say, you should never say, "Let us agree to disagree," that is an insult to an intellectual debate. It really is, I have a text book that says so. A person that says that, is the greatest enemy to the truth, at least my text book says so. I'll post more on that tomorrow after I wake up, just had a nice night playing D&D for the first time. I played a Dwarven Knight defender build, was a lot of fun.
 

kibou

Member
Local time
Today 4:21 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
93
---
@dark that sounds like a lot of fun =D I don't play a lot of videogames anymore because like anime, whenever I start it eats up all of my time, but it is an awesome thing to be able to float around in a fantasy world, I think it can really stimulate the imagination =)
 

terraxceles

Fufufufu.
Local time
Tomorrow 1:21 AM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
148
---
We are not talking about INFJs, we are talking about Nai'xyy. Do you want to understand our theory? Then stop thinking it works exactly the same way as MBTI, it is just going to keep you confused. Nai'xyy only correlates to INFJ in a purely theoretical sense. In other words, what an INFJ should be if you had a proper understanding of how Cognitive configuration works, should amount to a Nai'xyy. But due to the fact that you have a very poor and limited understanding of how Cognitive Configuration actually works, caused by using an immensely flawed theory, then that creature that pops into your head when you think "INFJ" is not a Nai'xyy, you still have no idea what a Nai'xyy actually is.

Nobody in Pod'Lair ever claimed the Nai'xyy are the rarest of all configurations, again, you keep insisting that we are talking about MBTI here. INFJs being the rarest is an MBTI statistic, measured with the MBTI test, which is a completely retarded test even by your own standards. It is still beyond me as to why you are still taking that statistic seriously knowing full well how horribly inaccurate those tests are, but to think that it also applies to a completely different theory that doesn't even work the same way, is utterly asinine.

Yes the Nai Alpha are one of the most well represented in the mainstream media, this is just what our data is showing. Now I can give you an explanation as to why this phenomenon is occurring, but no matter how adequate you believe my explanation is, it is not the explanation that makes this true, it is the fact that this phenomenon is occurring, and our data is reflecting this.

Nai Alphas are extremely well represented in the data samples that we are using (which is very mainstream and famous), that is not a reason to doubt the methodology, because there is absolutely no reason that you should assume that Configurations are supposed to be evenly distributed across the board. As a matter of fact, I would say this is more of a proof of concept, because seeing configurtations clumped in areas actually make way more sense then having them evenly distributed everywhere like the MBTI thinks they are.

Lastly, and most importantly, this is just what the data is showing, and your feelings about this data is completely irrelevant to if it is true of not.

To think that you should deny something simply under the pretense that you don't like what it implies is complete disgrace to the acquisition of Knowledge. The truth is not dictated by your feelings, nor is it dictated by your ability to make sense of this truth.

If the evidence is showing a pattern, then it is your duty to understand what that pattern means, or why it is occurring, not go "Ewwww, that can't be right!", because there is no higher authority than the evidence.

If it is true, and it is, then that means you have a lot to learn if you were unable to foresee it, and you do.



*Epic Facepalm*

A written description is one of the lowest forms of understanding there is. You can't expect a person to understand what sex is like if all you did is describe it to them in a small amount of words. Natural Phenomena are ineffable in there fullest comprehension, and in that same way, you could never expect a person to be able to identify Nyy accurately just by giving a very short description of what it is like, you actually have to see the real Nyy doing what it does, and if you can't read people, then you cannot do that.

I could write an entire book on Nyy alone, and it would still not truly capture it, so describing a phenomenon in a similar way as someone else most certainly does not mean you believe it to be the same things. Especially considering your understanding is nothing more than descriptions, and we could actually point out the real phenomenon, as phenomenon that is as organic as life itself.

Furthermore, regardless of our basic descriptions being similar, you are still not taking into the consideration the fact that when you add together an entire configuration of four conscious powers, the resultant is a human that can do and learn to do almost anything that any other human can do.

So if you see a human improvising or speaking off the cuff, then that does not mean they must automagically have Nyy as a conscious power, because there is no reason to assume that a Nai user cannot do what Dark is doing. You are basically suggesting that a Nai user cannot improvise, cannot brainstorm, and cannot speak in a stream of consciousness fashion, and if that was the truth, then up to half of the human population would be severely crippled, and simply put, mother nature is just not that fucking retarded.

This is exactly why you get those cognitive functions test people saying "I use both Ni and Ne equally"

These people are mistaken because they are doing the exact same thing you are doing, they are calling an activity a Cognitive function, when said activity can actually be performed by any human with any configuration.

As a matter of Fact, Nai itself is highly inventive and speculative which actually does yield many of the exact same characteristics that YOU are attributing to being Nyy exclusive. It is structured, but the fact the Nai simulator is an interpretive simulator, creates a randomness element to its speculations.

This is why MBTI, or any of the other Jungian models are irrevocably flawed, because they are all built on static assumptions on how functions and configurations are supposed to work, but they have no way of knowing or proving if these assumptions are correct to begin with, or if they are correct some of the time, and other times not, and when those times are, they are unfalsifiable assumptions. You NEED an to work with an objective standard, which is what you get with Mojo Reading to not fall into that pitfall.

Even if you are one of the more experience people on this forum and looking at the way I have corrected Terraxceles thinking "I already knew that," still you are bound to nothing more than a whole model of static assumptions, with no objective proof to set the records straight in anyway. This is why all MBTI/Jungian forums are just made up of eternal debate cycles, with no potential for natural law being discovered.

Dark is in no way acting in a way that his configuration, the Nai'xyy, is not "supposed to" act. There is no way that anyone of any configuration is "supposed to" act, and if you are only seeing Cognitive configuration in terms of what is possible/impossible for them to do, then you are just labeling people, and nothing about the real natural phenomenon will ever be learned.
No, I have a bigger penis!

Random bullet points inspired by this post.

1. If Nai'Xyy is not INFJ, then your criticism towards Lenore or MBTI or Socionics, is baseless since you are working off of a completely different model that identifies physiological cues before personality types.

2. And if you do not prioritize identifying personality types, then can Podlair be called typology? If it's not a personality theory, why do you keep bringing it up here and comparing it with MBTI and Socionics?
[The only reason I can think why is because it induces curiosity within people, so it is a marketing ploy. But then later you say you have nothing in common with MBTI or Socionics because Podlair is a way of life (or something equally as ridiculous), so that's somewhat deceptive.]
3. And if it is a personality theory first and foremost, then it's a pretty poor model considering people of the same type do not seem to think alike, or act alike, or appear alike, and have nothing in common other than physiological cues, so what exactly are you measuring?

4. Identifying physiological cues in people tells us that you have found a consistent pattern in nature in how people tend to act. However, there is no quantifiable proof that shows that the cues will map up to the functions you say you do throughout the world, within all people of all races, cultures, traditions, upbringings, regions, countries, etc.
I suppose you could show me videos of people giving off certain cues as proof, but this is not really proof at all. This could be evidence if you showed me people of similar personalities giving off similar cues, but bringing people from completely different walks of life and personalities to show me how their cues make them the same type is ludicrously inductive. How do you know if a cue has Ni or Se behind it, other than your telling me "trust me, I know it so?" I don't trust you Adymus, and I don't trust your team of cronies to bring me to light.
5. And if there is quantifiable proof for it, then submit the theory for peer review or at least allow the people to see it for what it is, openly, rather than asking for blind faith and promises for a greater meaning at the end (isn't this how religion works?). Then maybe I could take it seriously.

6. You seem to completely miss the point that there is such a thing as interpretation, and that Podlair is simply an interpretation of a phenomenon. If I reject this interpretation, I'm not rejecting the phenomenon itself or turning a blind eye to it. That's your assumption.
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,298
---
Hostility, you say. The way I see, in the beginning it was very interesting to hear what you said, but there wasn't anywhere others could get more information, and thus they didn't really ask many questions about it. When the site came up, many reacted to the arrogant behaviour both from there and from others behind it. They become more sceptical. They asked you critical questions, which you started to take personal. At the very least, you defended yourself very aggressively. This inspired more scepticism and hostility. But the real sparrows were very few. I also think you applied ill intentions where there were only curiosity. This hasn't seemed to change.

Yes, you did contribute a lot to the forum, and I among others appreciate that. But all I see now is that you still bear a grudge and I don't see how we can bridge the gap if none treat each other with respect. I don't think you understand how powerful a tool respectfulness is. You would have found far more people defending you if you behaved maturely. No knowledge can be seeded from this.


Even Cheese is accused, even though we can all tell he has never been progressively aggressive, arrogant or dismissive. He has been almost annoyingly perfectly open-minded in any debate.


Okay, I just visited the page too, wow.


Emergency / Why Are We Calling People Stupid?


Mass ignorance is reaching epic proportions. People are ignorant. You are likely ignorant. Does that hurt your feelings? Ignorance hurts your fellow humans. If you are a hero, that shouldn’t be news to you, but it should alarm you. We are at war on ignorance and you should be too. The basic definition of ignorance is not knowing something you should know. You were designed and built to do three things that you don’t know how to do:


First Stupid: Most likely you didn’t read yourself right,

Second Stupid: Most likely you didn’t read the people in your life right,
Third Stupid: You don’t even know what that means if you got that right, which you didn’t.

Many people claim to be self aware. Are you aware that you’re stupid? What we have to offer is to “de-stupid” you and de-stupid models out there that are doing Rituals Of Stupid on smart people and contributing to stupidity on a mass scale.


Pod'Lair has now officially lost all respect from me. I was willing to give it a second chance, but seriously? Someone should take a course in marketing and, you know, being grown ups. Really, you don't find anything wrong with that approach?
+1 Well Said..

I had some scraps written up but the thread's moved way too fast for me to keep up, leaving some of them syncopated. Maybe I'll just leave them here in no particular order...

Adymus, do you remember how many pms you recieved when you were advocating Podlair's methodology through a middle-ground before? I bet it's a lot more than what you get now. People liked you a lot, were attracted to you. You had influence. Why? Because people gravitate toward nobler assets of character. Generosity, consideration, patience, respect, helpfulness - things that make a teacher successful. Had you kept that same approach, I am certain you would have dozens more in your ranks.

You are making a completely subjective values statement in telling us what we need to do with our own discovery, just because YOU think it is right to do such and such, just because some guys named their discovery after such and such. You don't get to make that call, no one gets to make that call, and no matter what we choose to do, there is nothing you can do about the outcome. (..) who do you think you are? You are in no position to make demands on how Thomas should use his own theory or name his own discoveries. Thomas did something Jung could not do, and because of that he made a discovery that Jung never made, and thus can (and will) do things with his theory that Jung could never do. Thomas has his own vision that he is going to see to, and he is not bound to follow anyone else's vision. Especially not the guy that was wrong.
So essentially, you're chanting one of a child's favorite chants.
"You can't tell us what to do. We'll do what we want."
Usually, mature people move past that and actually consider opinions outside of their own. I was suggesting changes Podlair could make to further its cause. If you had the openness to accept suggestions you would not have gotten angry, but it seems what makes you upset is the very notion of me suggesting something to you. It is an ego thing. Possessiveness. It's not about whether my suggestion is helpful or not to you is it - you just don't want to give into an outsider's critiques. Podlair must not submit, it must overcome. It must revolutionize. It must dominate. It must conquer. It must overpower. Ego. Ego. Ego.

I don't expect Jung's model to be absolutely flawless. I'm aware it is limited via the lack of the concrete element. Even before Podlair's appearance I knew something was missing and was hoping some empirical link would be made via neuroscience - from which to form a concrete verdict of type.

The fact that Jung didn't hit the mark 100% is not occasion for which to bash his work. As far as I know, no pioneer in any field ever gets it completely right from the start. Should they be scolded because they don't? No.

The first to discover something usually does so with some awkwardness, not being entirely sure what he's discovering. This is to be expected. Then when more progress is made in a field of knowledge, people present their finds and correct the pioneer.

But why is Podlair so upset that Jung didn't map out 'everything'? ..then even saying that Jung's model is a step backward from having no model at all? Seriously, what?

Jung was treading on the psychic component of this whole thing. I agree without referencing some concrete (sure why not, lets call people reading *concrete* for the purpose of this post) or scientific way to map the differences, some errors are made. What would be mature of Podlair to do is stop the "I'm better than you" game and understand it only hurts their cause to do so.

If you could point out something fundamentally different between the cog.functions and pod powers then you might have a valid point. Y'know, like if there was a missing dichotomy (i dunno maybe like Auditory vs Visual) or even if one of the dichotomies didn't really match reality. However, Pod'Lair shares all four dichotomies (S/N/T/F), and the orientation (I/E) which creates a total of 8 psychic processes (Si/Se/Ni/Ne/Ti/Te/Fi/Fe). Not only that, the processes are describing the same thing (Jung often described "F" as values oriented, "T" as logic, "S" as tactile, "N" as pattern-focused). Further more these Eight psychic processes are paired the same way (a judging function + a perceptive function - - of opposite orientations) to form a total of 16 different pairings/types/hierarchies. These are the fundamentals aspects of the cognitive functions.

As far as Pod Powers and Mojos go (I'll leave out your Spirit Forms, etc for now) Podlair is not introducing anything new. It is just tweaking the definitions and expanding the scope they can reach via using the physiological identification as basis to understand when and where a function is in use. And yep it also explains the relationship they have to each other more, and by extention the relationship types/mojos have to each other - - that still isn't presenting something fundamental - - but better refining and expanding on how those 16 orderings operate in humans.

My example of Atoms wasn't the most appropriate since there are thousands of years between Democritus and the discovery of Atoms. My example of Mendel was more appropriate for this situation since the time between Mendel and the mapping out of DNA's structure is roughly 90 years, which is about the time between Jung's book (1921) and now (2011). The gap in time and hence knowledge (by proportion) is about the same.

The amount of things Democritus said that are actually valid at this era are few, true. As you mentioned, yes, probably only the fundamental definition of the word atom remains valid. But the amount of things Jung said that Podlair still echoes, at times almost verbatim, are LOTs. And Jung was not presenting something so basic as a theory or tiny grains of matter - but the complex human psyche.

The Arrogance of Podlair is more reason to be doubtful of it..

Generally, arrogant people (people who believe their reasoning is superior) are, ironically, more prone to make mistakes in reasoning than a careful and cautious thinker.

Podlair seems to have a habit of making unwarranted assertions and just overall claiming their opinions are somehow more than opinions; fact. Someone who is that quick to assert, someone who shows such little moderation of critical thought, leads me to believe they are likely making similar mistakes in the assumptions of their models.

If you can't even see what is so blatantly wrong with your presentation and reasoning as of the moment, that leads me to doubt your reasoning altogether - - and hence whatever reasoning you used to form your model.

Someone who is careful with their words, decisions and assertions - and who understands the limitations inherent to human (and their own) reasoning - would be who I would trust most. You are human. You are not beyond error, and neither is your model. An attitude that reflects that realization would be more healthy, and would earn you more respect among critical thinkers.

Oh but wait, I'm sorry I guess I forgot..
"It's not arrogance if we're right." :P

Kibou I appreciate your posts, thank you. You're a cool cat. :cat:
These things are directed at Adymus mostly, not you. It seems to be how we get along.. heh. A type of dysfunctional friendship.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,180
---
Location
Anaheim, CA
Adymus, do you remember how many pms you recieved when you were advocating Podlair's methodology through a middle-ground before? I bet it's a lot more than what you get now. People liked you a lot, were attracted to you. You had influence. Why? Because people gravitate toward nobler assets of character. Generosity, consideration, patience, respect, helpfulness - things that make a teacher successful. Had you kept that same approach, I am certain you would have dozens more in your ranks.

I am conducting myself in no different way now than I was back then, the only difference is I am not speaking MBTI tongues anymore, and Pod'Lair is now open for all to participate in, and not just something mysterious that I talk about.

I did not lose a single one of those qualities, if you are giving me credit for them, the only thing that changed is that I started being completely honest about the theory, and started being more true to my principles.
So if you want me to go back to the untruth so you can feel more comfortable, then I don't want you in my ranks. Staying true to my principles is more important then you liking me, I'd rather be hated for what I am, than loved for what I am not.


So essentially, you're chanting one of a child's favorite chants.
"You can't tell us what to do. We'll do what we want."
Usually, mature people move past that and actually consider opinions outside of their own. I was suggesting changes Podlair could make to further its cause. If you had the openness to accept suggestions you would not have gotten angry, but it seems what makes you upset is the very notion of me suggesting something to you. It is an ego thing. Possessiveness. It's not about whether my suggestion is helpful or not to you is it - you just don't want to give into an outsider's critiques. Podlair must not submit, it must overcome. It must revolutionize. It must dominate. It must conquer. It must overpower. Ego. Ego. Ego.
People consider suggestions outside of their own when they are relevant to their goals, but your opinion to what we should do is not relevant to what we are intending to do with this model. It is not a matter of ego, it is a matter of agenda. You have your own agenda, your suggestions reflect your agenda, but your agenda is not relevant to ours.

Nothing else really needs to be said about that, we know what we want to do, you don't know what we want to do, thus your suggestions do not reflect what we feel need to be done, simple as that.

I don't expect Jung's model to be absolutely flawless. I'm aware it is limited via the lack of the concrete element. Even before Podlair's appearance I knew something was missing and was hoping some empirical link would be made via neuroscience - from which to form a concrete verdict of type.

The fact that Jung didn't hit the mark 100% is not occasion for which to bash his work. As far as I know, no pioneer in any field ever gets it completely right from the start. Should they be scolded because they don't? No.

The first to discover something usually does so with some awkwardness, not being entirely sure what he's discovering. This is to be expected. Then when more progress is made in a field of knowledge, people present their finds and correct the pioneer.

But why is Podlair so upset that Jung didn't map out 'everything'? ..then even saying that Jung's model is a step backward from having no model at all? Seriously, what?
If Jung was just some philosopher that wrote some things on the human psyche, but was somewhat forgotten, then I would agree that it is weird that we look like we are fighting him. But that is not what is happening, Jung has an entire following of people that stick to his work on no other merits other than Jung said them. Even now in this thread, people are comparing our findings with the assumptions of Jung's model, as if that model was the current standard of what is known. His work is not just some idea that dissipated into the ether, institutions have been formed under his doctrine, institutions that will inevitably be threatened by our work and will want to fight us on this.

What exactly is your point anyway? There is nothing wrong with showing the flaws of other people's theory, there is no reason as to why theoretical smack talk should be out of bounds, especially if the theory in question has influences that it does not deserve to have, with the Jungian Model does.

Honestly, are you just looking for us to say "Ehhhh, I guess he wasn't THAT bad, I mean at least he wasn't that guy that determined personality based on how much phelgm you had."

Sure, you can have that, but regardless it is still an incomplete model that needs plenty of correction.

Jung was treading on the psychic component of this whole thing. I agree without referencing some concrete (sure why not, lets call people reading *concrete* for the purpose of this post) or scientific way to map the differences, some errors are made. What would be mature of Podlair to do is stop the "I'm better than you" game and understand it only hurts their cause to do so.

If you could point out something fundamentally different between the cog.functions and pod powers then you might have a valid point. Y'know, like if there was a missing dichotomy (i dunno maybe like Auditory vs Visual) or even if one of the dichotomies didn't really match reality. However, Pod'Lair shares all four dichotomies (S/N/T/F), and the orientation (I/E) which creates a total of 8 psychic processes (Si/Se/Ni/Ne/Ti/Te/Fi/Fe). Not only that, the processes are describing the same thing (Jung often described "F" as values oriented, "T" as logic, "S" as tactile, "N" as pattern-focused). Further more these Eight psychic processes are paired the same way (a judging function + a perceptive function) to forum a total of 16 different pairings/types/hierarchies. These are the fundamentals aspects of the cognitive functions.

As far as Pod Powers and Mojos go (I'll leave out your Spirit Forms, etc for now) Podlair is not introducing anything new. It is just tweaking the definitions and expanding the scope they can reach via using the physiological identification as basis to understand when and where a function is in use. And yep it also explains the relationship they have to each other more, and by extention the relationship types/mojos have to each other - - that still isn't presenting something fundamental - - but better refining and expanding on it.
So aside from everything that I just said that is not in the Jungian model, there is nothing that is really new?

But I... just... said... Ah never mind.

Actually there are in fact dichotomies that don't reflect reality. One of them would be Sensation, which actually has very little to do with the senses, hence our use of the word "Literal" (as a matter of fact, Nyy, an interpretive power acquires information via the senses) Another would be the Rational/Irrational dimension, which if we were to translate into the Pod'Lair lexicon, Rational would be the combination of Discernment Lead and Directive, and Irrational would be the combination of Perception Lead and Adaptive. Jung believed these dichotomies were part of the same pattern (socionics applies this,)
We can demonstrate however, that these two patterns are entirely different patterns caused by entirely different powers, you can Lead with Discernment and still be Adaptive, and you can lead with Perception and still be Directive. So you could also say that we do have the missing dichotomy.

You could say that MBTI applies the right mathematics in that case, but no one really knows if that was intentional or not, and so far it looks like the Socionists are gaining ground in conserving to the original Jungian assumption and undoing this accidental refinement. You would have no way of knowing which is actually true, all you would know is how Jung originally said it, which tends to win arguments when you bring it up.

As I already said above, a description is among the lowest forms of transferring information, it is blind without an objective sample of the actual natural phenomenon that it is supposed to be talking about. I said before, if we did in fact steal the work of Jung and simply change the names, then there is no reason as to why you shouldn't be able to do what we are doing now.
But you can't... because Jung didn't discover anything, and so there is no way to mobilize the theory, and expand it, turn it into anything more than just descriptions, and any attempt to do so would ultimately fail because you are using half-baked assumptions with no way to check them.

The discovery that Thomas has made informs on and corrects many theories, not just Jung's, but that is no reason to claim that he stole their work. Logically if you steal a person's work, then you are basing your theories on that work, you cannot correct a person's theory if your own theory is founded on that theory, you would be contradicting your own foundations. Which is exactly why Socionics uses inconsistency with Jung's work as an attack against MBTI.

But if you are going to tell us that our building blocks were the same as yours then there is no reason as to why the Jungian's could not find any physical link too, if we are all working with the same pieces of the puzzle.

Again, there were many people that attempted to invent the lightbulb, and many of them used similar principles. But the credit for inventing or discovering something does not go to the person that kind of sort of got it in the ball park and ultimately failed, it goes to the one that got it right.

Since Thomas was the first to actually discover this phenomenon, he can do what ever he likes with it.

The amount of things Democritus said that are actually valid at this era are few, true. As you mentioned, yes, probably only the fundamental definition of the word atom remains valid. But the amount of things Jung said that Podlair still echoes, at times almost verbatim, are LOTs. And Jung was not presenting something so basic as a theory or tiny grains of matter - but the complex human psyche.
Many of the fundamental concepts of human design are similar to Jung's model, but as soon as you get into how they actually work and play out is when you fall off of a bridge, (eg: Jung claim the Tertiary and Inferior functions are in the Unconscious, but the Offside and Polar powers are very much conscious powers. There is nothing in there about how Modulation works or how Stress lock actually plays out. etc.) so it is actually not that different from Democritus at all. So he got kind of a gist of human design right, but definitely not THAT close to the mark, I mean the guy wasn't even able to read himself correctly.

The Arrogance of Podlair is more reason to be doubtful of it..

Generally, arrogant people (people who believe their reasoning is superior) are, ironically, more prone to make mistakes in reasoning than a careful and cautious thinker.

Podlair seems to have a habit of making unwarranted assertions and just overall claiming their opinions are somehow more than opinions; fact. Someone who is that quick to assert, someone who shows such little moderation of critical thought, leads me to believe they are likely making similar mistakes in the assumptions of their models.

If you cannot even see what is so blatantly wrong with your reasoning as of the moment, then it leads me to doubt your reasoning altogether - - and hence whatever reasoning you used to form your model.

Someone who is careful with their words, decisions and assertions - and who understands the limitations inherent to human (and their own) reasoning - would be who I would trust. You are human. You are not beyond error, and neither is your model. An attitude that reflects that realization would be more healthy..

Oh but wait, I'm sorry I guess I forgot..
"It's not arrogance if we're right."
You say that last part sarcastically, but you are exactly right.

That is exactly what makes the difference between a Crazy person and a Genius, being right.

Do you know how Einstein came to conclude that E=MC^2?

He Guessed. Year and Years of Nai crunching, but he eventually got it. There was no laboratory, no evidence in support of his work, just an intuitive leap. When he had his answer, he published his paper with absolutely no footnotes or references, and the scientific establishment went fucking balistic. "Who does this Einstein think he is? How dare he contradict the fundamental principles of Newtonian physics. Where is his scientific evidence? What are his credentials for making such an assertion? This is preposterous....we can't allow people just to say things like this without proof! How dare he...this idea should be given no credence at all!"

And how did he respond to all of that criticism? "Go ahead and check my work, you'll see its right."

So why is Einstein not remembered as that arrogant and dismissive asshole? Because twenty years later when his hunch could actually be tested, he was fucking right! He is not remembered as a bad ass for bowing his head letting the morons of the establishment dismiss his work, he is a genious because he had the balls to stick to his guns against all of that adversity.

Now then, I would say that we are not completely in Einstein's shoes here, because of the inter-subjectivity of our discovery, it can be pointed out to people, and they can see it too, and get really good at seeing it as well, which alone adds to our proof of concept (and just makes us all the more secure in our assertions). So you are actually preaching to the choir when you lecture me about human error, we take that into consideration far more than the Jungian Model (or any other psychological model) takes into consideration (That is what 5th gear in Mojo Reading, and the Concept of Energy evolving is all about) about human error. Our assertions are not unwarrented, our assertions check out just fine. Just because we are not as insecure about claiming what is true as you are does not mean we are not thinking critically, it just means we feel we have ground to stand on. Just because you personally have not tested our work as we have doesn't mean we are supposed to resonate with your uncertainties.

Our model is also not beyond error, but since it is impossible to know what is cosmically true beyond any reasonable doubt, the best you can do is go with what works better than anything else, and be ready to update, and that would be our model.

So I am going to end this with the same style that Einstein did:

If you don't like what we are saying, go ahead and try to prove us wrong, but you're more likely to find that our work actually does check out.
 

mainiac

Member
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
48
---
Aburn, it seeems like maine stream science seems to think that only their own caabal of people are qualified to testr their own theories and experiments. Never a person whith out one of their approved degrees would evr be allowed even though he tool a equivlancy test at phd level. No, that will not happen. Therefre your own tets are flawed and hardly fit to practice on another outside your own caabal. Doesnt mean I think the theory is right.
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
TOO. MANY. FUCKING. WORDS.

@Adymus, how were they able to verify the Unabomber as Nai'Xyy? (is there video footage of him that I wasn't able to find?)

Also: have you been able to predict what portion of the population make up each type yet? (I remember your guesses from a while back did put Ns as much rarer than Ss, so is that still the case given new developments?)
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,298
---
@ Adymus

Thank you. *thinks*

Well then I suppose you're right. I can't say I know your motives entirely. Maybe your presentation is returning exactly the type of reception you want it to receive - and I've no way of knowing for sure, so my suggestions are irrelevant to your cause.

Maybe I really don't know just *how* different the two are until I've experienced it fully myself. Perhaps it's true all Jung got right were the basics and some generalities of how they operate but not at all the full story, I dunno. *shrugs*

To be honest the reason I'm still here posting in these threads is because your story still doesn't add up in my head. I consider you a reasonable and critical person and can't understand why you'd be so adamant about this model when it appears so dubious. Leads me to think it is either *that* real and tangible, or you're absolutely nuts. From your first months on this forum the former seems more likely..

Hmm..
So what now..? =/
I've been banned from your forum.

And no matter how true *anything* in life is,
I'm not the sort to give praise and adoration to a human being.
 

tikru

Member
Local time
Today 3:21 PM
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
99
---
vision.
agenda.
will.

Where there's a will there's a way
A way for who?
Those who are eager and willing
To put aside differentiation.
A step in two
Opposite directions,
Stubborn and stagnate.
Would it be wise
To attach a feather to a lizard
And drop it from a mountain
And expect it to fly?
 

tikru

Member
Local time
Today 3:21 PM
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
99
---
lol sorry. ive been awake for 22 hours, i shouldn't be posting
 

pjoa09

dopaminergic
Local time
Tomorrow 4:21 AM
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
1,857
---
Location
th
TOO. MANY. FUCKING. WORDS.

I fucking agree!

Can't follow this anymore. Everytime Pod'lair is the topic I find myself pondering on reading a novel instead.

There is a wall of text and an enormous commitment. Wait. Just an enormous commitment. Following this thread has been an enormous commitment.

I feel like it's Star Wars now big arguments flying around and I am an illegitimate child of a bartender.

It was breaking news from Pod'lair and now it is straining eyes from Pod
lair redundant criticism.

Personally, I find Pod'lair fascinating but I hold back as presenting my face over the internet to a few strangers is very expensive. I am no undercover agent but I just have a need of privacy.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Today 1:21 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,180
---
Location
Anaheim, CA
To be honest the reason I'm still here posting in these threads is because your story still doesn't add up in my head. I consider you a reasonable and critical person and can't understand why you'd be so adamant about this model when it appears so dubious. Leads me to think it is either *that* real and tangible, or you're absolutely nuts. From your first months on this forum the former seems more likely..

Hmm..
So what now..? =/
I've been banned from your forum.
*sigh*

Do you have any idea how many people I hear that same thing from? People I have never even talked to before on completely different forums.

"Yeah there was this Adymus guy on INTPf, 2 years ago he wrote this really interesting thread on typing people in real-time and said it came from some Pod'Lair theory. But then all of a sudden he just snapped and just started saying all of this crazy gibberish! What did those Pod'Lair people do to him!?"

And I just shake my head at that behind my computer screen, because like I said, I haven't changed my stance on anything theoretical, I mean I have made some improvements to my positions here and there, but nothing contradictory. I have only changed the language I use, I feel more confident about saying things that I believed before but would sound weird to other people, and I am mainly stuck defending Pod'Lair from "Why do you use those silly words" arguments instead of theory talk, which is much more interesting for all of us.
So that is what they see, the Zealous Gibberish spouting Adymus, and not the insightful Adymus of Yesteryear.

I consider me a reasonable and critical person too, and as a Zai'nyy I consider me the kind of person who would make damn sure I am not saying anything incorrect. Because as I am sure you are completely aware of, there is nothing worse for a Zai'nyy than to make the trek from Zai to Xyy, and embarrass yourself in front of the world by not even being right. If that does happen, the only heroic thing one could do to atone for such a sin would be to come out and correct your mistake by explaining that you were wrong to everyone and then explain what is actually right. Because if you don't do that, then you have created a gaping wound of incorrectness that is just going to fester out there in the world, and you are directly responsible for it. I have a pretty guilty conscious for things like that, it doesn't sit well with me, I have had to correct my mistakes before, and I am not above doing it.

The thing about Logic though, not so much Zai specifically, but logic in general, is it is only as strong as your assumptions. There is this idea that the Intelligentsia of the world seems to have, that Logic is this universal force that is always correct, and through logic you can discover all of the mysteries of the universe, and if an idea does not stand up to Logic, then it is obviously wrong. And then whenever they hear an idea that doesn't make sense to themselves, they say "You're being irrational!" Because Logic is universal, and obviously if an idea does not make sense to me, then it is because it is profoundly inaccurate and should not make sense to anyone.

But that is complete bullshit.

Logic is only as good as what you know, what you have experienced, and if you are missing something, then your Logic is flawed. Logic cannot solve the mysteries of the universe on its own, because Natural Law is not supposed to be dictated by a silly human's idea of how the Laws of the universe are supposed to sequentially flow. On the contrary, human understanding should be dictated by how Natural law actually does flow. It should be a tool that can help you understand the component parts of Natural law, and how they all fit together.

Here is where I am going with this: Looking dubious does not make something wrong, it just means, according to your current view of how reality works, such a thing should not be able to occur. That leaves you with one question, is it occurring or not? If it is in fact occurring, then that means there one's current worldview needs a serious update, because it is not properly representing the reality that it is supposed to be representing.

Most of you guys still understand Mojo Reading in the way that I described it when I was just starting to learn it myself in that thread I wrote two years ago. Like it is just checking for where people's eyes are moving, and their gesturing, blah blah blah, things that don't seem like they can be conclusive at all. But that is sooooo just the tip of the iceberg of what Mojo Reading actually is. It is only the first two Gears, which is technically not reading a person at all. As a matter of fact, it is really more of a way to train yourself for the gears that are up ahead, and also to check your work for consistency.

Because like all skills that require you to master the use of your body as an instrument, like Martial Arts or Learning a Musical Instrument, it takes time, immersion, patience, Self-Mastery, a willingness to overcome fears, prejudice and insecurities, but once you invest that, it becomes living breathing part of you that you can never turn off. It gets to a point where you see it in everyone without even having to try to see it. You see it in pictures, in drawings, hear it in people's voices, you look at any person and you see their Mojo, every person become a part of this natural law phenomenon that everyone is connected to, and always was connected to.

It gets to point where no human is just a human anymore, they are a Nyy'xai, Xyy'nai, Vyy'zai, etc, and you can see that creature living out their Mojo's storyline in full technicolor vibrancy. Now combine that with other people who can see it too, who it is just as obvious to that you can share the experience with.
It gets to a point where to actually live through this much consistency and then doubt that you are actually seeing something real would be illogical. No, not Illogical, stupid. It would just be plain stupid to actually doubt that you are seeing something real and tangible when you literally cannot unsee it no matter how hard you try, and other people are experiencing the same thing with the same consistency.

So the way I am acting? That is where it is coming from. This is my reality, and I am not going to treat it like it is less than my reality, just because it is currently not your reality also.
So what now..? =/
I've been banned from your forum.
A number of people that were also banned at some point are now back studying with us again. No one is banned forever, you are always welcome back if you can play nicely.

And no matter how true *anything* in life is,
I'm not the sort to give praise and adoration to a human being.
I am not exactly sure what you are saying here. No one is asking you to worship anyone, and no one is asking you to be a suck up, and give any more praise and adoration than you would to any other person that came up with a really ingenious idea.

All we ask of anyone is to come in with the mind of a student, because that is what it takes to learn this. The mind of a student does not mean you have to dogmatically believe everything a person is telling you from the get go, but it does mean you have to shapeshift into their culture, and be as. Have you ever heard the Zen Buddhist Parable about the Empty cup?
Once there was a university professor who went to visit with a Zen master to discuss things of a Zen nature. While they talked, it became clear to the Zen master that the professor considered himself quite knowledgeable on the subject of Zen and Buddhism, going on and on about various related topics.


The Zen master listened, and then offered tea. He went to fetch the tea pot and cups and set one before the professor.
The Zen master began pouring tea while the professor continued talking, but when the cup became full to the brim, the Zen master continued pouring. Tea spilled over the edge and all over the table!


"Stop, what are you doing?!" the professor spoke, interrupting himself. "Can't you see that the cup is full?"
"You are like this cup," the Zen master explained. "You are so full of information that nothing more gets in. You came here to discuss Zen, but how can I show you what is Zen if you do not first empty your up?"
The professor thought for a moment and became silent, ready then to receive lessons from the Zen master.
That is basically what we mean when we say "mind of a student." You might interpret that being a sheep, just unquestioningly listening to what your are told. But that is really not at all what it is, having the mind of a student just means allowing yourself to be taught, not believing you know better than them just because you currently don't understand their reasoning, and just soaking up all data until you have learned that what you sought out to you.


The Nai'xyy that have come in to train with us most certainly do not just buy in to everything we say from the start, but the are certainly not above conducting themselves with the mind of a student to learn what they came there to learn. This kind of thing comes a bit more naturally and easily for the N'xez, but we are not incapable of doing it as well. If you are saying that you are incapable of doing that, then that is a serious limitation that you are putting on yourself. It means you are stopping yourself from having access to knowledge that you deserve to have, because you feel weird doing something that is really not all that weird. There will always be things that someone else has mastered, and you have not, and it will be in your best interest to be able to become a student so you can learn this skill.
 

crippli

disturbed
Local time
Today 10:21 PM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,779
---
Ok. I'm not able to follow all of this. I would like to start with the basics. What is the longform of what I presume is the short form of Nai'xyy? What does the apostrophe mean? The N, a, i, x, y,y. Why are there two y's? Do they mean the same thing? I'm not a native speaker, and it helps if I know what the letters and words roughly mean. With mbti it's easy. As INTP stands for introverted intuitive thinking perceptive, and there are only two valid positions for east letter, the opposite ESFJ. And on, you get the 16 types. All you need to know is one type, say INTP, and from this you can extrapolate out the other types easily when you know the system.

So, is there a similar simplicity with the tying of PL that I could start with, to get an idea of what is going on? Because I am confused. Is there a paper somewhere for the novice to get the basics? Similar to this?
https://www.cpp.com/pdfs/smp267149v.pdf
 

alrai

Banned
Local time
Today 9:21 PM
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
124
---
Location
Leicester
Mainstream science; all that which is in line with the present beleifs is funded, any deviation receives zero support and tolerance. Mainstream alone wouldn't equal fact, evidence tend to strongly support a theory or discredit it, no absoluteles, especially in feilds such of psychology, where theories have face value, but research and methodology is often difficult to repeat in "exactly" the same way. As far as I'm concerned I've not seen any significant "fact" in your posts, just "theories", there is a fine line between the two. I often could not repond to all your arguements because there are simply too many, if you feel that i missed any important points, you should not hesitate to clarify, as I'm not avoiding them.
Just in case you twist my argument to claim I'm discrediting mainstream science, I'm not, i'm simply saying you seem to back your claims by "everyone thinks that", but no REFRENCES.
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
Ok. I'm not able to follow all of this. I would like to start with the basics. What is the longform of what I presume is the short form of Nai'xyy? What does the apostrophe mean? The N, a, i, x, y,y. Why are there two y's? Do they mean the same thing? I'm not a native speaker, and it helps if I know what the letters and words roughly mean. With mbti it's easy. As INTP stands for introverted intuitive thinking perceptive, and there are only two valid positions for east letter, the opposite ESFJ. And on, you get the 16 types. All you need to know is one type, say INTP, and from this you can extrapolate out the other types easily when you know the system.
The labels like Nai'Xyy are highlighting the dominant-auxiliary function structure of type psyche configurations.

They've changed the notation so that they don't -have- to show that they are talking about the same things as before, but basically they are - we just finally have a reliable way of identifying someone's type.

So do you know the functions from the MBTI model? It says we have a "dominant" function, and an "auxiliary" function, eg. INTP is Ti-Ne, and as a result they have the inverse functions of Si-Fe, and the other functions as unconscious considerations. The model uses two different kinds of each function, i and e, so there is Ti and Te etc. where i means the function is purely internal, personal, subjective and e means it is in relation to the external, environment, objective.

Pod'Lair conversions:
Z_ = T
X_ = F (I thought it was pronounced as zh, but apparently it's a soft g?)
N_ = N
V_ = S
ai = i (pronounced as I)
yy = e (pronounced as E)

Source power = dominant function
Tandem power = auxiliary function

And your label goes source'tandem

So it's isomorphic to MBTI, and means the same thing, but does away with the attempts at identification which the previous systems used. Just as there is MBTI, there are other JCF systems which are similar, and there is also Pod'lair. There have already been different systems trying to identify the 16 types, and Pod'lair is the newest, and perhaps only one with a reliable, consistent Typing mechanism (cue reading).

So, if you are a true INTP, i.e. you have dominant Ti, auxiliary Ne, then you are a Pod'lair Zai'Nyy (T = Z, i = ai, N = N, e = yy), however to be allowed to wear such a label you need to have yourself video typed so that there is verification you really are that type.
 

crippli

disturbed
Local time
Today 10:21 PM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,779
---
Thanks Artsu. Yes I am familiar with the functions. Although I don't get them to add up right, at least not for me. Socionics worked better for me in that regard. Anyway. Can you type the full names?

Thinking = Z_..?
Feeling = X_..?
Intuitive = N_..?
Sensing = V_..?
Introvertive = ai..?
Extroversion = yy..?

Maybe they are the full names? I like to make associations. Makes it easier to remember. Like F=X_, as in the female X chromosone? A bit sexist though. I guess that will work. T=Z_.. Any thinking stuff with Z? YY, is like a connection, two togheter, so extroversion.

So you see. Now you explained it, so it's clear. But how long until I have forgotten, and then do not remember what the different words mean?

It's clear to me, that when these letters operate the same way as function theory in MBTI they should use the same names. The MBTI names are easy shortforms of longforms we have a relationship to. I hate it when something simple is complicated, as seems to be the case here.
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Tomorrow 8:21 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
Thanks Artsu. Yes I am familiar with the functions. Although I don't get them to add up right, at least not for me. Socionics worked better for me in that regard. Anyway. Can you type the full names?

Thinking = Z_..?
Feeling = X_..?
Intuitive = N_..?
Sensing = V_..?
Introvertive = ai..?
Extroversion = yy..?

Maybe they are the full names? I like to make associations. Makes it easier to remember. Like F=X_, as in the female X chromosone? A bit sexist though. I guess that will work. T=Z_.. Any thinking stuff with Z? YY, is like a connection, two togheter, so extroversion.

So you see. Now you explained it, so it's clear. But how long until I have forgotten, and then do not remember what the different words mean?

It's clear to me, that when these letters operate the same way as function theory in MBTI they should use the same names. The MBTI names are easy shortforms of longforms we have a relationship to. I hate it when something simple is complicated, as seems to be the case here.

I don't think they stand for anything. The feel evoked by the X (j) and Z sounds mirrors somewhat the differences between F and T, in that F is a more fuzzy process, and T is more well defined and so this may be the source of the letters chosen. N is what it was before, V is the one leftover. ai you should see to be pronounced as I, and yy as E, though yy is a totally new letter combination.

So I don't know how to get you to remember it exactly if learning it by rote will be too hard.
 

crippli

disturbed
Local time
Today 10:21 PM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,779
---
I don't think they stand for anything. The feel evoked by the X (j) and Z sounds mirrors somewhat the differences between F and T, in that F is a more fuzzy process, and T is more well defined and so this may be the source of the letters chosen. N is what it was before, V is the one leftover. ai you should see to be pronounced as I, and yy as E, though yy is a totally new letter combination.

So I don't know how to get you to remember it exactly if learning it by rote will be too hard.
I think I could do it. But I think there is also the scepticism that triggers motivation if serious work that is presented doesn't seem to be thought through and if things are only randomly selected, then I raise my eyebrow. I'm still waiting for an explanation where the letters are motivated from(other then mbti) and what is their official definition. Or is what you wrote their full definition and explanation?
 
Top Bottom