• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • See https://www.intpforum.com/threads/upgrade-at-10-am-gmt.27631/

Guide to typing in real time.

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
I understand that as INTPs many of you will meet this with skepticism, All I can say is that my colleges and I have been reading people for quite sometime and have perfected it into an art. I am 99% percent certain of the validity of this material, and it is constantly being confirmed for me everyday, just by dealing with different types and seeing their cognitive functions in action. So try some of it out, maybe you'll see what I am talking about. I am actually tempted to make a Youtube video about this so I can show videos, analyze them, and point out the functions in real time.

This requires you have at least a basic knowledge of cognitive processes, so if you don't you might want to look the up and get an understanding of what all the jargon I am about to throw out means.


E/I - This one can be tricky, as a person might be talking a lot and still not an Extrovert. You see this mainly in IxxJs. Watch the person's posture: are they leaning forward into the conversation or are they sitting back. An extrovert will generally not lean back unless they are in a dark place in their lives.
What are their hands doing? Introverts like to keep themselves poised, and maybe move their hands around when describing something, but they always go back to their poised positions right after. Plus you can also see an Extrovert (even if they are quiet) get more and more energized as they talk (Unless they are afraid of being hurt, or again, in a dark place.)

Ni: Watch their eyes, because perception, whether it be sensing or intuition is all in the eyes. An Ni user will do something my colleagues and I call the "Ni drift." When they do this, you will see they move their eyes to the upper left corner. It is kind of a dreamy like look, think JD from scrubs, it's exactly like that (Which is cool because he is an INFJ character.) This means that the person is introverting to check their Ni model for more information. Here is a video clip of Jesse Jackson (An ENFJ) using an Ni drift in a really pronounced way: He does it at 0:19 and again at about 1:01, plus other times.
YouTube- Jesse Jackson's David and Goliath speech
Keep in mind these two things, Ni users might hide their drifts in many ways. NJs are very aware of how they look to people and may not want to be seen drifting about in mid conversation, especially the women, do to how rude it is to look like you are introverting in mid conversation. Ni is a left brain function and will usually do it to the upper left, but if they have better control over it, then it might be to the lower left (sometimes to the right too, but I think that might be Ni, and then checking it with Ti), or close their eyes and drift. Also, keep in mind that an Introvert will naturally have to drift more than an Extrovert. Also note (This is very important) that you will see eye drifts to the right as well (This is usually for right brained functions like Ti and Fi)
Oh oh oh! And don't fall into the pitfall of seeing an ISTP's and ISFP's tertiary Ni and thinking they are intuitive. They drift too, only they will not bring out as much as an INFJ for example as that process is not as strong for them.

Ne: The first thing you should notice is that Ne users bounce once their Ne get's going. Check out Milla Jovovich (an ENTP)
YouTube- Milla Jovovich interview

Notice she is continuously moving except for when she has to go in and check her Ti (When she stops and looks to the right)?
Now for her eyes, an Ne types eyes to two things, "Bounce" (again) and "flash." When an Ne using type (that can be INTPs, INFPs, ENFPs, and ENTPs) are pattern surfing for possibilities their eyes sometimes bounces rapidly in different directions, Milla does that at about 1:05.
Also Ne users, specifically ENFPs, will widen their eyes at the person they are talking to while saying something important or otherwise just accentuated. Check out Dom DeLuise at 0:20, see that thing he did with his eyes? That is the Ne flash baby.

Ti - When person uses Ti they will probably look to the right, and drop all emotion on their face, even INFJs with Tertiary Ti do this. You can see Milla Jovovich do this, as I pointed out.

Te - You should be able to see them coming at you with extroverted judgment, but the face will be still an emotionless. Sometimes they raise their eye brows, but it is a "push" so to speak with Te. Kind of vague I know, but It's kind of hard to explain. Also look at how they are listening to the other person talk, if there face is completely straight, and only maybe doing the occasional nod, then it could be Te. This is best compared to the following.

Fe - Fe should be one of the first things to stick out on an Fe dominant type, or even one that has it in Auxiliary position (Although developed INFJs and ISFJs like to hide in their Ti). Basically what Fe looks like is they are using their emotions to push what they are saying, basically accentuating their points.
This is why it is an "extroverted" function, it is directed emotion that is meant to influence and respond to the environment, unlike Fi which is only inner subjective emotional judgment (meant only for the individual.) Every type who has Fe in their top four will use this, even us INTPs, dispite the fact that it is our inferior function.
Fe will come out mainly in two places The Mouth, and the voice. With every type that has Fe higher on the top four you will see Fe appear higher up on the face, all the way to the Eyes. Which means ENFJs and ESFJs will use Fe with pretty much the entire face, and INTPs and ISTP will use it mainly in the mouth, and for the most part keeping the eyes straight. Fe in the voice makes it sound melodic so to speak, using pitch inflections to accentuate their points. This is best understood when compared to Fi.

Fi - Fi will also show up in either the Mouth or the Voice... or both. One thing to keep in mind though, this is introverted judgement, which means it is meant for only the individual. So when you see a person's face contorting with emotion then you should ask yourself "Was that for everyone else or was that for themselves?" When Fi appears in the voice, you are hearing convictions, and the voice will take a more weighted tone, usually somewhat monotonous. But it is basically a tone that is saying "please recognize how important this is to me." For those of you who have INTJ friends, have you ever seen them get intense, like when something important to them is challenged? You know how their voice gets really low and they start speaking in one steady tone? That's Fi.

But to best get these ideas across, I'll show you some video examples of both Fe and Fi.

Cathrine Keener (INFP
YouTube- Catherine Keener interview with Moving Pictures during Toronto 2007

Kim Basinger (INFP)
YouTube- Kim Basinger interview


Okay look at that "awwww" movenment Cathrine Keener has at 0:15. That quick little shrug and what she did with her face was her checking her Fi with how she feels about working with Sean Penn.
Now look at Kim Basinger, at about 1:01 she just send out a torrent of Fi in both her voice and in her face up to 1:09. You can see she is really feeling what she is talking about.

Tyra Banks (ESFJ)
YouTube- Gossip Girl Interview - Tyra Banks

I'm not going to reference any particular point in time because it's all over the place. Notice how every since emotive cue she throws out, ever smile, every eye flash is meant for the benefit of the outside world? Her voice is more melodic and animated, it bounces around different pitches to create interest.

Si - Okay this one might just be confusing, because the eyes will look to the upper or lower left just like Ni, the only thing is this: It doesn't look as "dreamy" as Ni, if that even makes sense. It looks more like they are going inside to just check some details, not go on some Scubs daydream.

Tom Cruise (ISFJ)
YouTube- History of Psychiatry

starting at 0:13, he goes inside and looks at his past attitude of psychiatry. Pretty much everytime he turns to the left, he is checking his inner Si model of the past. You see quite a bit of Fe and Ti in that video clip too.


Se
- you can usually see it on Se dominants or Auxiliaries, who mainly take in information from outside details, by observing how responsive they are to outside stimuli. They do a lot of darting of the eyes, and zoning in quickly on things that get their attention.
It's pretty hard to point out what it "looks" like when it is used in real time, especially on a youtube video, I am actually finding myself at a loss for words. You generally have to see it for yourself in person. What I can talk about is how it it look when it is used abstractly. Bare with me here because I am about to vere away from Jungian theory. Se can be used out of real time as a memory keeping function. When used like this then the person is essentially reliving what they went through before. This is different from Si, because Si is generally used to go back and look at little detailed notes they took in the past, while Se is for go back and actually reliving an event. This is why I can remember details like names, and conversations better than my ESTP friend, but he can remember how to get to places better than I can; Because he can go back inside and re live where he was when he took certain turns and what have you. The Jury is still out on whether this is Se at all (And not Ni), but I think it is just because of how tactile it is on the body. When you see a person using this Se "reliving" then their body might start moving and responding the way that it did at that exact moment. For example an Se using Martial artist, when reviewing a fight will start moving their body as if it were happening again.


Some thoughts:
You probably noticed I left Thinking functions pretty brief and when on pretty long about Feeling functions. The reason for this is because Feeling functions are so much more distinctive than thinking functions when trying to actually "see" Them. Every type has a Thinking and A feeling function, and if you can figure out what their feeling function is, then that automatically tells you what their thinking function is, and narrows down your possibilities to 8 types.


I know I left a lot of this pretty sparse so I will be editing more into this; it will be a work in progress. But I hope you guys will find it helpful, and if there was anything I wasn't clear on, let me know.
 
Last edited:

Fukyo

blurb blurb
Local time
Today, 07:11
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
4,323
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Hmm, interesting...

I have to admit that I don't pay much attention to people's posture,eyes or tone of voice and pay more attention to noticing the patterns in their behavior and how they express themselves verbally (abstract vs. concrete,etc),but upon reading this I remember noticing this mannerisms in people.

I do the eye thing a lot when I talk.Especially when I start to go into explaining something abstract my eyes automatically go up and to the right and I also tend to do the "eye bounce".

It irritates people because they think I'm either spacing out or not paying attention to them.



Totally off topic: JD from Scrubs INFJ? He always looked like an ENFP to me.His imagination seems very Ne.I could see him as I, but J... he's too random and scattered. :confused:
Maybe I'm interpreting his functions wrongly though.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Hmm, interesting...

I have to admit that I don't pay much attention to people's posture,eyes or tone of voice and pay more attention to noticing the patterns in their behavior and how they express themselves verbally (abstract vs. concrete,etc),but upon reading this I remember noticing this mannerisms in people.

I do the eye thing a lot when I talk.Especially when I start to go into explaining something abstract my eyes automatically go up and to the right and I also tend to do the "eye bounce".

It irritates people because they think I'm either spacing out or not paying attention to them.



Totally off topic: JD from Scrubs INFJ? He always looked like an ENFP to me.His imagination seems very Ne.I could see him as I, but J... he's too random and scattered. :confused:
Maybe I'm interpreting his functions wrongly though.
When meeting new people, there are probably times where they will remind you of someone you know. More times than not, this is because they are using a similar set of cognitive functions, maybe even the same ones.

But yeah, that's why INFJ women tend to get really good at hiding their drifts, because they have to do it, it's like an itch, but they don't want to look like they are spacing out in mid conversation.

As for JD, the way he daydreams is like more of a linear story unfolding, which I would say is more Ni than Ne. Like I will come up with random things with Ne that are like what JD does, but I won't actually watch it unfold in my head.
Also, JD doesn't really seem to have any Fi, his emotions are going into pushing with Fe. As for being a J, this is why he is really stern about doing things his way with Dr.Cox, also why he is really articulate.

But considering we are talking about a fictional character, we can't really expect him to be faithful to all of the cognitive processes anyway. So it's kind of beside the point.
 

Jaico

(mono no aware)
Local time
Today, 03:41
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
265
Location
Lost in my thoughts
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

That's pretty nifty how you've got a system all set up on how to see the different functions in action - it's great to see how someone else goes about typing others. I do have some questions about it, however (so you were definitely right about the skepticism bit - it's mainly about your accuracy, though ;)).

First up, how are you sure about the celebrity personality types? I was only able to 'confirm' (and I use that word cautiously, because only the person in question can determine their real type - on a side note, that reminds me of the sorting hat) that Tom Cruise was an ISTP according to the typelogic page on ISTPs, while I couldn't dig up much on the others. While the others could very well be the types that you listed them as, it's still impossible to tell unless they take the MBTI and publish their results to the world.

To go further with this point...how would you be able to be 99% sure of your typing just through looking at their body movements, without getting to know them? I'm sure that INTPs aren't the only ones capable of projecting an "outside face" to people we don't know very well - so how can you be so sure of the celebrities, and others that you may just casually observe (I'm making an assumption that you do type people off-the-cuff without knowing them too well and without really following up with an MBTI - please correct me if that's false). Furthermore, if it's sort of a "one-shot deal" - the person could simply be displaying a function that they might not usually (or prefer to) display while you see them...just because it might be a "natural environment" doesn't necessarily mean that the person is acting with their dominant function first.

Which leads me to another problem (although this is really a problem with the MBTI in general) - what happens if their function order isn't normal? Someone could have two functions neck-in-neck...but they could both be judging or perceiving functions - then what?

Another question I have is how do you know that you're not just looking for signs in a certain person because you want to believe that they're a certain 'type', or you only pick out the traits that seem to correlate with a certain function? What I guess I'm trying to say is - what about confirmation bias (i.e. only looking for signs that you want to see)? It's a far too common problem in the world to only search for signs that prove your point, while ignoring those that disprove it - take that Kim Basinger clip, for example. It could just as easily be Si working there (recalling memories, if I heard correctly) as it could Fi, and any number of such examples could probably be dug up, as well.

Ah! Now that all of that's out...:p. I, myself, only type people extensively after getting to know them well - there's all sorts of things (like I mentioned above) that could be clouding the real personality; I might say "heh, that crowd looks very SJ," but I won't be as confident as you are in my predictions...there's just too many unknown factors. I'm sort of reminded of the stuff that Sherlock Holmes does whenever I try to type people - but then I remember that Holmes lived in a far more rigid society that had rules, and he simply learned those rules and exploited them. The rules today are a lot more complex, and it would be far harder to perform the sort of analytical magic that Holmes works with that sort of accuracy (at least for me, anyways).
 

Toad

True King of Mushroomland!!!
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,781
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Wow, very interesting guide adymus.

I'm not sure if you can deduce a person's type on their movements, but still very interesting.

I noticed xSFJ's can be very domineering. I wonder what psychiatrists would have to say about Tom Cruise.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

First up, how are you sure about the celebrity personality types? I was only able to 'confirm' (and I use that word cautiously, because only the person in question can determine their real type - on a side note, that reminds me of the sorting hat) that Tom Cruise was an ISTP according to the typelogic page on ISTPs, while I couldn't dig up much on the others. While the others could very well be the types that you listed them as, it's still impossible to tell unless they take the MBTI and publish their results to the world.
Well first of all, I completely disagree that only the person in question can determine their own type, in fact, in many cases a person is very unreliable in understanding their own type. If they don't understand how the theory works then they might misinterpret of of their traits incorrectly. Especially if they are just using Myers-Briggs Dichotomies.
How is typology central more of an authority on this than I am? I'm definitely not saying I am an authority at all, but what could they possibly be doing differently from me other than just analyzing Tom Cruise? It's pretty clear that guy is no P, even if you are just using the most rudimentary of typing methods.
Secondly the MBTI test is at best only about 60% accurate, it was never really meant to read people. It was always just a short hand method of quickly putting people into categories, and ignores most of the math that is going into personality typing.

It is not impossible to tell a person's type without having them take the test, and that is really what the whole point of this guide is. While you can hide some functions, you will be using other functions to hide them. Your cognitive functions are in the front line of your personality, it's what you use to deal with the world on a day to day basis, this isn't something you really need to know the person to see. But to answer your question better, the accuracy of this typing method has been using on people I know and developed this technique with, and other colleagues of ours that have "Confirmed" types.

To go further with this point...how would you be able to be 99% sure of your typing just through looking at their body movements, without getting to know them? I'm sure that INTPs aren't the only ones capable of projecting an "outside face" to people we don't know very well - so how can you be so sure of the celebrities, and others that you may just casually observe (I'm making an assumption that you do type people off-the-cuff without knowing them too well and without really following up with an MBTI - please correct me if that's false). Furthermore, if it's sort of a "one-shot deal" - the person could simply be displaying a function that they might not usually (or prefer to) display while you see them...just because it might be a "natural environment" doesn't necessarily mean that the person is acting with their dominant function first.
I have people that I have gotten to know to fall back on, and confirm all of these hypotheses. But real arguement is, you don't have to get to know people to be able to accurately read them, for the reasons I listed above. There is really nothing "deep" about your cognitive functions, it would be like saying I have to get to know a person before confirming they have blue eyes. There is always a way to see through the face they are showing the world. Your personas are separate from your cognitive functions, and they will manifest in different ways depending on what your cognitive functions are. It is not possible for a person to unconscious act EXACTLY like another type just because they are in a different environment, there will always be noticable differences. You're right though, people might just display functions that they are not as strong with just to fit the situation, and it is difficult to read that, but it is still readable. For instance, INFJ males like to use their Ti to cut off their Fe and go "Stone-faced" if you will. But you can still observe that they are using their Ti to control their Fe from being let out too much. As opposed to an INTP that would be using Fe to not look so robotic.
There is really no way I can prove this to you, but I believe that no one is untypable, and with enough experience, knowledge, and some keen eyes, you can see through any fascade.

Which leads me to another problem (although this is really a problem with the MBTI in general) - what happens if their function order isn't normal? Someone could have two functions neck-in-neck...but they could both be judging or perceiving functions - then what?
I do think it is possible to have Irregular functions in a sense that the ones in your top four are developed Lop-sidedly. For instance an INTP with Stronger Fe than Si. But that's really not a problem when reading people, because the functions will always be there, there is never a time when one is absent, no matter how under-developed it is.
Yeah, I know people on the internet claim they are various X types, but never in my experience have I encountered a person that had REALLY irregular functions, like two dominants or something, or both Ne and Se at the same time. Or an INTP with stronger Ne than Ti, that just doesn't even make any sense. So I really don't see why I should take that possibility very seriously.


Another question I have is how do you know that you're not just looking for signs in a certain person because you want to believe that they're a certain 'type', or you only pick out the traits that seem to correlate with a certain function? What I guess I'm trying to say is - what about confirmation bias (i.e. only looking for signs that you want to see)? It's a far too common problem in the world to only search for signs that prove your point, while ignoring those that disprove it - take that Kim Basinger clip, for example. It could just as easily be Si working there (recalling memories, if I heard correctly) as it could Fi, and any number of such examples could probably be dug up, as well.
Well it is hard to do that in the times where you don't know who the person is. But yeah, wishful thinking is sometimes a pitfall, all I can say is try to withdrawal from your read, that's the best you can do to avoid bias. It helps to have a lot of friends who do this too though, which I have. Considering the fact that Si and Fi have two very distincting looks, I wouldn't really agree with how easily they can be confused. I mean, maybe if you are still inexperienced then I suppose you could, there is also the factor of one being a left brain function and one being a right.

Ah! Now that all of that's out...:p. I, myself, only type people extensively after getting to know them well - there's all sorts of things (like I mentioned above) that could be clouding the real personality; I might say "heh, that crowd looks very SJ," but I won't be as confident as you are in my predictions...there's just too many unknown factors. I'm sort of reminded of the stuff that Sherlock Holmes does whenever I try to type people - but then I remember that Holmes lived in a far more rigid society that had rules, and he simply learned those rules and exploited them. The rules today are a lot more complex, and it would be far harder to perform the sort of analytical magic that Holmes works with that sort of accuracy (at least for me, anyways).
Look the fact that this methodology has survived my scrutiny and testing as long as it has, has given me a reason to trust it. I'm not saying that is why you should trust me, by all means, read people how ever you want, but I have found something that works exceptionally well, and even more so than just observing how they live and what they like to do. I had all of the same questions you did when I first started doing this, and I have resolved all of them for myself. What you don't realize is, there is much to personality that you will not be able to read just by matching up behavioral patterns. For instance, how extroverts are not necessarily very talkative, or how Introverts can sometimes rant on and on like an Extrovert. Or how J's can come off as being a laid back P. There is a lot of bullshit you will always have to sift through, I merely suggest short cuts.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Wow, very interesting guide adymus.

I'm not sure if you can deduce a person's type on their movements, but still very interesting.

I noticed xSFJ's can be very domineering. I wonder what psychiatrists would have to say about Tom Cruise.
I'm not surprised you guys are not exactly accepting this with open arms, you are INTPs after all (Which is why I have been hesitant to talk about this practice for quite some time now.) I probably didn't do they system very much justice with how I explained it.

But it's really the proof of concept that got me to think this way. It's such an ethereal concept, and pretty unbelievable that you can deduce a person is using Ni just by some thing they do with there eyes. But it has worked and proven itself consistently over and over again for me.
 

Kuu

>>Loading
Local time
Today, 00:11
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
3,399
Location
The wired
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Very interesting. Nevertheless, I also find flaw in the approach of body language... I always focus more on overall behaviors and body language comes only as a small part, as it can be deceiving, and faked if one is knowledgeable enough...

It's under pressure when one can find people's types more easily, observing their reaction to their weaknesses.



(Am I the only one being driven insane by the thread title? :confused:)
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Very interesting. Nevertheless, I also find flaw in the approach of body language... I always focus more on overall behaviors and body language comes only as a small part, as it can be deceiving, and faked if one is knowledgeable enough...

It's under pressure when one can find people's types more easily, observing their reaction to their weaknesses.



(Am I the only one being driven insane by the thread title? :confused:)
A person cannot possibly completely hide all of their functions, in order to hide one, they have to show you another. Even then, they cannot stay out of their comfort zone for extend periods of time.
But whether you agree Visual typing or not, nothing is wrong with a hybrid approach.

Although I'd say one benefit to mine is you don't actually have to interact with the person in question. They are less likely to hide themselves if they don't know they are being read.
 

SEPKA

What???
Local time
Today, 14:11
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
228
Location
I suggest I could put the coordinate here but then
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

I think MBTI said that only the person can determine the type because it is based on preference, which is inside their brain rather than observable. You can type people using Kiersey's Temperament instead, which is based on long-term behaviours, however it had less correlation with cognitive function.
Also, there is a lot of variables that influence body language. I for once almost always fake my body language. Body language will also be influenced by social pressure, practising, physical abilities, etc.
I am also skeptic about the method in which you verify that your method actually work, because you did not state it in your post, so it is hard to repeat.
By the way, "guild" should be changed to "guide" (I think most of you noticed that).
 

sniktawekim

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today, 02:11
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
611
Location
Dayton, OH
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

I think MBTI said that only the person can determine the type because it is based on preference.
i think that your preference affects your external.
however, if someones preference is to throw someone else off, then that would say something about their preference.. if you were able to detect that they were trying to throw you off.
 

sniktawekim

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today, 02:11
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
611
Location
Dayton, OH
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

argh, i once had a complete grasp on this.. but could someone remind me.
the p makes the x in axaa the extroverted funciont, and the j makes the x in aaxa the extroverted function?
and what does the i and e do again?
:/
 

Toad

True King of Mushroomland!!!
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,781
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

(Am I the only one being driven insane by the thread title? :confused:)
No. I want to stab Adymus for incorrectly spelling Guide lol. :evil:
 

sniktawekim

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today, 02:11
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
611
Location
Dayton, OH
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

its funny how intps for the most part dont care about certain details, but on somethings, every detail matters..
 

flow

Audiophile/Insomniac
Local time
Today, 00:11
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
1,167
Location
Iowa
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Well, I'm satisfied with this synopsis. My only question is, who are your collegues? I'd love to talk MBTI irl, but my friends aren't as interested in psychology as me... And unemployment leaves me colleguesless. :confused:
 

SEPKA

What???
Local time
Today, 14:11
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
228
Location
I suggest I could put the coordinate here but then
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

argh, i once had a complete grasp on this.. but could someone remind me.
the p makes the x in axaa the extroverted funciont, and the j makes the x in aaxa the extroverted function?
and what does the i and e do again?
:/
'i'/'e' tell you where does your most preferred function oriented to.
So for INTP 'P' tell you that your extroverted function is N so the other function T must be introverted, 'I' tell you that your dominant function is introverted, therefore Ti is your dominant function.
While ENTP 'P' tell you that your extroverted function is N, and 'E' tell you that your dominant function is extroverted so Ne is your dominant function.
(Note: "you" have many meanings in the preceding 2 paragraphs)
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

I think MBTI said that only the person can determine the type because it is based on preference, which is inside their brain rather than observable. You can type people using Kiersey's Temperament instead, which is based on long-term behaviours, however it had less correlation with cognitive function.
Also, there is a lot of variables that influence body language. I for once almost always fake my body language. Body language will also be influenced by social pressure, practising, physical abilities, etc.
I am also skeptic about the method in which you verify that your method actually work, because you did not state it in your post, so it is hard to repeat.
By the way, "guild" should be changed to "guide" (I think most of you noticed that).
About Functions being entirely internal and unobservable, that's just plain wrong. Just look at cognitive functions that are meant to engage the outside world like Fe, Te, Se, Ne, to suggest that they would leave no print on the outside is pretty counter intuitive considering they are focused on the outside.
You can type using Kiersey's method, but I wouldn't recommend it, because it is slow and clumsy. All Kiersey did is point out what types appear to want to be around each other, and what types appear to be doing, but he neglects the math that is involved with why this is. It is far easier to misread someone using temperment theory because you are trying to fit someone in a group of observed traits, by observing what they seem to be driving at.
What I do observes what Functions they are using, and if you can see clearly what functions they are using and in what order, it cuts out all the guess work speculation you would have to do with Temperment.

The fact that you are trying to hide your body language is in itself revealing. You can actually see types figiting about trying to look comfortable. Trying to look comfortable, looks very different from actually being comfortable. It's really not that hard to see through the things you are acting like are impenetrible barriers.


sniktawekim just said a mouthful. He is absolutely right, there are certain types that will try and hide themselvs more than other types. Not just more often, but more effectively too. These are generally IxxJs and ExxP, because of the fact that their thinking and feeling judgement is in the middle, and they can play with both fairly well. But again this is still not a road block. For instance if an INFJ is putting up a lot of Ti to hide their Fe. All you have to do is spot their Ni and Ti, and you essentially already know what they are just by process of elimination. (it is not possible for a dominant Ni to completely hide their Ni, it's like air to them, they have to go back into it sometime.)
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

Well, I'm satisfied with this synopsis. My only question is, who are your collegues? I'd love to talk MBTI irl, but my friends aren't as interested in psychology as me... And unemployment leaves me colleguesless. :confused:
We are a group of people who are working on developing a new Personality psychology model called "Pod'lair". It is based on Jungian theory, but it expands upon it. When the book is published then everything will have completely original names. I am not the founder or the mastermind behind all of this, I've only helped develop some of the theories and methods of typing.
 

sniktawekim

Well-Known Member
Local time
Today, 02:11
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
611
Location
Dayton, OH
Re: Guild to typing in real time.

The fact that you are trying to hide your body language is in itself revealing. You can actually see types figiting about trying to look comfortable. Trying to look comfortable, looks very different from actually being comfortable. It's really not that hard to see through the things you are acting like are impenetrible barriers.
haha this is a much much better way of stating what i was trying to say.
 

Jaico

(mono no aware)
Local time
Today, 03:41
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
265
Location
Lost in my thoughts
Interesting. I guess I'll have to take your word on the typing for now - there's nothing I can say to disprove you; I'll have a shot at it myself, actually. I do still have unanswered questions, though...again, regarding accuracy.

You said that you've tested your theories mainly on colleagues who've been "confirmed" - but wouldn't you already partially know these people, thus colouring your perceptions on them before their 'evaluation?' I hope you'll understand why I'm somewhat skeptical of your claims of being able to type people you don't know and claim that it's accurate without checking what their type is. Secondly, you yourself say that the MBTI is only about 60% accurate (and you're right - it is filled with all sorts of problems on its own, anyhow)...and yet you tested your predictions of your colleagues against their 'confirmed' status (assuming that they were confirmed by the test - if there's some other evaluation tool that types people aside from the MBTI/Keirsey, it's unknown to me); it just seems odd that an unreliable control was used - wouldn't that fact alone mean that 40% of your correct identifications would have been, at best, maybes? Thirdly - you say that it, in theory, it would be quite difficult to catch someone who's projecting a function that they normally wouldn't (i.e. INFJ showing Ti, etc.)...so I wouldn't say it would be too much of a leap of faith to imagine a situation where Ti suppressing Fe and Ti overriding Fe (or perhaps vice versa) were indistinguishable from another. In this case, the person wouldn't be impossible to type - they'd be typed incorrectly. Finally, about what you said about mixed up function order...I think that a cursory peek into this thread, you'll find a lot of people with non-"INTP" function orders (for the first four); in this case, wouldn't considerable amounts of other functions pop up and throw off the typing even more? The results were (for most of the posts) from a test; while obviously not perfect, it's the closest thing to an objective measurement of function preference that's been found.

And I do realize the fact that extroversion =/= being talkative, and all that jazz - hence the questions on displaying non-"core" functions (as well as the idea that we're living in a more complex time; things aren't always what they seem). I think that something like this could be wicked awesome...I just want to make sure that the questions I have about it are cleared.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
You said that you've tested your theories mainly on colleagues who've been "confirmed" - but wouldn't you already partially know these people, thus colouring your perceptions on them before their 'evaluation?' I hope you'll understand why I'm somewhat skeptical of your claims of being able to type people you don't know and claim that it's accurate without checking what their type is.
It's not just close friends that we have tested this on. We actually have a Meetup.com group that gets a steady flow of new members that we can type. The new members either already know what they are, have no idea, or have taken the test and got an inaccurate result and now think they are something they are not. Either way, we read them without knowing what they are, and even in the case where the told us they are a type that they are not, we still saw through it. In the case of correcting a bad read from the MBTI test, it would be inaccurate to say we only use visual methods, we use everything we can. At some point we try and prove to the person that they are not the type the think they are, and will use examples of how they actively use their cognitive functions in their lives. Obviously we can't just say "You are a _____ Because we all say you are."
So yeah, testing has been done on plenty of fresh subjects, and it still holds true.

Secondly, you yourself say that the MBTI is only about 60% accurate (and you're right - it is filled with all sorts of problems on its own, anyhow)...and yet you tested your predictions of your colleagues against their 'confirmed' status (assuming that they were confirmed by the test - if there's some other evaluation tool that types people aside from the MBTI/Keirsey, it's unknown to me); it just seems odd that an unreliable control was used - wouldn't that fact alone mean that 40% of your correct identifications would have been, at best, maybes?
I just said I don't agree with the test, why would you assume I was using it as a confirmation? We confirm our types by relating the theory with how we actually think and live our lives. My collegues and I confirmed our types all by using the test as a starting point, and then relating the research we did on how our types work back to how we actually indentify with it. It's a pretty subjective form of control, I know, but if the next best thing is a faulty test, then I'll take the subjective approach.


Thirdly - you say that it, in theory, it would be quite difficult to catch someone who's projecting a function that they normally wouldn't (i.e. INFJ showing Ti, etc.)...so I wouldn't say it would be too much of a leap of faith to imagine a situation where Ti suppressing Fe and Ti overriding Fe (or perhaps vice versa) were indistinguishable from another. In this case, the person wouldn't be impossible to type - they'd be typed incorrectly.
To someone who has little experience with this typing method, yeah I imagine it might be a little difficult to tell the difference. But it is far from impossible. On one hand you have a person who is naturally warm, but is using their Ti to "cut off" their Fe, and on the other hand you have someone that is naturally rather straight faced, but using a weaker Fe function to "warm up". If you watch enough xxFJs and enough xxTP you will begin to be able to see the difference, that's really all I can say on this.

Finally, about what you said about mixed up function order...I think that a cursory peek into this thread, you'll find a lot of people with non-"INTP" function orders (for the first four); in this case, wouldn't considerable amounts of other functions pop up and throw off the typing even more? The results were (for most of the posts) from a test; while obviously not perfect, it's the closest thing to an objective measurement of function preference that's been found.
I've seen the thread and I think that test they are basing this on is complete garbage (I think I said this is an reply.)
Some of the Cognitive processes are so similar to each other (Like Ti and Fi, or Si and Ni) that a question that is targeting one could easily get a similar answer from one that uses another. On top of that, if you really listen to some of the people who claim they have irregular function order, it is pretty clear they are just mistaking a normal function order for something else.
Simple logic refutes this, most people who took that test got something substantially different from a normal INTP function order, and yet they don't act that different from any other INTP. Don't you think someone that Got Ti-Fi-Ni-Fe Would act astronomically different from your run of the mill INTP?

And I do realize the fact that extroversion =/= being talkative, and all that jazz - hence the questions on displaying non-"core" functions (as well as the idea that we're living in a more complex time; things aren't always what they seem). I think that something like this could be wicked awesome...I just want to make sure that the questions I have about it are cleared.
You're right, and I would hope that this method will teach people to see through how things seem.
 

Zero

The Fiend
Local time
Today, 06:11
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
894
I didn't even know there was a formula for this. I just do it myself.. by, you know, talking to them. O_<;
 

del

Randomly Generated
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
282
Location
St. Paul, MN
This is a great thread.

I'm curious if you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any thoughts on how to further differentiate and spot a person's primary & secondary function.

I ask because I have a friend who's very clearly an NTP, but it's really difficult to decide E or I based on everyday descriptions, as most people are pretty borderline -- in fact, E/I scores on the MBTI are normally distributed. I can see Ti and Ne, but I can't tell which is dominant.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
This is a great thread.

I'm curious if you (or anyone else, for that matter) have any thoughts on how to further differentiate and spot a person's primary & secondary function.

I ask because I have a friend who's very clearly an NTP, but it's really difficult to decide E or I based on everyday descriptions, as most people are pretty borderline -- in fact, E/I scores on the MBTI are normally distributed. I can see Ti and Ne, but I can't tell which is dominant.
If he is an introvert he is still going to be more comfortable inside himself than engaged with the outside. Basically try and observe how much time in social situations he is spending outside and engaging people and inside himself. Keep in mind that Engaging the outside world does not necessarily mean interacting with it directly, extroversion can also mean listening and simply gathering information. When he does actually talk (to people other than you, preferably ones he does not know well.) try and observe how comfortable he is with it. Does it look like it comes to him naturally, or is he having to push himself to do it?

Basically determining what function is on top usually just means determining the strength of them. For instance when you see Fe in a person then they can be one of 8 types. But if you can determine that based on the strength of the Fe, they must have Fe in either Dominant of auxiliary position; Now you are down to 4 types. Now you should observe how they are using Fe, are they being energized the be experience of interacting itself, or does it just look like they are using it to push an idea, like it is only a tool. The former would mean it is dominant, and the latter would mean it is probably auxiliary.
 

Waterstiller

... runs deep
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
732
Location
over teh rainbow
Great job.

If only for mentioning the 'Ne bounce'. I get really self-conscious when doing that and always think I freak people out when I go on one of my tangents and then suddenly stop and become stoic.

I had an INTP professor that would literally kick chairs over when he got into an Ne tangent on something he was passionate about. And then a quarter later I think people got to him and all his movements were subdued and more 'professional'. I thought it was really sad. But then I realized I began doing the same.

But if I can be as enchanting/awesome as Milla Jovovich was in that interview, I think I'll embrace my bounce. :p
 

Nicholas A. A. E.

formerly of the Basque-lands
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
509
Location
Shoreline, Washington
Interesting ideas, but I won't depend on them without better, more controlled evidence verifying them.

You say you disagree with the MBTI - but what then do you use to define the types and functions?

True to type, I have been bothered by my inability to find concise, well-constructed definitions of the functions. I am uncomfortable discussing them until I have found such definitions.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Interesting ideas, but I won't depend on them without better, more controlled evidence verifying them.

You say you disagree with the MBTI - but what then do you use to define the types and functions?

True to type, I have been bothered by my inability to find concise, well-constructed definitions of the functions. I am uncomfortable discussing them until I have found such definitions.
For the most part, the Jungian Model of the Cognitive functions, and the MB model of the types. However, I disagree with the MBTI means of typing people. The MBTI test was only meant to be a shorthand way of guessing at what your top two functions are, but it overlooks valuable information. MBTI overlooks all the other mathematics that goes into being one type, as well as the fact that everyone uses a Sensing, Intuiting, Feeling, Thinking. Which get's you ridiculous test results like "I'm and ENFP but only a borderline F!" Instead of what it should be which is something more like "I'm an ENFP with developed Te."
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Great job.

If only for mentioning the 'Ne bounce'. I get really self-conscious when doing that and always think I freak people out when I go on one of my tangents and then suddenly stop and become stoic.

I had an INTP professor that would literally kick chairs over when he got into an Ne tangent on something he was passionate about. And then a quarter later I think people got to him and all his movements were subdued and more 'professional'. I thought it was really sad. But then I realized I began doing the same.

But if I can be as enchanting/awesome as Milla Jovovich was in that interview, I think I'll embrace my bounce. :p
Exactly.

These are things many of us have probably already noticed, and maybe even applied them to typing in your own subjective analysis of types. The first thing I started noticing I think was the expressiveness of Fe and the Ni drift. I would see that and Immediately think "Ah, this is some kind of FJ" or "This person is intuitive."
 

cheese

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
3,190
Location
internet/pubs
Wow. I just watched the Tom Cruise video.

Wow. What an incredibly offensive guy. I love how the reporter tries to pacify him with flattery.

Heavy reliance on "history" being an automatic justifier of his views as well - Si? I didn't actually get to hear many reasons, although perhaps I wasn't listening properly.
 

DJArendee

Wandering ISTP
Local time
Today, 02:11
Joined
Jun 10, 2010
Messages
13
With Si dominants, I most frequently notice them using the phrase "you're supposed to ...." But the looking away thing is also common.

Ti I generally recognize by the freezing.
Te I think tends to make a lot of confrontational eye contact when used.

As for Se, you got that right. When someone asks me how I did a move in tae kwon do, I have to demonstrate. Also Se users probably have a tendency to look around at inanimate objects and architecture when idle.
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Yesterday, 20:11
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,138
This is pretty interesting. I'm not sure that video of Tom Cruise is enough to suggest he's an ISFJ however. I would say it is also as equally possible that he is an ESFJ.

Basically I tend to also look for motivations. You have your basic ethical and logical motivations which are more subtle and less conclusive, but then there is also a motivation to what sparks a person's thought processes. Cruise didn't give away any indication of the latter in that video (which I see as more important), but it's clear he was very ethically orientated as opposed to a logical orientation that seeks organization in some way. Interestingly enough IxFJs usually desire to supplement their ethical orientation with a Ti system that wants to develop a more rigorous system of implementation, whereas ExFJs usually desire to supplement their ethical orientation with a more spontaneous and aggressive Te system that organizes their environment more 'spur-of-the-moment' kind of thing. Of course, I don't expect anyone to agree with me on all of this ;). But with that in mind, I feel more certain of ESFJ than I would of ISFJ.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
This is pretty interesting. I'm not sure that video of Tom Cruise is enough to suggest he's an ISFJ however. I would say it is also as equally possible that he is an ESFJ.

Basically I tend to also look for motivations. You have your basic ethical and logical motivations which are more subtle and less conclusive, but then there is also a motivation to what sparks a person's thought processes. Cruise didn't give away any indication of the latter in that video (which I see as more important), but it's clear he was very ethically orientated as opposed to a logical orientation that seeks organization in some way. Interestingly enough IxFJs usually desire to supplement their ethical orientation with a Ti system that wants to develop a more rigorous system of implementation, whereas ExFJs usually desire to supplement their ethical orientation with a more spontaneous and aggressive Te system that organizes their environment more 'spur-of-the-moment' kind of thing. Of course, I don't expect anyone to agree with me on all of this ;). But with that in mind, I feel more certain of ESFJ than I would of ISFJ.
An IxFJ is going to hold their worldview (Si or Ni) as their highest priority, their Fe below that is going to serve to push that worldview and agenda. This is different in an ESFJ or ExFJ because they would begin in the current social dynamic, and then go in to use their Si or Ni to serve the harmony of that dynamic. For an IxFJ their ideal world is in their Si and Ni, not the current world, this is why they will use their Fe to push the social dynamics to resemble the world that is in their Si or Ni regardless of how the current social dynamic feels about it.

Fe is an objective system in itself, much like Te is an objective system. The difference is that Fe is a dynamic that is built on conduct, social norms, etiquette, and tact. Both Fe and Te are mainly concerned with the effectiveness of these systems, in Te this comes in the form of efficient workflow, and in Fe it comes in the form of Social Harmony.

Tom Cruise is a man who has his own idea of how the world should be. His worldview is one that would conflict with our societies current dynamic, but his concern is to push his worldview, becuase this is how society should be. People reading aside, that right there is what you get with dominant worldview (Si or Ni) over Fe.
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Yesterday, 20:11
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,138
An IxFJ is going to hold their worldview (Si or Ni) as their highest priority, their Fe below that is going to serve to push that worldview and agenda. This is different in an ESFJ or ExFJ because they would begin in the current social dynamic, and then go in to use their Si or Ni to serve the harmony of that dynamic. For an IxFJ their ideal world is in their Si and Ni, not the current world, this is why they will use their Fe to push the social dynamics to resemble the world that is in their Si or Ni regardless of how the current social dynamic feels about it.

Fe is an objective system in itself, much like Te is an objective system. The difference is that Fe is a dynamic that is built on conduct, social norms, etiquette, and tact. Both Fe and Te are mainly concerned with the effectiveness of these systems, in Te this comes in the form of efficient workflow, and in Fe it comes in the form of Social Harmony.

Tom Cruise is a man who has his own idea of how the world should be. His worldview is one that would conflict with our societies current dynamic, but his concern is to push his worldview, becuase this is how society should be. People reading aside, that right there is what you get with dominant worldview (Si or Ni) over Fe.
I think I see what you mean. That's a good distinction to keep in mind.
 

Saeros

Destroyer of Worlds
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
246
Location
Inside my head.

Words

Only 1 1-F.
Local time
Today, 06:11
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
3,223
Location
Order
Ted Bundy:

A lot of "eye to the right"-Ti. Possibly Dom Ti because he doesn't seem articulate. IxTP.
Closing of the eyes = Si (checking memory). INTP?
 

cheese

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
3,190
Location
internet/pubs
I think I see Te and Fi on Bundy. I'd guess INTJ.

Also, he looks like Jacob from Lost!

*edit
Second guess would be INFJ - I'm fairly sure of INJ, just a bit unclear whether it's TeFi or FeTi. I thiiink I'd go with TeFi - those eyebrows and the uncomfortable scrunches of emotion...

Then again - is he being honest? This is meant to be one day before his execution btw (I think).
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Saeros, it's best not to read people off of Movies even though it is entirely possible. But anyway, Jim Carry is an ENTP, and Ted Bundy is INFJ (Great job Cheese, you're really improving)

Words: The reason he is not articulating strongly is because he is modulating heavily with Ti, Ti modulates Fe which is his articulation function, so naturally it is going to trip him up. You can see this from the way his head is cocked to the right, and has his eyes to the right the entire time. That is another lesson in itself, seeing a person use a certain function a lot does not mean that it is their dominant function. He was actually doing a lot of Ni to Ti to Fe.

The first thing you should notice is that this guy is no P, he is very directive. Even though he is modulating heavily, he is being completely directive, everything he is saying has a beginning middle and end, none of this is just off the cuff ideas as they come. You can see that this guy would articulate so much faster and more fluidly if he was under less pressure and a more conclusive environment. Yeah, he is soooo not an INTP.

Cheese: That is actually warm articulation we are seeing. It is a bit cooled down because he is usually the hell out of his Ti, but even still, it is far more connective than Te actually is. It is also very held back, Te would not need to hold this much back just to pull off it's straight and fact based appearance. Just from the way his face move, you can kind of speculate how much warmer of a person he would be in other situations.

Is it necessary for him to be honest?
 

Saeros

Destroyer of Worlds
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
246
Location
Inside my head.
Saeros, it's best not to read people off of Movies even though it is entirely possible. But anyway, Jim Carry is an ENTP, and Ted Bundy is INFJ (Great job Cheese, you're really improving)
Thanks. Actually, I wanted to see if it were possible to type the character that the actor is portraying. Do you think that ace ventura (if he really existed as is) would have the same type as Jim Carrey, himself? I doubt that's how he normally behaves :)

edit: I stand corrected: Jim Carrey
Just from the way his face move, you can kind of speculate how much warmer of a person he would be in other situations.
Yes, I'm sure he was a very warm person when he bludgeoned, and strangled each of his 30+ victims :)
 

cheese

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
3,190
Location
internet/pubs
Aha, that makes a lot more sense! I actually started off thinking Fe, but it looked more like Te after a while (to my inexperienced eye). I couldn't think of a compromise, but Ti 'cooling off' Fe and giving it a warm T-ish look works.
I must've tripped on the Fi as well then. And thanks!
 

Words

Only 1 1-F.
Local time
Today, 06:11
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
3,223
Location
Order
Anyone else want to share some videos to "test" this method?

Jim Carey:

cues
1. "Se flash"
2. "Fe smile."

= ESTP.
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
Yes, I'm sure he was a very warm person when he bludgeoned, and strangled each of his 30+ victims :)
Never let stuff like this bias your reads of people. You have completely detach you thoughts and feelings from the person in every way.
 

ckm

still swimming
Local time
Today, 06:11
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
437
Location
Cork
What's your opinion on typing by "consideration" first (dynamics/worldview/stimulus/compass)? The types can be separated into two groups, either primarily dynamics/worldview users or primarily stimulus/compass users, and then further into four groups depending on which of the two "considerations" comes first. Basically, into ExxJ/IxxJ/ExxP/IxxP. Would this be useful for sifting through the seemingly endless real-time quirks there are to be analysed?
 

Saeros

Destroyer of Worlds
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
246
Location
Inside my head.
another to type:

Alexander Arguelles


My guess would be: INTJ.

YouTube- Paradigms of Language Learning

Maybe it's just me, but his expression and mannerisms look a little contrived. If that's not enough to get his type, there is a video of his daily routine in a slightly more relaxed pose in the spoiler. His routine is really quite impressive. He has a lot of discipline, and focus. Of course, that's probably required to learn as many languages as he has.


Also, I have a few questions about your method. Do you use this to type random people you happen to have conversations with, as well as people you know well? How does knowing someone's type influence the way you try to interact with them?
 

Adymus

Banned
Local time
Yesterday, 23:11
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
2,191
Location
Anaheim, CA
INFJ, but I should say that this guy face holds like a motherfucker (which is not a good sign development wise, considering his type) so I can understand why you would go with Te instead of Fe. I am reading that he is a bit gripped up, and you can probably see that too in the way he seems really "itchy" and manic. The more gripped up a person is, the harder they will be to read, so this was a really tricky one.

Yes, I literally read random people I see in public as well as people I know well. It is actually a great help to be a bit more accommodating with people, or to be able to see where they are coming from. For instance, I can see when a person is modulating (did I talk about modulation in this guide? I don't remember, it is a bit outdated) and at that point take a minute to see what is happening in the environment that is causing this change in energy use, whether it be something I am doing, or another person, or something else.
 

Saeros

Destroyer of Worlds
Local time
Today, 17:11
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
246
Location
Inside my head.
INFJ, but I should say that this guy's face holds like a motherfucker (which is not a good sign development wise, considering his type) so I can understand why you would go with Te instead of Fe.
If it's not too much trouble, could you explain your reasoning, please? I'm not quite sure I understand how you arrived at that conclusion.


I am reading that he is a bit gripped up, and you can probably see that too in the way he seems really "itchy" and manic. The more gripped up a person is, the harder they will be to read, so this was a really tricky one.
I agree. His expression and mannerisms seem kind of contrived. Did you watch both videos? there's a second video wrapped in the spoiler. He seems much more relaxed in that video, so it might be easier to 'read' him.


Yes, I literally read random people I see in public as well as people I know well. It is actually a great help to be a bit more accommodating with people, or to be able to see where they are coming from. For instance, I can see when a person is modulating (did I talk about modulation in this guide? I don't remember, it is a bit outdated) and at that point take a minute to see what is happening in the environment that is causing this change in energy use, whether it be something I am doing, or another person, or something else.
That's very interresting. I'll have to try it at some point. If you don't mind, could you explain 'modulation'?
 

Words

Only 1 1-F.
Local time
Today, 06:11
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
3,223
Location
Order
Jay-Z: ISTJ

0:32(and most of the video) = eye direction: left. action: extracting information. Si

1:14 = eye direction: left. action: raises both eyebrow to show agreement. Si + Te.

1:25 = action: *eyebrow agreement*. eye contact. Te


I was unable to continue beyond 1:25. Youtube does not seem to like me.
 
Top Bottom