Physiognomy: The Eight Cognitive Functions

[Auburn]

• http://physiognomy.me/vfunctions/

Hello guys. As promised, this is the long awaited guide to identifying the eight cognitive functions visually as well as a person's psychological Type.

This is the present result of a group of us who are working on remodeling the present typology system from the ground up.

We hope you enjoy this introduction guide. ^^

***

​

Physiognomy is an 'open-source' project with the intent on identifying a connection between psychology and physiognomy/neuroscience.

We do not claim to have an 100% sure perspective; the articles and finds at present only reflect our current discoveries.

Having said that, we are confident that our methodology is far more accurate at type-identification that the current testing methods, and we are more than happy to assist others in the discovery of their type, as well as the learning of our methodology up to this point.
​

 

[snafupants]

That looks pretty cool, and accurate from my experiences with different types. I like how you tried to capture the quintessence of each type with those thumbnail image clips. I wonder, though, how each looks in the auxiliary and tertiary function slots, with healthy/abnormal development. By the way, is the second thumbnail in the extraverted thinking section the chocolate rain guy? The head shake with extraverted thinking and the stop-start with introverted thinking, brilliant.

 

[Auburn]

The animated image showcased here are all from those who have the function as dominant, for clarity's sake, but those who have it as auxiliary will also display the signals - as well as the signals to all their four functions.

​

 

[snafupants]

The animated image showcased here are all from those who have the function as dominant, for clarity's sake, but those who have it as auxiliary will also display the signals - as well as the signals to all their four functions.

​

That does provide clarity but I wonder if gestures more than the sum of their two component parts can be created and manifested. That is, does introverted intuition and extraverted thinking, say, yield something more than a logical addition of both function's expected gestures? Put another way, how does INFJ introverted intuition differ from INTJ introverted intuition in gestures, if at all?

 

[BigApplePi]

Thanks lots Auburn. I can't tell you why, but I feel totally intimidated by this ... possibly because it's so visual. It's a new language for me and I'm not good with languages. It's only uphill from here. I wonder how this is related to Pod'Lair ... before I dismiss it?

I keyed in on this:
http://physiognomy.me/configuration/nife.html
If that's English, it's foreign to me.

 

[Roran]

The type descriptions are actually in Latin (thanks google translate) but it says that it's the dummy text, so, there's that.

Aside from the Latin, it seems to be cool, though.

 

[snafupants]

For whatever reason extraverted thinking makes me think of Voltaire spouting off over coffee.

 

[Auburn]

That does provide clarity but I wonder if gestures more than the sum of their two component parts can be created and manifested. That is, does introverted intuition and extraverted thinking, say, yield something more than a logical addition of both function's expected gestures? Put another way, how does INFJ introverted intuition differ from INTJ introverted intuition in gestures, if at all?

@snafupants - Great question. It differs, yes. Each type has a specific signature to their conduct that is more than just the addition of cues. However, the nuances would be far too subtle for me to name at present.

Still, in general the cues outlined here are more than enough to accurately identify type - and from which the specific signature can be learned by exposure & reinforcement.

​

Thanks lots Auburn. I can't tell you why, but I feel totally intimidated by this ... possibly because it's so visual. It's a new language for me and I'm not good with languages. It's only uphill from here.

It's totally understandable, don't worry. It is quite literally an art form, just like learning to play an instrument, and takes practice. Furthermore it is a practical skill, so it takes a lot of concrete mapping which is not the forte for a lot of us. ^^

​

I wonder how this is related to Pod'Lair ...

It's not.
Not affiliated with them whatsoever.
​

The type descriptions are actually in Latin (thanks google translate) but it says that it's the dummy text, so, there's that.

Yep! We haven't yet gotten to writing the 16 profiles. We intend to rewrite them based on real data from our reads - and expect they will be quite different and not have the N bias that typology currently has, among many others.

The reason people are often mistyped is in part due to the flaws of the test, but also because the profiles are written in a way that S types won't identify with the descriptions, so they gravitate instead to the aggrandized N profiles.

Typology should be used to bridge the gap of understanding between different configurations, not to reinforce an Us vs Them mentality. We are more similar to one another than we think.


​

 

[Minuend]

Interesting.

 

[Auburn]

Addendum to OP:

Physiognomy is an 'open-source' project with the intent on identifying a connection between psychology and physiognomy/neuroscience.

We do not claim to have an 100% sure perspective; the articles and finds at present only reflect our current discoveries. We are approaching the subject of people-reading from the perspective of honest inquiry.

Having said that, we are confident that the phenomenon of psychological types is indeed real, tangible and observable in multiple levels. And although we do not claim 100% accuracy, our methodology is far more accurate at type-identification that the current testing methods, and we are more than happy to assist others in the discovery of their type, as well as the learning of our methodology up to this point.

Thank you~
​

 

[tikru]

chocolate raiiiiiin

 

[snafupants]

Could you perhaps elaborate on the neocortex brain scan section of the site? That seems comparatively avant-garde, although pretty intriguing. That makes me uncomfortable, however, when you almost dismiss Jung's work as pseudo-science since he participated in therapy and psychological analysis before psychiatry and medicine really achieved its modern day footing. One could dismiss Newton and Einstein in the same manner because their views are not in concert with current cosmological understandings of string theory and the multiverse. That doesn't mean that their analysis was paltry; in fact, their analysis provided the cornerstones and building blocks for our current models.

 

[Paranoid Android]

Today I asked my INTJ friend did she recognize any of these types on me, and she said she usually saw the Ti and Ne, but Ne is the "strongest". Then we talked about her Te. I usually see her opened, while she's explaining something, focusing at people's eyes, glaring at them without blinking, while I usually watch somewhere else and have that "closed" expression on my face, react to myself, have those fingers and hand movements. I'm also look at different stuffs around me, something maybe grabs my attention from the environment, break eye contact often etc.

 

[Auburn]

Many of the specifics are also being explained in this thread:
http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?t=77252

@snafupants - Not dismissing Jung at all. Actually I am saying I want to take his findings out of their current location as pseudo-science and bring them higher, into harder science. But regarding the neocortex, I made a video explanation about my aim which I can show you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bOegRUN0SE


This video was originally made to explain to the other developers what the vision is.
​

 

[nanook]

i guess this is helpfull for me. didn't have time to check it out. i dive into VI episodically, and just had another episode, beginning a week ago, when i began a collection of lookalikes, trying to create gradients, pointing out how unlike individuals of a type are still connected. i am still a beginner at looking at movement patterns and i also tend to be confused about which pattern-group uses which functions - like differentiating entp against enfp.

 

[Reluctantly]

This is the cool.

But the potential for stupid people to abuse this is...

 

[Don't mind me]

When you tied recurring facial expressions/movements to specific functions, how did you identify what particular function was being used?

 

[Mello]

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE6SZu_VOAA

Type me, @Auburn.

 

[Auburn]

When you tied recurring facial expressions/movements to specific functions, how did you identify what particular function was being used?

I began very cautiously by observing the few people in my life I was absolutely certain of their type from a psychological perspective. Then I simply noted when and why their face manifested certain expressions - depending on what mental process they were engaging at that exact time. When doing memory recall, certain things were noticed, and when articulating, others. When explaining an ethical decision, others still. I live with an Se(Ti) and an Si(Fe), and am myself Ti(Ne). My older sister who presently doesn't live with us but who I've lived with for years is Fe(Ni), and my now deceased father was Fe(Si). I used all my memories on them to map out a template of mannerisms tied to specific mental processes.

However, as you might guess from that list ^ - Fi and Te are entirely absent in my family. So I struggled for a bit trying to understand it, as I had only really seen it in co-workers or cousins I had not lived with extensively.

It took me about a month of watching probably over 100 video interviews online to become familiar with what Te and Fi look like and how precisely it differs from Fe and Ti. It took me another month more, and some 150 videos interviews more, to create a celebrity list with a minimum of two samples of each type (a goal i set for myself) from using the template I acquired in my real life interaction with family.

I then began to see more clearly what other types look like that I had not seen in my personal circle, and different variations of each type. After seeing enough of the same type I honed in on the distinguishing traits they shared in common. I then downloaded the videos in which those particular cues are seen most clearly, converted the clips into .GIF images and created pages defining the eight cognitive functions.
​

 

[BigApplePi]

I began very cautiously by observing the few people in my life I was absolutely certain of their type from a psychological perspective. Then I simply noted when and why their face manifested certain expressions - depending on what mental process they were engaging at that exact time. When doing memory recall, certain things were noticed, and when articulating, others. When explaining an ethical decision, others still. I live with an Se(Ti) and an Si(Fe), and am myself Ti(Ne). My older sister who presently doesn't live with us but who I've lived with for years is Fe(Ni), and my now deceased father was Fe(Si). I used all my memories on them to map out a template of mannerisms tied to specific mental processes.

However, as you might guess from that list ^ - Fi and Te are entirely absent in my family. So I struggled for a bit trying to understand it, as I had only really seen it in co-workers or cousins I had not lived with extensively.

It took me about a month of watching probably over 100 video interviews online to become familiar with what Te and Fi look like and how precisely it differs from Fe and Ti. It took me another month more, and some 150 videos interviews more, to create a celebrity list with a minimum of two samples of each type (a goal i set for myself) from using the template I acquired in my real life interaction with family.

I then began to see more clearly what other types look like that I had not seen in my personal circle, and different variations of each type. After seeing enough of the same type I honed in on the distinguishing traits they shared in common. I then downloaded the videos in which those particular cues are seen most clearly, converted the clips into .GIF images and created pages defining the eight cognitive functions.​

Auburn that is a commendable amount of effort. Have you done much checking with your peers as to accuracy? I would think the more concurrence in judgments, the more objective and valuable we can take the results. (If I were to do the judgment, not having the experience, I would not have faith in my reliability. So I look to "experts.") If a "rival" such as Adymus were to do the same viewing and came up with the same, but independent results, I would have increased faith. Do you yourself see your results as tentative, working hypotheses, or relatively certain? I am as always never sure of anything, lol.
​

 

[snafupants]

chocolate raiiiiiin

Some stay dry and others feel the pain.

 

[Auburn]

Auburn that is a commendable amount of effort. Have you done much checking with your peers as to accuracy? I would think the more concurrence in judgments, the more objective and valuable we can take the results.

Admittedly not as much as I'd like! We started off the project together but somewhere down the line I became very absorbed and as a result began developing a more personal/subjective methodology.

But I knew I was starting to see something real, except it was so very challenging for me to communicate that to others. So I instead I decided to pick the best medium to translate this that I could think of. Words wouldn't work because they mean a million different things to different people, and images were better but it is still not possible to grasp something that is defined by body animations. So I converted the cues to animated images.

So now that I've gotten at least a basic intro of the methods I'm using out there, it makes it possible to both dispute my methods and/or be able to resonate with them as legitimate.

I encourage anyone to try them out for themselves and see whether or not they match your experience. I'm not beyond correction but I'm confident what I'm observing is real and that it'll match your experience also.
​

 

[Auburn]

Hi @Mello,
I've not yet seen enough people who look like you to say for sure but what I do know is that:

• You're a Perception (N/S) dominant.
• You have Fi+Te as your inner functions.

I think that if you make a video in the following format, I'll definitely be able to narrow it down further, if you're interested.

Spoiler

This is a quick how-to on making a proper video for identifying your psychological type. An ideal video would be:

• In an interview (or vlog) format
• Between 8-10 Minutes Long
• Have Good Lighting
• Have Clear Sound
• Preferably, have an interviewer (family/friend) ask you questions

Below are some sample questions you can use in the interview. You don't have to use these necessarily, so long as you are engaged in a topic of interest. But they're designed to help tell apart certain things.

1. What is an average weekend like for you?
2. How would you describe yourself using only three objects/items?
3. Do you have any pet peeves?
4. What sound or facial expression makes you laugh? Can you imitate it?
5. Describe a moment in your life when everything felt 'just right'.
6. If you found a bag filled with money on the way home, what would you do with it?
7. Do you believe there is a God, or higher power?
8. What is your opinion on the death penalty?
9. If you were President for a month, what would you change?

 

[Jennywocky]

Well, I won't go as far as to offer a ringing endorsement, but when I looked at the Ti clips, I actually identified with them pretty strongly. It was rather eerie to be honest.

However, when I get time, my next steps would be to examine all the other clips and see if I get a negative connection with them. (i.e., test for Forer).

 

[ElvenVeil]

hmm.. I am not sure how to understand all the parts on the site..

Are the celebrity typing done on this page related to the methodology that you present in the OP?

I see that Lawrence Krauss and Einstein are typed as what I guess is INTP Ne(Ti). Or is it ENTP?
If it is ENTP then I am right now surprised that you would put einstein there, but open for suggestions as to why he would be ENTP. On the other hand, I could never ever put Lawrence Krauss as anything but a Ne dominant, which ofc would be ENTP then. (that is what I type him as). But which is it? Ne(Ti) = INTP , or ENTP? If it means INTP then Lawrence Krauss should be corrected.

Richard dawkins is obviously used in the presentation of Te dominant, in the animated showcases, but marked as Te(Si) in the celebrity list. You obviously have good typers (which is rare on the internet), but do you type Richard Dawkins as ESTJ and not ISTJ? If ISTJ , then I guess it is a mistake to put him in the Te dominant showcase, although you argue that those with Te auxuliary will also display much the same expressions. again, which is it ?

I have only looked at this shortly, but it seems like a good site sorry I just need to ask the above questions to understand what it is that is argued on the page.

Edit: took another look at it, and it seems most coherent of Ne(Ti) is ENTP. and so Dawkins is typed as ESTJ okay. Then we are just down to the question of why Einstein is typed ENTP. sorry for the confusion

 

[Fukyo]

um @ElvenVeil Te(Si) is ESTJ, and Te dom.

 

[ElvenVeil]

Yes.. I am sorry, as added in the 'edit'. Still the Einstein quesiton remains, which I am curious about

 

[Auburn]

(no problem for asking! it's totally fine.)

Types are listed with their dominant function first and their secondary in parenthesis. This is similar to how Jung wrote them originally [ IT(N) would be Introverted Thinking (Intuition)]. And yes, all the listings were identified via this physiognomical methodology. And all the animations showcase those who have the function as dominant.

Einstein would translate to ENTP, correct!
And Richard Dawkins is ESTJ.

I realize this sounds crazy, since Einstein is considered the quinessential INTP, but his eyes are actually incredibly buoyant. They are the central focus of his face and he doesn't show any of the signs of a discernment (T/F) lead.

This is also a testament to the reality that Ne dominants are actually "introverts" by the practical definition of that word. This is because although they are engaged by stimulus, they are able to engage their Ne by themselves by re-running their memories through a 'scenario-generator' per se. They don't really need more than just their own thoughts to be stimulated, so they may prefer being alone.

 

[Auburn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-1Z2wi2uSA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUwvmlvJAuA

Notice how his eyes are always wide open. They easily engage with the environment when he looks up and when they do his whole body will seem to be driven/steered by their focus point. His body moves fluidly, without the rigidity that discernment leads have - as you will see in the Ti animations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSyvwaE6HvM

Deflecting
​

He definitely has Ne dominant eyes, but nonetheless his face is pretty deadpan, with flat cheeks, which is a result of secondary Ti. And when engaging with people, he does so in a playful Fe manner as seen here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=oU6kHBzPHWY#t=1m37s (at 1:37+)

 

[ElvenVeil]

I have never been directly oposed to the idea of einstein = ENTP.. But we should move very cautiously when naming him ENTP given this data.
As you say yourself, with Ne auxuliary, Einstein would too present the 'Ne look', but obviously there is a difference of a Ne dominant to auxuliary eyes.. And that is where it saddens me that most pictures and movies that are of him, are from when he is rather old. . For I would not think of it as impossible that a person would be more in touch with his other functions as age comes along.. In other words, it does not seem like a stretch to me, to consider the possibility that our 'Ne eyes' , might change a bit, with age(Need to look more into this myself). Still, I think your considerations for retyping Einstein are well founded.

 

[Valgaar]

Pod'lair copycats.

 

[snafupants]

Pod'lair copycats.

I see you're new here. Are you from California by any chance?

 

[Mello]

I have never been directly oposed to the idea of einstein = ENTP.. But we should move very cautiously when naming him ENTP given this data.As you say yourself, with Ne auxuliary, Einstein would too present the 'Ne look', but obviously there is a difference of a Ne dominant to auxuliary eyes.. And that is where it saddens me that most pictures and movies that are of him, are from when he is rather old. . For I would not think of it as impossible that a person would be more in touch with his other functions as age comes along.. In other words, it does not seem like a stretch to me, to consider the possibility that our 'Ne eyes' , might change a bit, with age(Need to look more into this myself). Still, I think your considerations for retyping Einstein are well founded.

We should move very cautiously when naming him ENTP given this data.(?)

Spoiler

Are you part of their team, now?

Our 'Ne eyes?'

Spoiler

Are you talking about yourself or... ?

 

[Auburn]

I have never been directly oposed to the idea of einstein = ENTP.. But we should move very cautiously when naming him ENTP given this data.
As you say yourself, with Ne auxuliary, Einstein would too present the 'Ne look', but obviously there is a difference of a Ne dominant to auxuliary eyes.. And that is where it saddens me that most pictures and movies that are of him, are from when he is rather old. . For I would not think of it as impossible that a person would be more in touch with his other functions as age comes along.. In other words, it does not seem like a stretch to me, to consider the possibility that our 'Ne eyes' , might change a bit, with age(Need to look more into this myself). Still, I think your considerations for retyping Einstein are well founded.

The read is definitely open to dispute. We do want to create room for discussion on any particular conclusion. The celebrity listing has a "Read By" column for precisely that reason. Currently we are only a handful of readers (the other readers have not yet submitted their official reads. I am Valkyrie, btw) but the readers that agree with a particular read will be listed in that column.

This is meant to provide an objectivity to the listing and is also a countermeasure against having one single subjectivity dictate reality. Because if indeed what we are observing is objective phenomenon then that should be evident to others outside of us.

Eventually we hope each read can be confirmed by many readers as people's perceptions begin to align together (even if what that is isn't precisely what it is now) If people are doing genuine/sincere observation, then that is what is most important - - their visions will come to align with time because they are all observing the same reality.

We hope to have each read confirmed by at least 5, or 10 readers in the future. The Functions Cues pages are also open for refinement and as the project grows more and more cues will be added to the pages.

 

[ElvenVeil]

Yes okay It is certainly the correct approach you have.. Still, I have given it a little more thought, and I think it seems very relevant to do a follow up on the relation between the 'dominant function look' and age. I guess you see the point in doing so, but I don't know if you guys have already considered doing some research on that specific (didn't spot it on the webpage)?

Another note: When you say that readers who agree with a certain typing, will be listed the 'read by' column.. How is one added to this column?

 

[Auburn]

I think it seems very relevant to do a follow up on the relation between the 'dominant function look' and age.

I agree. Heh. There are certain celebrities for whom footage exists from their infancy up to their present elder age. We can definitely investigate that further. What I have noticed, though, is that with age the fourth function begins to show more, not the second or third. So a Ti dominant will begin to resemble an Fe dominant in many ways, and so forth.

Another note: When you say that readers who agree with a certain typing, will be listed the 'read by' column.. How is one added to this column?

Ah! =D
Yes, hehe. we have a forum here: http://physiognomy.me/forum/
Where we will be discussing reads. There is also an Examination Room board there where any celeb can be brought to the table and opinions can be bounced around. :3

Anyone is open to be a part of this project. (you are most welcome to signup)
Newcomers will first be introduced to what material/research has been done thus far.

Now, given this introduction, the newcomer is free to disagree or agree with it.

If, per chance, the newcomer resonates with the methods and finds that they align with their own personal experience, then they need only become confident in their own reading abilities and then submit their reads as they type yet-unlisted celebrities. There will be a Celebrity Submission thread for this.

If, say, the newcomer disagrees with it, we can discuss the methodology in the "People-Reading Methods" board. The core developers will take a sincere look at their perspective and possibly adjust to it, if they see it holds more truth.

But the newcomer's first task, before having their reads submitted to the official list, would be to synch with the pre-existing readers at least to a great extent - - whether that means them adjusting to hir or hir adjusting to them.

This way we avoid the chaos that would emerge from anyone being free to submit their reads without consultation of the others, while also taking an open approach that allows for adaptation.

The current core developers: Valkyrie, Function, Solio and Vangelis - are still in the process of aligning their perceptions as well, so now would be a ripe time to intergrate into the development process.

 

[tikru]

I agree. Heh. There are certain celebrities for whom footage exists from their infancy up to their present elder age. We can definitely investigate that further. What I have noticed, though, is that with age the fourth function begins to show more, not the second or third. So a Ti dominant will begin to resemble an Fe dominant in many ways, and so forth.

It actually seems to be the opposite case for me. As an INFJ, I developed Se early on (grade school and highschool) by playing many sports, running and working out, etc... But then I had to develop my inner functions, the 2nd and 3rd, to adapt to society, grow into a responsible adult or adjust to various truths and lies I've learned and debunked (science/religion) which has made me feel less whole than when I was ten years old. This could just be psychological anomaly or maladjustment on my part, but it could also be the case that development is cyclic, meaning I start out with Ni & Se combo, then gradually develop Fe and Ti, which has the effect of draining the polar's energy (and perhaps the dominant's, but to a much lesser degree), then I start to develop Se again, perhaps after some sort of mental crisis, and then after that, I go back to focusing on the inner functions and so on and so forth. I don't know, what do you think?

 

[Pyropyro]

Nice post Perhaps I need to be more observant to find these quirks. Hmmm perhaps my boss is a Ti (but I'm pretty sure he isn't an INTP. Too choleric for that)

 

[Pyropyro]

The Ne girl is cute. Who is she?

 

[Auburn]

Tessa Violet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0cX1FDd-so

 

[Pyropyro]

Tessa Violet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0cX1FDd-so

She's indeed cute

 

[InvisibleJim]

@Auburn

Although I find your ideas insightful, I'm not sure how correlation relates to causation from the idea of functions as mental constructs.

I would say this seems more indicative than definitive.

However, perhaps you can prove me wrong.

 

[Auburn]

Unfortunately, I can't really prove anything atm. Heh..
It's all very much in an experimental stage. The most I could do is show you how the cues appear, and see if you find them to be consistent with your experience and the people you know to belong to the corresponding types.

We'll eventually be testing these things out against brain scans (which will be an incredible project in itself!) but can't say atm.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Unfortunately, I can't really prove anything atm. Heh..

We'll eventually be testing these things out against brain scans (which will be an incredible project in itself!) but can't say atm.

Another potential way to triangulate your data: http://etlab.cog.ohio-state.edu/

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

@Auburn This may have been previously addressed (what can I say, I'm tired and lazy), but do you think you would see any differences between a "baseline" video of someone and a video shot under circumstances when specific functions should be exposed, i.e. certain types of music/songs should bring forth Fe, etc.?

 

[Auburn]

@thehabitatdoctor - Yes, depending on the activity, the ordering of the function can be challenging to tell (at least to my present ability) but the functions in use are generally not mistaken.

The cues that the function-pairs give off are the same regardless of energy levels, moods, etc. In some the order is obvious to me despite their emotional levels, but with others it'll take several videos at different times to verify.​

 

[nedenom]

URL not found? I was able to find most of it in Googles cache, but this should be out there!

 

[Fukyo]

URL not found? I was able to find most of it in Googles cache, but this should be out there!

It's currently under construction. The whole project is.

@nedenom

 

[BigApplePi]

Outline-Physiognomy: 8 CF's

Hi guys. I took these notes back in April. Since we don't know when the website will return, I thought I'd post them. In the back of my mind is the question of, can these visual symptoms for temperaments be matched up and justified with the etiology (origin) for each separate temperament? @Auburn: feel free to critique, ignore or use.

Notes on the eight lead cognitive functions, their physical manifestations (copied or paraphrased fm website http://physiognomy.me/vfunctions). <-- today may be under construction.

Bold is summary. Blue is hypothetical explanation.

1. Ti - Body rigid. Movements straightforward but not so graceful or natural. Doesn't impose on other's space. Hand motions, not facial expressions. Flat/dead face. Extroverted functions are start/stop.

Internal Logic Discernment/ Reflects thinking disregarding affect. Effort devoted to explanation independent of immediate outside world. Motive is to explain how things work without external interference.

2. Te - Body rigid. Movements straightforward & coordinated projecting outward. Articulate. Facial emphasis. Speech flat, dispassionate. Animated but not emotional.

External Logic Discernment/ Overt thoughts meant to impress. Effort devoted to direct explanation of outside world. Motive is to explain to others.

3. Fe - Body rigid. Movements straightforward & coordinated projecting outward. Articulate. Facial emphasis. If benevolent, warming, assuring, accepting, safety. If malevolent, opposite. Words elicit emotion.

External Ethic Discernment/ Feelings meant to impress. Effort devoted to direct evaluation of outside world. Motive is to convey to others what is important.

4. Fi - Body meticulous quality. Movements straightforward but not so graceful or natural. Doesn't impose on other's space. Hand motions with soft facial expressions. Sprite-like aura. Emotional tone yet not intended to influence. Warming as opposed to lifelessness. Steady but confined feeling level. Process is warming; speech cooling. Aura may purvey real opinion yet words don't do this.

Internal Ethic Discernment/ Reflects feelings while disregarding affect. Effort devoted to judgment independent of outside world. Motive is to express internal feelings.

5. Ne - Body fluid. Animated & spritely. Eyes lively, curious, surreal. Eyes loose, relaxed, alert, watery buoyancy. Eyes agile, limited intensity, gentle, self-kept. If focusing, eyes can blink, dart, look up, think fish in water.

External Abstract Perception/ General abstraction conveyed. Effort devoted to big picture of outside world. Motive is to convey generality, not details.

6. Ni - Fluid body & thoughts. Their abstractions are felt probability. Inertial & elemental nature. Eyes direct rest of body. Eyes: steady, focused, no blink. New focus eyes move with whole head. When looking inward, eyes can "zone-out" responding via universals.

Internal Abstract Perception/ Converys inner picture disregarding affect. Effort devoted to personal picture for outside world. Motive is a personal view of a big picture.

7. Se - Body fluid, animated, spritely. Eyes lively, keen, observant, lock-on with strong contact. Penetrative stare. Same even if moves to another object and but eyes move whole head.

External Concrete Perception/ Perception meant to impress. Effort devoted to specific in outside world. Motive is to convey real specifics.

8. Si - Body fluid, but unhurried. Eyes give direction followed by head. Eyes are concentrated, intense yet loose. Eyes open, aware and relay information, disconnected from mouth. Eyes will "deflect" easily breaking contact when reflecting. There is a waterfall or fast stream quality.

Internal Concrete Perception/ Personal perception disregarding affect. Effort devoted to personal recall of outside world. Motive is to express internal specifics.

 

[Auburn]

It's currently under construction. The whole project is.

@nedenom

Yep, we're overhauling most everything,
and reconstructing it bit by bit from a new approach.

We're re-evaluating all cues at the moment, but we decided to reupload the pages for the time being for those who wish to see them - so long as its understood that it is only a preliminary draft and not to be taken as absolute. You can find it in the archive here: http://physiognomy.me/b01/

@BigApplePi - That's not a bad summary. Nice.