Breaking News from Pod'lair!

[Moocow]

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.

Quoting this because he made good points and got ignored.

So far I'm still just seeing rhetorical replies from Adymus that, just like the website, very clearly lack self awareness; absolutely no distinction of ego from the proposition of a concept. In fact, all facets of pod'lair would be more interesting and intriguing if they were simply proposed isolated from the personal feelings and opinions of its more manic members.

It shows a lot more confidence to calmly present the essentials of your case and accept if others don't understand or agree than to hide them behind mountains of condescension, insult, and unjustified pride. Also, justification is not the same as repeating what you think of yourself ad nauseum. I get it, you've learned to jerk off and you just really enjoy it.

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-br...-podlairs-stupid-models-join-comsens-now.html
lol, we need more NTJs on this forum.

Anyway, had it been presented in a concise manner, I'm sure the similarities would have been more apparent. AND picked on by the great debaters of PerC.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

An argument in favour of Pod'Lair:

This guy.

 

[Logic]

Yea Artsu that guy actually doesn't know what he's talking about as much as he thinks. He's going deeper than the typical mbtier but he still has huge gaps in his knowledge. I actually commented on one of his videos correcting him on his read on Bill Gates actually being a Nyy'zai, however in that "bill gates is an INTP and not an ENTJ" video he didn't want to listen (no surprise) believing that I didn't know what I was talking about.

The thing that bugs me the most is that he's actually causing more problems as a result of this behavior. He's in a very guru type position but he's teaching people that take him seriously the wrong information which will hurt rather than help.

 

[Adymus]

Quoting this because he made good points and got ignored.

So far I'm still just seeing rhetorical replies from Adymus that, just like the website, very clearly lack self awareness; absolutely no distinction of ego from the proposition of a concept. In fact, all facets of pod'lair would be more interesting and intriguing if they were simply proposed isolated from the personal feelings and opinions of its more manic members.

It shows a lot more confidence to calmly present the essentials of your case and accept if others don't understand or agree than to hide them behind mountains of condescension, insult, and unjustified pride. Also, justification is not the same as repeating what you think of yourself ad nauseum. I get it, you've learned to jerk off and you just really enjoy it.

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-br...-podlairs-stupid-models-join-comsens-now.html
lol, we need more NTJs on this forum.

I have already addressed everything he has said, Here.

And again in what I just said to Auburn:

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.

Pod'Lair is a theory as well as all of the things that we believe need to come with what the theory implies, technical, cultural, noble, and spiritual. This should be common sense for you, obviously if our goal was to sell-sell-sell-out to as many people as possible then we would not be doing any of this, we would make this as easy to swallow as possible. Obviously if we are not doing things in the way you think we should be doing then it is because our goal does not entail going in that direction, otherwise we would obviously be doing it.
But a game changer of this magnitude coupled with all that it implies, including how you will need to learn it, is by nature a very hard thing to do.

You can't relate to the words we are using? Good, that is the point, that means you have a clean slate to work with, and not a mind full of assumptions. This is no different than learning a new language, and when you learn a new language you have to start a point where you have no idea what any of these new words mean.

If you want something easy (and useless), then you can keep your MBTI tests. If you are okay with something being difficult if it is immensely rewarding, Mojo Reading is right up your alley.

 

[Auburn]

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

By this I just meant I can offer respectfulness toward a teacher (I enjoy being a student in the form you described) but not excessive praise. I'm glad to hear that isn't necessary - as some of the things I read from Podlair sounded questionably similar to worship. Again, my impression, which is not necessarily accurate.

Yep, I'm actually quite capable of emptying the contents of my mind. :3 I do it occasionally, where I deconstruct my whole worldview and piece it back together from zero - when there's additional information that requires an edifice shift. I'm willing to do that. o.o

Since you already know my type from the video I submitted, do I have to do it again? ^^; ..or can I just slip back in. ..I suppose I should just PM you instead.

 

[Fukyo]

Here's what I hypothesize...



Thomas embarked on a study of human nature, probably spontaneously. Somewhere along the line he came across Jung's work. He realized this stuff had similarities to what he had already inferred about people. He studied it. He started noticing correlations between the theoretical knowledge he had and what could he could see about people experimentally. As time progressed his skill in people reading increased. He realized he had something immense on his hands. He may have been exposed to other Jungian hobbysts and venues and became aware of the great load of misinformation and mistypes, and the great load of divided opinions between practitioners.

He couldn't have any of this. He couldn't allow his insights to be become tainted like this. He had to preserve their purity and integrity. He couldn't have all these people taking his work and diluting and facilitating more misreads and doing possible wrong doings. Thomas appointed himself the guy who was going to unite and codify all this knowledge for the purpose of the greater good and the greater truth. After all being ultimately right gave him the omniscient morality license to ignore and obfuscate the little stuff, the details whose importance paled in comparison to the greater benefit.


and this is why Pod'lair is such a hermetic community, this is why you need to make a commitment to them in order to study, why it all needs to be on their terms.

This also explains some of the obvious inconsistencies,

Spoiler

Why is the initial Pod'lair lexicon a very slightly altered version of the names Jung used?

Why do Pod'lair practitioners evaluate typology using the Pod'lair diagnostic criteria? I mean, if they ARE different models don't you think you're mixing apples and oranges here?

Just how many of the Pod'lair practitioners had their first voyage into psyche categorization using Jungian offshots? Nysamis says "I misread my family, I misread myself". Did she know how to read people right as she joined Pod'lair, I mean actually read them in the Pod'lair sense? Or was it rather that she typed them?

Thomas mentions how his parents were both the same mojo as him and taught him about it, but they didn't have the complete picture about it. This is confusing in particular. Are you saying Thomas' parents actually knew about Pod'lair, mojos and people reading before him, which doesn't follow if Thomas is the originator.


Unless...their "incomplete picture" was actually based on Jung or MBTI.

So much for speculation. Did I get it right?

 

[NoID10ts]

 

[Adymus]

By this I just meant I can offer respectfulness toward a teacher (I enjoy being a student in the form you described) but not excessive praise. I'm glad to hear that isn't necessary - as some of the things I read from Podlair sounded questionably similar to worship. Again, my impression, which is not necessarily accurate.

Yep, I'm actually quite capable of emptying the contents of my mind. :3 I do it occasionally, where I deconstruct my whole worldview and piece it back together from zero - when there's additional information that requires an edifice shift. I'm willing to do that. o.o

Since you already know my type from the video I submitted, do I have to do it again? ^^; ..or can I just slip back in. ..I suppose I should just PM you instead.

Glad to hear that

It would actually be preferable that you submitted a new video as per our new filming protocol, which you can see my example of here.

 

[Puffy]

In the original the plants were called "pods"
.
.
.
.
.
.
OH DEAR GOD!

They're Already Here! You're Next! - YouTube

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Spoiler

And why, simply put, does Pod'Lair surpass all other systems?

Because it was designed by someone who actually understands people. Let's face it, up until now Typology was the activity of people who preferred abstracted thought to dealing with people, and thus they got a lot of good Thinking material, but they totally left out the human element.

There's no need to deny that Pod'Lair has surpassed them all, since it is the only one to actually define itself in terms of the material world, but what we are largely put off by is their denial of everything that came before. We have put time into understanding the system as is, and thus are potentially able to transfer our understandings over with ease, but instead we are forced to start again from the beginning!

Now, the cult claims are a typical overreaction to any sort of socially based endeavour, that is, something you do by -first- socialising, and -then- theorising. For the NT, theoretical basis comes first, and socialising is a by-product. That's why NFs have taken to it more than NTs. They actually like the fact that we are first social, second theoretical.

This goes for the INFJs here too. Pod'lair has attracted mostly NFTS types because that is what it was designed to attract, because that is the primary mode of worldview for its creator. Thomas was INFJ. He knew he needed ENFPs in order to help his vision grow and become a reality (Ni finding basis in Ne). However, as a tertiary Ti, he knew that he would need a theoretically sound basis, but wasn't proficient enough to do this on his own without compromising his abilities, and thus needed INTPs. However, he was careful to ensure that only the INTPs he wanted could get in.

INTPf, tl:dr, if you are seriously rejecting Pod'lair due to its image, then you are getting massively, massively trolled.

 

[Fukyo]

Spoiler

And why, simply put, does Pod'Lair surpass all other systems?

Because it was designed by someone who actually understands people. Let's face it, up until now Typology was the activity of people who preferred abstracted thought to dealing with people, and thus they got a lot of good Thinking material, but they totally left out the human element.

There's no need to deny that Pod'Lair has surpassed them all, since it is the only one to actually define itself in terms of the material world, but what we are largely put off by is their denial of everything that came before. We have put time into understanding the system as is, and thus are potentially able to transfer our understandings over with ease, but instead we are forced to start again from the beginning!

Now, the cult claims are a typical overreaction to any sort of socially based endeavour, that is, something you do by -first- socialising, and -then- theorising. For the NT, theoretical basis comes first, and socialising is a by-product. That's why NFs have taken to it more than NTs. They actually like the fact that we are first social, second theoretical.

This goes for the INFJs here too. Pod'lair has attracted mostly NFTS types because that is what it was designed to attract, because that is the primary mode of worldview for its creator. Thomas was INFJ. He knew he needed ENFPs in order to help his vision grow and become a reality (Ni finding basis in Ne). However, as a tertiary Ti, he knew that he would need a theoretically sound basis, but wasn't proficient enough to do this on his own without compromising his abilities, and thus needed INTPs. However, he was careful to ensure that only the INTPs he wanted could get in.

INTPf, tl:dr, if you are seriously rejecting Pod'lair due to its image, then you are getting massively, massively trolled.

I think people are also rejecting them because of the commitment they require. Sure, they may be willing to learn and a lot seem curious, but crusade against the current world order? Hmmm, not so sure about that one.

 

[kibou]

I think people are also rejecting them because of the commitment they require. Sure, they may be willing to learn and a lot seem curious, but crusade against the current world order? Hmmm, not so sure about that one.

Hahah it's true, it just kinda naturally happens though, when you're developing how to read yourself and others accurately and in a nuanced manner, experiencing and channeling higher energy in your activities, being able to see mojo everywhere (you turn on the TV and suddenly you're reading all these nuances and cross-contextualizations while watching someone you never met), figuring out better creative artistic processes for yourself (so you consistently have the most energy in art), having a foresight into social situations, rewarding relationships, etc...it's really magical in that way I think most people wished MBTI would feel more like. You keep growing more and then you can't help by be excited by what more you're discovering, because you're discovering new things about yourself and in the world and what extent you can develop your abilities, rather than reading the same typology portraits over and over, speculating purely based on theory (with minimal application) something new. If it concretely impacts your life, you can't help but be more passionate~

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I think people are also rejecting them because of the commitment they require. Sure, they may be willing to learn and a lot seem curious, but crusade against the current world order? Hmmm, not so sure about that one.

Like I said, massively, massively trolled.

 

[BigApplePi]

I was just passing by this youtube of Dick Cheney and right away thought of Pod'Lair. Never mind his message. What the heck type do you experts think he is?

Dick Cheney says Bin Laden Innocent on 9/11 - YouTube

 

[dark]

^ I'd like to know too.

 

[Masterlord]

ISTJ.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

His eyes are engaged on the subject the whole time with little loss of momentum, so he must be an E. I don't think he's aware at all of how his mouth is, and he's not very warm, so I think he's Te-Fi. You see his eyes narrow, and he looks very dissatisfied, so he must be Ni-Se

Therefore he is ENTJ.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Pod'lair not only shows you how to get back in touch with your primordial mind, but it shows you how to get their with minimal loss in material, and with a way of dealing effectively with the world.

Part of what onlookers don't like, is that this notion of effective dealing which was developed to offset the effects of getting in touch with yourself make it unsatisfactory for the Purity driven INPs.

 

[kibou]

Note: Neither Artsu Tharaz nor Masterlord are Pod'Lair readers, so their opinion doesn't reflect a Pod'Lair official read. Their reading level has not been confirmed (they are entitled to their opinion but their read may be wrong).

PL will be giving an initial official sample of 1000 celebrity reads that are confirmed in the near future, as well as Mojo Case Studies that goes really indepth with accurate reads.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Note: Neither Artsu Tharaz nor Masterlord are Pod'Lair readers, so their opinion doesn't reflect a Pod'Lair official read. Their reading level has not been confirmed (they are entitled to their opinion but their read may be wrong).

Nothing wrong with satire. (Is there?)

 

[Adymus]

Nothing wrong with satire. (Is there?)

I'm not sure if that means you were not serious, or if you are just saying you weren't now, but either way here are a few pointers just to set the record straight:

An Objective Mojo's eyes are not necessarily going to be painted on the person they are talking to all the time, and it actually is possible for a Subjective to keep up their Momentum while they keep their eyes on the person they are talking to for somewhat extended periods of time, and it is not uncommon for them to do so. Objective Mojos have eyes that have an unhooded look, that is the most basic second gear cue for Objectivity, but that is not the same thing as keeping your eyes on a person.

You are going to want to watch out for using 1st or 2nd gear cues as universal constants like you seem to be doing here, because they are not meant to be used that way. The "They did X, that means they therefor must be Y" reasoning is very MBTI/Socionics/Typology reasoning, and it is of very little use in this arena. Reading people is a much more organic process, and not overly reductionist "X always = Y" like Typology models are. No one can accurately be read using 1st and 2nd gear cues alone.

Also it is important to note that when we say "Nai's Distinct Signal of Dissatisfaction", we are not simply talking about your opinion of what dissatisfaction looks like on a person. Nai naturally gives off a distinct signal, and we choose to call that signal "Dissatisfaction" because that is what it looks like to us. However, that does not mean your current subjective mental image of what a dissatisfied person looks like is going to match up with the distinct signal that the Nai Mojos are Naturally giving off. You actually have to know what signal we are calling "Nai Dissatisfaction", and be able to actually see it yourself, before you start going "Oh that person looks dissatisfied to me, that means they are using Nai!"

Right now you are basically trying to just type people using physical cues, which is not the same thing as actually reading a person. That is a habit that you are going to want to drop if you want to get into Mojo Reading, since the Typology models kind of instilled you guys the notion that all you have to do is learn a couple theoretical principles, and then you can start typing your whole neighborhood and actually be right. This is highly unrealistic when compared to all other skills in life (ie: You can't just go into an MMA match with only a theoretical understanding of Punching and Kicking, and expect to win), and it doesn't cut it here either. Reading people is an art that requires hours and hours of tacit training, just like everything else that requires you to master your own body and mind does, like learning a musical instrument, or a martial art. You have to really geek out on it, and actually enjoy studying other humans, and not just enjoy studying the theory of other humans.

 

[BigApplePi]

You have to really geek out on it, and actually enjoy studying other humans, and not just enjoy studying the theory of other humans.

That doesn't mean there can't be a manual on the theory. Can you point to a good manual or two?

 

[kibou]

@BigApplePi Adymus's explanation is great and worth reading over several times. People-reading, like other skills/abilities has to be taught experientially and not simply through words, just like teaching someone to play piano well, teaching someone to fight well. You can read all the articles in the world about how to play piano well or how to fight well, but you need to learn it experientially, ie you need to practice piano, and be tutored by someone watching you actually playing piano, to even know whether what you're doing when playing piano at all matches up to the theory you're reading about.

PS: basics manual is up and coming

 

[Masterlord]

http://www.podlair.com/

We're not stupid anymore.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

http://www.podlair.com/

We're not stupid anymore.

What, you mean to say they were trolling the whole time with that?

 

[cheese]

Oooh, this looks nice! More organised, better vibe, better sell.

 

[Gather_Wanderer]

Much better home page now.

I do hope that Pod'lair takes off. I understand that they don't like for people to "observe from the sidelines" so to speak, but once (if) it does reach mass popularity, I suppose it could be a little easier to do so. That's what some of us want, I think. I don't think that would allow for a total understanding of theory either, but hey, it may take a lot to encroach on some people.

Adymus sounded pretty bold with the "We're trying to change the bleeping world" thing. I'm excited for you guys to do that, if everything stands up through criticism.

 

[Puffy]

This is a cause for celebration!

happy happy joy joy - YouTube

 

[Oblivious]

http://www.podlair.com/

We're not stupid anymore.

Quite an impressive change I must say.

The vision is good, it's well balanced between ideology and practicality. The best part is the use of laymanese. Not saying you should not have your own terminology, but the introductory page should be laymanese.

The only thing lacking right now is just application and brand building.

Ultimately it will come down to the creation of definitive experiments that are repeatable by anyone with the capability to do so. Someone will eventually get interested and give them a shot.

Your selling point will be your ability to make the correct predictions that no one else but you can. People can argue theory all day long, but results speak for themselves. It's difficult to check a theory so far removed from conventional understanding, so you have to depend on how well your model works.

 

[dark]

@ Oblivious, the only problem with that is, well, Pod'lair claims the others are wrong by the same principles that the others claim Pod'lair is wrong.

It seems illogical to say that people VI others and get like 50% wrong, when you already determined their type via Pod'lair. Results like that does not say Pod'lair is right, it shows shadyness, not something we want to see from a revolutionary vision.

To compare others VI by your predictions is a fallacy. Let me try and make it make more sense. PL gets a test ready with 100 people to type. Out of these PL has already decided which type each person is. They then give the test to opposing masters in typology and because their typology is different than PL, they score about 50%. Then the claim is made that PL is superior because the other masters aren't as capable of typing.

Do I need to make it more clear? Simply, don't use tactics like this, it is not results, the information isn't real. Big deal if you find things in people and keep seeing them and call it whatever you call it. It doesn't mean anything. Well it does, it is quite amazing to know that we exhibit brain functions that visibly. But anyways, don't make claims like this. It is one of the major things that makes me dislike PL. Shadyness, also not giving credit where it is due, way to be a real scientist (this isn't sarcasm, scientists do this all the time, stealing from one another or not citing sources and shit), don't be like those assholes. Take for example, just because I independently wrote a paper in high school which I called the Universal Collective, then years later discovered that many others came up with the same idea and they were famous people, and they called it the Collective Unconscious or whatever, doesn't mean the idea is rightfully mine, sure I gave it a different name, my theory was slightly different, but it was the same damn thing even though I was so ignorant of the fact the other existed.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

While I may not agree with what they say, I'll fight to the death for their right to say it.

 

[Oblivious]

To compare others VI by your predictions is a fallacy. Let me try and make it make more sense. PL gets a test ready with 100 people to type. Out of these PL has already decided which type each person is. They then give the test to opposing masters in typology and because their typology is different than PL, they score about 50%. Then the claim is made that PL is superior because the other masters aren't as capable of typing.

I think we're operating under different definitions of 'prediction'. There is no reason an experiment designed to falsify a concept should necessarily be subjective and therefore unreliable. That just means the experiment was poorly designed.

This is unless you are claiming that it is impossible for Podlair to be objectively verified. This is a separate issue, and not one I am capable of addressing. I would certainly be interested in hearing why you think so.

Calculus, that annoying math course you now take in high school, was initially derided by mainstream mathematicians because of its screwy concept of a limit evaluated at infinity, among other things.

However, they always got the right answers. What I mean by this is that calculus was able to derive certain results that were later verified through other means. When I say prediction, I mean that Podlair should be able to say something should happen a priori that can then be objectively verified.

Calculus was also independently developed by multiple parties, and history remembers these people.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Typology until now: Type is identified by the function.

Pod'lair's revolution: Type is identified by the derivative.

You could have very strong T strengths, but if your mind is constantly trying to push you back to F, then you are F - F is your peak pathway, despite your T strengths. This is because T is made far less efficient by the F pulling, and so it is better to keep F primary, and let T come up naturally.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

It all comes back to that fundamental psychological principle of a psychic force.

Typology is an amazing model for how to divide these forces.

 

[dark]

I think I will refrain from arguing anything in this thread anymore since clips of my arguments are taken out without the whole of the point.

Of course I can point out anything in any argument if I only take part of it and I can then make it seem like it says anything. If you don't take things in the great context, I find no reason to argue a point.

Have fun.

I think that is using my Fe, not sure. At least in my logic book it says to do things like this, so since I am learning, may as well start practicing it now.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

dark, you seem to get very intense with your arguments.

Emotion is not meant to be stressful, however arguments are.

 

[kibou]

@dark Mmm, the issue exists independent of who's lenses we're judging predictions by, because these other typology models like MBTI do not have a consistent standard that even the practioners are able to follow.

Well-trained PL practioners will reach the same read on the same subject.

What about for MBTI? Just looking on MBTI forums, you can see that people are all over the place in who they type who as. What about the experts? The experts don't agree either, whether we're talking Thompson or Kiersey or Nancy R. Fenn.

Pod'Lair reads are consistent with itseslf because they are based on physiological movements.


To put this in example: When (this is not even a question of If) 20 high-level Pod'Lair readers are in completely isolated rooms and are given the same set (say 100) of new samples they've never seen before on video, there will be a high (if not 100%, depending on how good the readers are) consistency between each person's reads.

What about with MBTI?

Considering how opposite people's typing of characters are on the forums, and how inconsistent expert typologist's typing of celebrities are...

It will be no surprise that the results are same in the lab: there will be a great inconsistency between 20 typology experts' typing of the same 100 samples.


That is a concrete, irrefutably different aspect of Pod'Lair that comes from taking an approach that is based on physiological cues. It is observing a consistent external phenomenon that is connected to an internal phenomenon. We will pass the "lab tests" with flying colors, and will challenge the other typology models to do the same feat with the same standards.


@Artsu yeah, Nai'xyy ultimately tend get frustrated from people not seeing their Nai "vision"/"what am I seeing that everyone else is missing" rather than Zai principles (though many may say it's really the Zai they care about; the unrelenting agenda-pushing is really from the Nai, though - think intense pro-atheist pro-logic debaters). Auburn is one of the fewer Zai'nyy's on this forum and he doesn't really get this way.

PS: Also we are not looking to be scientists, it is precisely because PL doesn't just take a conventional scientific approach that PL able to approach the mind more holistically and without the limitations of science or typology.

 

[Oblivious]

Dark:

Please read what I write carefully.

Firstly, I am not a Podlair member. I think this should be quite clear from my earlier posts.

Secondly, when I say prediction I am not referring to any method in particular that is used by Podlair. I am referring to your ability to predict that the sun will rise tomorrow because you know in theory that the earth revolves around the sun.

When you talk about VI, you distrust it because you think it is subjective. This is a perfectly fine observation. I was just pointing out that experiments do not have to be subjective, and therefore lacking in reliability. If you think it is impossible for the theory to be verified, you have to say why so.

When you said that Podlair does not acknowledge what it is built on, I replied that it does not matter, because even if they do not, other people will know. History has not forgotten what Jung did, just as History remembers the other roots of calculus.

Ancient muslim mathematicians have been known to independently develop a form of calculus before Newton and Leibniz. There was even a guy in ancient japan who developed a form of calculus. History remembers these people, even if Newton or Leibniz never knew of them.

There were two main points that I picked up from your post:

1) Predictions are an unreliable method of falsification.

2) Podlair does not credit its sources.

I believed I addressed these in my previous post. If there are any other concerns that you feel are important, please feel free to mention them.

 

[Adymus]

@ Oblivious, the only problem with that is, well, Pod'lair claims the others are wrong by the same principles that the others claim Pod'lair is wrong.

It seems illogical to say that people VI others and get like 50% wrong, when you already determined their type via Pod'lair. Results like that does not say Pod'lair is right, it shows shadyness, not something we want to see from a revolutionary vision.

To compare others VI by your predictions is a fallacy. Let me try and make it make more sense. PL gets a test ready with 100 people to type. Out of these PL has already decided which type each person is. They then give the test to opposing masters in typology and because their typology is different than PL, they score about 50%. Then the claim is made that PL is superior because the other masters aren't as capable of typing.

Before Pod'Lair there was no objective standard for Cognitive Configuration, it was all done by debate (eg: "Socrates must be an extrovert because he spent all that much time teaching his ideas, he must have been energized by the engagement!")

Endless debate with no possible resolution, no falsification, just people interpreting theoretical principles differently and speculating how a person should be configured based on those principles. Basically it is Philosophy.

Pod'Lair changes that, it creates an Objective standard that puts an end to the endless subjective interpretation bullshit. You cannot fake Physiology, which actually allows one to demonstrating how a person is or is not a certain cognitive configuration.

There have been many models in the past that made many philosophical claims about different Natural Laws. For example there are a lot of claims in the Bible about how the universe and Human kind came to be. Advances in science as well as new discoveries however can put an end to that belief. In other words, you can use newly discovered mathematics to debunk previously claimed ideas, ideas that at one time may have been unfalsifiable, become falsifiable in response to new discoveries. This is exactly what Pod'Lair is doing when we correct other "experts."
We are simply applying the first actual standard of identifying one's Cognitive Configuration, to the models that have claimed to be able to do this, and surprise surprise, they are not doing very well. For the record, the typology "experts" are usually more like 20% to 30% accurate, giving them 50% is waaaay too much credit.

One more thing; Pod'Lair uses The Five Gears of Mojo reading, you can call it People Reading, or Mojo Reading for short. It is not VI, VI is a Socionics technique that works in a completely different way. Please do not call our Methodology something that it is not. There, now you know, and now you have no excuse to continue calling Mojo Reading VI.

Do I need to make it more clear? Simply, don't use tactics like this, it is not results, the information isn't real. Big deal if you find things in people and keep seeing them and call it whatever you call it. It doesn't mean anything. Well it does, it is quite amazing to know that we exhibit brain functions that visibly. But anyways, don't make claims like this. It is one of the major things that makes me dislike PL. Shadyness, also not giving credit where it is due, way to be a real scientist (this isn't sarcasm, scientists do this all the time, stealing from one another or not citing sources and shit), don't be like those assholes. Take for example, just because I independently wrote a paper in high school which I called the Universal Collective, then years later discovered that many others came up with the same idea and they were famous people, and they called it the Collective Unconscious or whatever, doesn't mean the idea is rightfully mine, sure I gave it a different name, my theory was slightly different, but it was the same damn thing even though I was so ignorant of the fact the other existed.

Why not?

You are saying we are not allowed to correct incorrect calculations, why the fuck not? If you are giving out false information, you deserve to be corrected. All other models of thought that can disprove previous models of thought, do this, it is not just Pod'Lair. They have every reason to do this as well, without correction, there can be no progress, correcting mistakes is actually a very heroic thing.

As for the stealing people's ideas part, simply put, All research and material that you have seen Pod'Lair present is original material and research, and it should be. Jung actually never discovered anything, none of Jung's work was proven, it is all just speculative, so it would actually be foolish to just rip him off, because then you would be ripping off his mistakes, which he most certainly made. All of our theory and claims are based on our observation of the Natural Phenomenon itself, and not some dead guy's theory. The simple logic to this is, if we were actually stealing Jung's work, then there is no reason that we should have a far more advanced model, it should be exactly the same as the other Models, or rather, the other models should be just as advanced, but they are clearly not.

It is time to drop the bitterness and see things for what they are, Pod'Lair has discovered something that has never been known before, there is simply no going around that fact. Other people have indeed speculated on the Natural phenomenon that Pod'Lair has discovered, but that is not the same as actually discovering it. When something is discovered, old theories that merely speculated cannot be used, they are irrelevant, all theory must be created based on the observation of this phenomenon, and nothing else, that is what Pod'Lair does, and this is why it is not simply a Rip off.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Why is this thread in Typology?

Shouldn't it be moved to Psychology?

 

[crippli]

How do you take into account for illusions?

I think this is a valid observation, especially when it comes to media as variable as amateur video footage.

But we make a mistake if we then conclude that what we perceive "literally" exists—as we perceive it to be—"out there," outside of our minds. Surely something exists outside of us. But, just as surely, our perceptions do not (can not) exist "out there."

Like this clip. If you don't change them, most everyone will agree one is smaller. But that isn't the case. What happens is that you see, and you believe, and in error.
Can you believe what you see - YouTube

I think if one remembers the quote above, then one have it covered. Thoughts about this? What is Pod'lairs approach to this phenomenon? In forensic investigation one uses advanced equipment to eliminate the subjective quality of human perception.

Could making a computer program be an option. Or is human perception actually necessary?

I hope these are not stupid comments. I don't know much about this system, except some of what has been written on here. So could have a faulty understanding.

 

[Adymus]

No, I have a bigger penis!

Random bullet points inspired by this post.

Oh snap! I didn't even notice you edited that, I can't believe I let this slip through the cracks!

I'm glad you decided not to just leave me with a cheesy cop-out, these are actually pretty good questions.

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.

No. You see what you are calling "Personality Types" is a part of a bigger phenomenon called "Cognitive Configuration" that can be read and identified through Physiological Cues, there is no this before that, it is all apart of the same phenomenon. Typology models make the claim that there are 16 different kinds of humans, not including gender, and this happens to be true. According to Typology models they can be separated based on certain principles and based like dicotomies and cognitive functions. So they will define these principles in certain ways, for example "An extrovert is a person that is energized by interacting with the outside world."

They are attempting to refer to an Objective Cognitive configuration, they are doing it in their own flawed way, but they are attempting to refer to a phenomenon that actually does exist. Pod'Lair theory does actually inform on this Phenomenon, and has actually discovered the existence of what the Typology models are attempting to refer to in their own way. The only problem is, they are doing it all wrong, and based on really poor assumptions of how these phenomenon are supposed to work.

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.]

I would actually agree that Pod'Lair should not be called Typology. However, both Typology and Pod'Lair are theories that are designed to inform on the human psychological experience, they are both looking at humans and trying to understand them. All theories are not created equally, and if one theory can provide better evidence that disprove the competing theories that are supposed to inform on the same area, then criticism is fair game.

This is exactly why Science can be used to disprove Religion, they may not be exactly the same ways of looking at the world, but Science and Religion are technically playing the same ball game, they are all theories that are designed to tell humans where they stand in the universe.

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?

Well this gets into the question: "What is a personality?" The problem here is not so much the value of Pod'Lair theory, but what you are assuming it means to have a Cognitive configuration. A Cognitive Configuration the way a person's Conscious and Unconscious Cognitive Functions are energetically ranked, and you are assuming that this means that you are supposed to act the same way as everyone as that has the same Cognitive Configuration; This is just plain not true. This is really no different then believing all men are supposed to act the same way, or that all women are supposed to act the same way.

However, bare in mind that this is not to say that they have "nothing in common", because having the same cognitive Configuration means they will have A LOOOOOTTTT in common, in the same way that a Male has a LOT in common with another male, based on that alone. Psychological cues are not just, you have a big nose, or a wide jaw, they are manifestations of functions in use that indicate how you are energetically wired, what is naturally stimulating for you, and what is naturally more work for you, and then of course what functions you are using and in what order; THAT is what we are measuring, and that all that matters in cognitive configuration, none of that other bullcrap like you are supposed to be interested in science and math to be an INTP or some shit like this that typology would have you believe.

You have to take into account that Cognitive Configuration is just one mathematic algorith that is occurring in the human psyche, along with a plethora of other algorithms and dynamics such as Gender, culture, sexual orientation, lifestyle, upbringing, personal development, and accepted memes, that together as a sum, would create what we call "The Personality." You also have to take into account that having a Cognitive Configuration does not mean you are going to be living a lifestyle that is most conducive to your own Cognitive Configuration, and that is more than often, the case for most people (Which is exactly why the statistics are so radically skewed.) If you have no way to tell when a person is being a heroic and shining version of their Cognitive Configuration, or an unheroic, or stresslocked version of their Cognitive Configuration, then you have nothing at all; your theory is useless. You need Physiological cues to make these distinctions.

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.

If you followed what I just said above, then yes it can, and yes it does. But in case you didn't follow that, I'll reiterate it in different words.

You have your own idea of what cognitive functions are from your MBTI or Jungian model, so I am just going to start by saying, we are not talking about your idea of what you believe cognitive functions are; people Reading does not map out Physiological Cues to Jungian Functions.

The Physiological Cues are the functions, they do not need to be mapped, they are one and the same. If you asked me what Xai was, sure I could explain to you how it worked, but I wouldn't actually be showing you Xai now would I? I would just be explaining my understanding of how it works and what it does. The only way I could truly show you what Xai was, would be to actually point to a person that is using it. They are manifestations that a person either has or does not have, and the nature of their manifestations always appears in ways that are perfectly consistent to our theory of how they work in the psyche, once you get all Five Gears worth of Cues that is. So if you are skeptical still, then you are more than welcome to try and demonstrate an inconsistency.

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.

We will be, mark our words on that, we do not run from proving our on theory right, that is obviously what we want.
Nobody is asking for blind faith, all we are asking of anyone is to look. You don't need to have blind faith to simply perceive, that's just silly.

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.

Actually you are turning a blind eye to the phenomenon, and here is why:

You are right to say that Pod'Lair theory is an interpretation of Natural phenomena, that is the most any theory can be, it is just the price we pay for having human cognition. However, Pod'Lair does more than interpret natural law phenomena, it makes humans aware that these phenomena are existent in the first place by pointing them out. Pointing out existent natural law is not an interpretation at all, it is a physical occurrence that is existing on an objective level, perceivable by all.

The fact is, you are not seeing the phenomenon of which we speak. You actually not seeing anything, you are just grouping people based on arbitrary barriers. If our theory is an interpretation of a phenomenon, then your theory is an interpretation of an interpretation of a speculation. Shit, at least we're actually looking at something that is actually happening, and not just making up theory based on what the dead guy said. You actually are taking a blind eye to the real phenomenon by assuming said phenomenon works in ways that it actually does not, you are actually not "seeing" anything, you just assuming something is there, and you appear to prefer to remain in the dark about this.

 

[Masterlord]

http://www.facebook.com/people/Thomas-Chenault/1435471038?sk=wall

We will be going with launching the E-Book by Dec 15 for several reasons, in no particular order...

* This puts us right before the holiday season which means that people will off work and have more time to hang out watching TV (which we need them to do for the experiment in the E-Book) than pretty much any other time of year, even summer in many ways.

* VERY IMPORTANT: The 1500 Celebrity Samples that will be included in the E-Book for the reader to do a self experiment on, are mostly from the current Fall Lineup of TV shows. This means that we will be putting out these to be looked at when people are already right in the middle of being hooked on these shows by the networks. This will be a major element of our marketing, so timing is critical.

* Our theme will be "This holiday season, give the gift of enlightenment to yourself and others"

* We are asking people to Hero Up as a major part of the book's premise so having this come out right before the New Year's Resolution time is perfect. Marketing: "You New Year's Resolution should be to start being the Hero you were born to be." That's pretty punchy.

* People Pool Training. Everyone wants to know about their family and friends. The holiday season is when you have more of your people bubble around you than most any other times. So we can challenge them to look at the E-Book, then look at at TV Shows they were already going to watch as we have likely read it for them. Now, look at the E-Book, look at the TV Show and then look left to Aunt Martha and right to Cousin Stewie...and freak the fuck out, hehehehehe

* There is a battle against ingorance, apathy and bullies. Suicides are quite popular during the holiday season because it is a time to 'take stock'. When humans do that, in this world we have now, they generally need to buy lots of presents and liquor to deal with the lousy reality of their situation. The desire to do something to make it better is very strong at this time of the year. This is well known. Charities and advocacy groups tend to do better business. It is also well know that this feeling is fleeting. You have to hit it while it is hot and it is hot during the holiday season.

* Loneliness. This is related to the other 'turning over a new leaf' elements but this one deserves special attention. People get very lonely during the holiday season. This makes the sell of Social Alchemy well timed here. People are very susceptible to products relating to 'finding your romantic match' at this time of year. Our pitch will stress heavily this life enhancement due to learning to Mojo read.

* Your Spirits will very much like you starting a ruckus of enlightenment at the beginning of the year as our group New Year's Resolution. We resolve to not let humans be stupid anymore in the year 2012 and beyond. There will need to be a never ending onslaught of educational media products to win the day to be sure, but my Spirits want to take a big ol' swing at The Stupid to get the party started. We are going to lay down the gauntlet "CAN YOU SEE IT? WHAT WILL YOU WHEN YOU DO?"

That is our mission fellow Pod'Lair. Seven weeks to rumble time. Once this hits, we need to be ready to defend ourselves, our brand and our work as people take a look at our data and experiment with it for themselves with varying degrees of success. We only need 200+ total hard-core Pod'Lair to be able to build a media-based empire without having to ask permission from anyone or anything. 200+ hard-core media production crew members means will have become a serious production group. This group will be known the world over as Pod'Lair Productions, the Big Dragon in this yard called Earth.

Interesting.

 

[tikru]

"inflated or heroic act"

 

[Saoshyant]

http://www.facebook.com/people/Thomas-Chenault/1435471038?sk=wall

We will be going with launching the E-Book by Dec 15 for several reasons, in no particular order...

Bump can anyone from Pod'Lair tell me if this will be released to the public or what?

 

[Auburn]

Well, most of the Podlair members have been banned from this forum.. c.c
But I asked Adymus yesterday and he said they're deciding to do things differently regarding the e-book. I am not sure what that means exactly.

I'll let you know if/when it comes out.

 

[Puffy]

That sounds a bit like a: "we got nothing, sorry."

 

[Auburn]

(..As a general note: I've left podlair and am not going back.)

And...
For anyone else still curious about it, podlair's reads are actually very skewed..
Bias and tainted by a personal agenda.
I'd highly recommend you not trust them.

That is all. o.o

 

[BigApplePi]

Auburn. I was waiting to see what Pod'Lair was doing. Infomercials are not science. Science is science. Must have peer review. Any time one tries to push something they are not unbiased. Too bad their approach here was not fitting, IMO, not that I'm any expert.

 

[Gather_Wanderer]

(..As a general note: I've left podlair and am not going back.)

And...
For anyone else still curious about it, podlair's reads are actually very skewed..
Bias and tainted by a personal agenda.
I'd highly recommend you not trust them.

That is all. o.o

Dammit Auburn. That loop I was talking about? I may as well be going crazy over here now.

In seriousness, I'm extremely disappointed in how they're handling things over there. I haven't been over there to check things out in a long time, but it kind of seems like they're letting Thomas and his over-protectiveness of his pet idea ruin things. The way they are handling the process of getting this thing into the mainstream is the like the least intelligent, strategic thing I've seen an organization do. They're going to ruin their product--which could actually be a solid one--just by the petty little bullshit they can't allow themselves to get around. Who even is running things over there? Madness.

I didn't want to say anything about them being skewed with their reads, but I couldn't help but note the fact that they know when people come from here, and they love to f**k with INTPf members. I tried to not to let this get in the way of analysis and still have been considering everything, but now that you've said this it kind of confirms for me that they're not being totally honest with their methods.

You've obviously seen much more than I have, but those are my thoughts.