Pod'Lair VS MBTI/JCF

[Fukyo]

Fukyo, not sure where your last post disappeared to, as this was intended to follow it.

I deleted it because I realized it was all far too redundant.

 

[Adymus]

Cheese, I think you are still thinking about this with the perception that Mojo Reading is telling you your MBTI type. That seems to be the only way "How do you know you are right" would be a question on your mind. Either that, or you are going Descartes on me.

The 16 Mojos are read by and identified solely by their physiological manifestations, those manifestations are directly connected to everything else about them. You are not going to give off the signals of certain Mojo unless you are that Mojo. There is no other criteria that needs to be met. You are not going to Modulate when using a certain power unless that is one of your modulation powers, you are not going to give off the Distinct signal of Nai Cunning or Frustration unless you are a Nai Mojo. That is how they are defined.

It doesn't matter if a Nai'xyy is "Acting" in a way they are not usually seen "Acting", if they are giving off the signals and cues of a Nai'xyy, they are a Nai'xyy, that is how they are identified, there is no "What if they are not" because they would not have been giving off those signals if they were not.

"How do you know you are right?"

Do you realize just how much of a cosmic question that is? How do we ever know anything that we claim to know is right?
Because it works. Success is the highest form of validation you can possibly get. Natural law is not going to come out and tell you that you are correct in any other form than being successful. Every standard we have is a standard that was thought up by human perception and thought, even if we are using a machine to get there, it was still a human mind that designed that machine and set its standard. That does not matter if your model is actually working, if it can reproduce results, or make predictions that are more successful than any other model, which Pod'Lair can, then it works, that is all that matters. As soon as it stops working, that is when you need to start worrying.

Also, sorry man, if you want anymore free reads of people you are going to have have to practice with us.

 

[Thaklaar]

That does not matter if your model is actually working, if it can reproduce results, or make predictions that are more successful than any other model, which Pod'Lair can, then it works, that is all that matters. As soon as it stops working, that is when you need to start worrying.

What sort of predictions are we talking about, here?

 

[Adymus]

What sort of predictions are we talking about, here?

Predictions like how one can approach developing their natural abilities, how they can begin using them in ways that are more efficient and effective, how they can structure their social environments to be more conducive and energy generating/Efficient. You can learn how to build teams that will be perfectly calibrated for accomplishing certain tasks because we have a very strong understanding on how the different configurations amplify, augment, inspire, and even surpress each other.
What careers a person could will enjoy, what work environments will be conducive to them, what romantic partners you will have the best chemistry with as well as appreciate the natural talents and gifts of your Mojo more than any other (a critical prediction MBTI, Socionics, or JCE has never gotten right), why their current relationship is not working out and what can be done to help it, and much much much much more. Pretty much we can make predictions on anything involves people, a person's life, and social environments and systems on both a micro and macro level.

 

[Glordag]

ESC, you are being a complete hypocrite. You are the biggest Fundamentalist Jungian I have ever seen on this forum. For three days we debated Socionics vs Pod'Lair back and forth, and the only back up argument you could muster was "Jung didn't say that, therefor it must be wrong." You had different wording, but that was the over all essence of your premise.
If you have truly taken into consideration the fact that theories are almost never perfectly accurate right out of the oven, then why do you defend a 100 year old theory tooth and nail? Why are you not applying your own standards to your own "pet theories" as you call them?

Of course no theory is 100% complete from the get go, that is obvious, but that doesn't mean we should be scared to death to try something new, or wonder what else there could be. It is for this exact reason that Socionics, MBTI, and Jung are flawed models, I was saying this in our little debate.

We readily embrace and anticipate having to update our model, incompleteness of a model is no new obstacle, however Jung, Socionics, MBTI do not have the luxury of doing this. The way the "16 types" are designed, everything about them is always assumed to be understood, so no new information can be gained, no growth in understanding is possible when you think you already have the answer. All you can do is put people in Boxes, ESC. Boxes that you have already assumed are correct.

Also, there is always training that must be done at certain levels, certain criteria needs to be met before you can progress. Would you pit a Kung Fu Novice against a Black Belt? No, they will be daunted, overwhelmed, probably get hurt, and it would just be a very inefficient way of learning.

And lastly, we do not and should not have to cater to the scientific community, if they want our model, they come to us. Until then, we'll be doing our thing, breaking records and taking names and all that good stuff.

Eyeseecold is persistent to be sure, but he's also extremely rational. Unlike Pod'Lair, he is willing to put his ideas and theories up against intelligent scrutiny and even make adjustments when he's convinced that something is flawed or incorrect. Believe it or not, that's how progression occurs - you gather collective intellect in order to find the objective truth.

I doubt I can say much more that hasn't already been said, but I want to add one thing - points are more effective if you use less words that carry more meaning. It has become increasingly difficult to actually follow the Pod'Lair argument, because every post in this thread is turning out to be a page long. Your actual point gets lost in all the expounding.

 

[Adymus]

Eyeseecold is persistent to be sure, but he's also extremely rational. Unlike Pod'Lair, he is willing to put his ideas and theories up against intelligent scrutiny and even make adjustments when he's convinced that something is flawed or incorrect. Believe it or not, that's how progression occurs - you gather collective intellect in order to find the objective truth.

1.) ESC is not a theory, he is one guy with some opinions on Jung and typology.
2.) You are all familiar with almost everything ESC is talking about, the theory he discusses has been discussed here many times over. You are not familiar with any of Pod'Lair theory or how it works, a new game is being played and you still think we are playing the old game. There is no intellect you can possibly contribute if you do not know what you are trying to contribute it too. Your intellect is completely irrelevant to the truth. As I said before, there is no democracy in truth.

 

[Glordag]

1.) ESC is not a theory, he is one guy with some opinions on Jung and typology.

Lies. ESC = the Borg.

You are not familiar with any of Pod'Lair theory or how it works, a new game is being played and you still think we are playing the old game.

And whose fault is this?

There is no intellect you can possibly contribute if you do not know what you are trying to contribute it too. Your intellect is completely irrelevant to the truth. As I said before, there is no democracy in truth.

By this reasoning, why is anyone but Thomas involved with Pod'Lair? Sounds to me like the rest of you have nothing to contribute, and nobody else ever will. Everyone must subject themselves to single bodies of knowledge, as any input is completely irrelevant unless it's from the founding source. Is that about right?

 

[Adymus]

And whose fault is this?

You have the resources at your disposal, if you choose not acquire them, that is nobody else's fault but yours.

By this reasoning, why is anyone but Thomas involved with Pod'Lair? Sounds to me like the rest of you have nothing to contribute, and nobody else ever will. Everyone must subject themselves to single bodies of knowledge, as any input is completely irrelevant unless it's from the founding source. Is that about right?

You know for a self-proclaimed rational thinker, you have a pretty hard time grasping a simple principle

You need perception to inform your discernment. If you cannot see the phenomenon that we are refering too, then your understanding of said phenomenon is irrelevant, as you cannot address it properly.

If a writer get's told his story sucks by a person who has never even read the story, was that a valid criticism? Should he change his story based on this guy's criticism? Come on people, it is a simple truth, your input is worthless if it is based on an understanding that lacks perception.

 

[Glordag]

You have the resources at your disposal, if you choose not acquire them, that is nobody else's fault but yours.

Yet you have very little knowledge of how much I (or many others that have commented here) know about the theory. You're the one that is telling us that we don't know enough.

You know for a self-proclaimed rational thinker, you have a pretty hard time grasping a simple principle

You need perception to inform your discernment.

I'm sorry, I'll try harder to grasp the next simple principle that comes around.

If you cannot see the phenomenon that we are refering too, then your understanding of said phenomenon is irrelevant, as you cannot address it properly.

If a writer get's told his story sucks by a person who has never even read the story, was that a valid criticism? Should he change his story based on this guy's criticism? Come on people, it is a simple truth, your input is worthless if it is based on an understanding that lacks perception.

Again, you're the one telling me what I can or cannot see. How do you have any idea how much I have perceived? In fact, earlier I even admitted that we can gather things from physical cues. What gives you the right to claim that you have some special perception or insight that I (or we) lack?

 

[cheese]

Predictions like how one can approach developing their natural abilities, how they can begin using them in ways that are more efficient and effective, how they can structure their social environments to be more conducive and energy generating/Efficient. You can learn how to build teams that will be perfectly calibrated for accomplishing certain tasks because we have a very strong understanding on how the different configurations amplify, augment, inspire, and even surpress each other.
What careers a person could will enjoy, what work environments will be conducive to them, what romantic partners you will have the best chemistry with as well as appreciate the natural talents and gifts of your Mojo more than any other (a critical prediction MBTI, Socionics, or JCE has never gotten right), why their current relationship is not working out and what can be done to help it, and much much much much more. Pretty much we can make predictions on anything involves people, a person's life, and social environments and systems on both a micro and macro level.

Yes! This! This is what I was asking for. More importantly I wanted to know if these have been field-tested (ie they're not just theoretical, beneficial extensions), what the ratio of success to failure is, etc.

And yeah, I know they can't give off the signals if they're not that Mojo - my question is how people (eg you) occasionally misread people with utter conviction. You saw signals there that (according to Thomas) weren't actually being given off, which speaks somewhat of the subjectivity of interpretation - which doesn't mean there's no one correct interpretation, just that verification seems to be kinda your-word-against-mine. I'm not saying people can mask their functions by acting differently, that's something you drilled out of our heads long ago. But reads differ, how do you know who's right aside from Thomas being super awesome at reading (because what is his awesomeness judged by). By making all those predictions you listed above and testing them against real outcomes? Hopefully. Without physiological analysis it's hard to verify otherwise.

BUT ANYWAY - I don't really have anything more to say on this. I'll head over to the forums one of these days. Thanks.

(Oh and sorry about the reads, I didn't know they were restricted.)

 

[echoplex]

What exactly are Mojos, outside of the physiological cues that identify them? What effect do they have on a person's interests, tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, etc.? I'm not asking for the kind of strict 'boxes' MBTI and others are often blamed for, but if a mojo is nothing but something you see in someone's face/body, it means little to its owner's actual life.

So much of your 'proof' is that "you can see the cues right in front of you", which I don't much doubt, but the 'real proof' comes later, right? when you discover that their mojo (as seen) is evidenced in certain patterns regarding how they interact with the world, what energizes/drains them, how they tend to view reality, etc.? Yeah, I know it's not quite that simple and there are other factors that must be taken into account, but my point is that the overall significance of a person's mojo (assuming there is any) is the effect it has on their life as a whole, not just their facial expressions.

I mean, as others have suggested, I've certainly noticed that people tend to have certain vibes, many of which seem to 'match' in some way to the point where it's worth noting. This could be totally different from what Pod'lair is seeing though, I wouldn't know*. I just don't see how people sharing certain facial cues definitely means they share anything else worth noting. It's a fascinating idea though, and I suppose what Pod'lair is asking is for people to take a sort of 'leap of faith', with the idea that over time it will become evident it is 'working'. I'm not against this approach, but Pod's job is to convince others the leap is worth taking and many things in this thread suggest they're turning people off -- though perhaps some of these people were never interested anyway.

*Yeah that's right! You wouldn't know, would you? How COULD you possibly know when you haven't seen it? Haha, see, the only way you can even argue about this is.... wait, you can't possibly argue about this! Well, unless you see it and then change your mind later, but then that probably means you never really saw it in the first place!

Seriously though, I'd like to see someone 'do' Pod'lair, become a master of it, see the phenomenon, and then later seriously question what they saw, possibly even abandoning it. Not out of any animosity towards Pod (I have none), but just because I've yet to see anything but certainty from those involved.

Honestly, I hope Pod'lair succeeds (how is this defined? popularity, right?). I think it's great that some people have attempted to create something new/interesting they believe strongly in and are willing to risk being 'wrong' so they can share it with others. Of course, it's possible that Pod is just one big mistake that will only take people further from the truth, I hope not. But life is short and there are only so many chances to do something you believe is meaningful. If the pod people truly believe they have a chance to do something great and revolutionary, I find it hard to blame them for at least trying, though they may fail.

 

[Adymus]

Yet you have very little knowledge of how much I (or many others that have commented here) know about the theory. You're the one that is telling us that we don't know enough.

I know what I have written on this forum, I know what information is public, and I know who is currently on the Pod'Lair forums and who is training with us. All I need to know is how much you possibly can know with what you have access to. Which is apparently not enough.

Again, you're the one telling me what I can or cannot see. How do you have any idea how much I have perceived? In fact, earlier I even admitted that we can gather things from physical cues. What gives you the right to claim that you have some special perception or insight that I (or we) lack?

You gave me that right when you demonstrated that you didn't have the right perception of how people are being read.
Here:

For example, if you claim that each particular property means a very rigid thing (or possible set of things), then you completely discount the possibility of variance within each of these properties. The same person can reveal the same expression and mean two different things. Even more likely is that two different people can exhibit the same expression (often as a result of adaptation) and mean two completely different things. Now clearly there might be some slight variation in length of smile, how wide open the eyes are, etc., but these cannot account for the underarching differences in the overall expression.

The fact that you think length of smile, or width of eyes is even relevant to how we read people, shows that you don't have a very strong understanding of how we read people.

The cues and signals that we see in people, you literally, and I really mean LITERALLY, cannot be faked or learned. Don't think of it like specific cues such as looking to the left are what is rigid, we understand that anyone can do simple cues like that, we are not that fucking clumsy.

There are certain kinds of Eyes that we refer to as Dancing Eyes or Cunning eyes which Nyy and Nai Mojos have respectively. The people that have these kinds of eyes only show up with these signals, they cannot possibly switch between the two. But to be able to recognize that, you first have to be able to see it, you need to be able to see the difference first. You can
t just go from having Aware expression to unaware expression, if it really were that chaotic, then this system would not work at all, it would have never have been created in the first place.

 

[Glordag]

I know what I have written on this forum, I know what information is public, and I know who is currently on the Pod'Lair forums and who is training with us. All I need to know is how much you possibly can know with what you have access to. Which is apparently not enough.

You know how many of the videos I've watched, which documents I've read, my background with regards to reading facial/physical cues, my background with psychology, and any other relevant piece of information...how?

You gave me that right when you demonstrated that you didn't have the right perception of how people are being read.
Here:

The fact that you think length of smile, or width of eyes is even relevant to how we read people, shows that you don't have a very strong understanding of how we read people.

Ohrly?

http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=5950

Edit: Unless, of course, you are disowning that information now. I think there's some validity in it, personally. Also, I didn't so much mean the physical width of the eyes or length of a mouth that are inherent traits. I meant the extent of the smile or degree to which one typically opens their eyes when reacting or making a point.

 

[Adymus]

You know how many of the videos I've watched, which documents I've read, my background with regards to reading facial/physical cues, my background with psychology, and any other relevant piece of information...how?

If your background is not in Pod'Lair then your background is not informed. There is no other theory that does what we do.

Ohrly?

http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=5950

Saw that coming a mile away.

That is a first gear cue, which is actually not conclusive to how people are read, you don't begin reading people until you get to 3rd gear.

Secondly it is not a rigid law, as it pertains to how readily expression passes the midline, as opposed to if it passes the mid-line at all. As I am sure you have figured out on your own, there could be many reasons as to why expression looks like it is or is not passing the midline, so that first gear cue is not really a strong decider.
If I am contradicting anything I said in that thread, assume the information I am saying now is the correct information. As that is a very old and outdated thread.

 

[Glordag]

If your background is not in Pod'Lair then your background is not informed. There is no other theory that does what we do.

Saw that coming a mile away.

That is a first gear cue, which is actually not conclusive to how people are read, you don't begin reading people until you get to 3rd gear.

Secondly it is not a rigid law, as it pertains to how readily expression passes the midline, as opposed to if it passes the mid-line at all. As I am sure you have figured out on your own, there could be many reasons as to why expression looks like it is or is not passing the midline, so that first gear cue is not really a strong decider.

That's pretty much exactly what I was attempting to say when I mentioned the length of smile or how wide open the eyes are. My point was to try and understand why my mentioning these traits somehow indicated that I wasn't "familiar enough" with Pod'Lair theory to have any value to add to the discussion.

Anyhow, it's far too late. I'm going to bed. I'm sure I'll continue this back and forth over the weekend. Cheers.

 

[Adymus]

Yes! This! This is what I was asking for. More importantly I wanted to know if these have been field-tested (ie they're not just theoretical, beneficial extensions), what the ratio of success to failure is, etc.

And yeah, I know they can't give off the signals if they're not that Mojo - my question is how people (eg you) occasionally misread people with utter conviction. You saw signals there that (according to Thomas) weren't actually being given off, which speaks somewhat of the subjectivity of interpretation - which doesn't mean there's no one correct interpretation, just that verification seems to be kinda your-word-against-mine. I'm not saying people can mask their functions by acting differently, that's something you drilled out of our heads long ago. But reads differ, how do you know who's right aside from Thomas being super awesome at reading (because what is his awesomeness judged by). By making all those predictions you listed above and testing them against real outcomes? Hopefully. Without physiological analysis it's hard to verify otherwise.

BUT ANYWAY - I don't really have anything more to say on this. I'll head over to the forums one of these days. Thanks.

(Oh and sorry about the reads, I didn't know they were restricted.)

Field tested yes, the world has essentially been one big field test for us
There really are not ratios of success though, too many factors play a part to just bust out a success statistic.

Its possible to dispute a read if two Mojo readers do not agree, so the two Mojo readers can show eachother what they see and decide from there. But ultimately the answer is there, so it is not really your word against mine because they are both looking at something objective, and if the person that is wrong does not see it, then it is because they need to update their Mojo Reading pallet (and they should be aware if their experience was not sufficient to notice a cue or signal.)

 

[Adymus]

What exactly are Mojos, outside of the physiological cues that identify them? What effect do they have on a person's interests, tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, etc.? I'm not asking for the kind of strict 'boxes' MBTI and others are often blamed for, but if a mojo is nothing but something you see in someone's face/body, it means little to its owner's actual life.

So much of your 'proof' is that "you can see the cues right in front of you", which I don't much doubt, but the 'real proof' comes later, right? when you discover that their mojo (as seen) is evidenced in certain patterns regarding how they interact with the world, what energizes/drains them, how they tend to view reality, etc.? Yeah, I know it's not quite that simple and there are other factors that must be taken into account, but my point is that the overall significance of a person's mojo (assuming there is any) is the effect it has on their life as a whole, not just their facial expressions.

Mojos are Read and Identified by physiology, however being a Mojo means that you are wired behave in certain ways and patterns. In fact, reading a person in the first place is seeing and recognizing these patterns in real time. Essentially reading a person is telling you how their Psyche is wired to work, which functions they are using, in what order and priority they use them, and what style of using these functions they have developed over their lives.

But yes, you are correct, a person's Mojo has a massive significance to their life as a whole, as it can be thought of as their natural and most energy efficient and conducive "flow."

I mean, as others have suggested, I've certainly noticed that people tend to have certain vibes, many of which seem to 'match' in some way to the point where it's worth noting. This could be totally different from what Pod'lair is seeing though, I wouldn't know*. I just don't see how people sharing certain facial cues definitely means they share anything else worth noting. It's a fascinating idea though, and I suppose what Pod'lair is asking is for people to take a sort of 'leap of faith', with the idea that over time it will become evident it is 'working'. I'm not against this approach, but Pod's job is to convince others the leap is worth taking and many things in this thread suggest they're turning people off -- though perhaps some of these people were never interested anyway.

The first gear cues, basic expressions, eye movements, and mannerisms are more oriented to getting you paying attention to people, and soaking up the information that they are giving off. Like I said, they are kind of training wheels or reading people until your Mojo Reading Scent is more tuned to the distinct differences in signals and vibe between the Mojos.

But you're actually right, it will be very difficult to see how this makes sense, or is even possible if you are viewing it from your current point of view. So it does require that you dabble in it for a little while, because seeing is believing, once you see the phenomenon for yourself, and then it just becomes blatantly obvious, and doubting that becomes out of the question, as there is no greater proof than experience. Unfortunately a lot of people, especially if you are not Nai or Nyy Alpha*, are uncomfortable with the idea of trying something out if they can't see or understand why they should invest in it. Which is why I am kind of at piece with the idea that there are some people (like the ones here) who just won't want to move from their position.

*Which is exactly why the Forum right now is Dominated by Nai'xyy and Nyy'xai. They are just naturally designed to be more tolerant about new conceptual ideas. And THAT Glordag is why I respectfully disagree with the INTPs being the most open-minded. Passingby acted like it was some mistake that so many people were being read as Nai'xyy, no homie, it is because you Nai'xyy are attracted to cool new ideas like moths to light.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/71330415/Mojo-Report---Gear-2-Cues-pgs-1-20

Gotta love those Pod Power names.

 

[echoplex]

Unfortunately a lot of people, especially if you are not Nai or Nyy Alpha*, are uncomfortable with the idea of trying something out if they can't see or understand why they should invest in it. Which is why I am kind of at piece with the idea that there are some people (like the ones here) who just won't want to move from their position.

It makes sense that Nai/Nyy would be more comfortable with it, but it would be a big mistake imo to give up on everyone else. I mean, is the future of Pod'lair just a bunch of Nai/Nyy alphas? Do you foresee a pod'lair community with every mojo? Is pod'lair willing, for its own sake, to try to convince more skeptical people? I'm not sure how successful or influential it will ever be if it only attracts the people most comfortable with 'cool new ideas'. Though I'm sure it will likely always be dominated by Ns.

I mean, if you're already having trouble selling this on an INTP forum (not that everyone here is INTP, but many are probably Ns), how are you ever going to convince, say, Vai alphas, Vyy, Zyy, etc.? Perhaps enough 'cool' factor and/or popularity will help to attract many of the other mojos, who knows.

Also, though it may be coincidental, I find it a bit odd that many are read as Nai'xyy but not Nai'zyy. I think the latter may be alot harder to attract, despite still being Nai.

 

[Nyxyia]

http://www.ted.com/talks/jane_mcgonigal_gaming_can_make_a_better_world.html

 

[Adymus]

It makes sense that Nai/Nyy would be more comfortable with it, but it would be a big mistake imo to give up on everyone else. I mean, is the future of Pod'lair just a bunch of Nai/Nyy alphas? Do you foresee a pod'lair community with every mojo? Is pod'lair willing, for its own sake, to try to convince more skeptical people? I'm not sure how successful or influential it will ever be if it only attracts the people most comfortable with 'cool new ideas'. Though I'm sure it will likely always be dominated by Ns.

I mean, if you're already having trouble selling this on an INTP forum (not that everyone here is INTP, but many are probably Ns), how are you ever going to convince, say, Vai alphas, Vyy, Zyy, etc.? Perhaps enough 'cool' factor and/or popularity will help to attract many of the other mojos, who knows.

Also, though it may be coincidental, I find it a bit odd that many are read as Nai'xyy but not Nai'zyy. I think the latter may be alot harder to attract, despite still being Nai.

That is actually not what I was saying, Pod'Lair is definitely intended to be for everyone.

However there is a natural flow of change, and in that pattern there are different phases, starting Nai and Nyy alphas usually come first as they are the most comfortable and tolerant of ideas in their most conceptual of forms. After the Nai and Nyy alphas have hashed out the logic and cause the model enough, the Mojos with Tandem Nyy or Nai come in, like the Zai'nyy, Xai'nyy, Xyy'nai, and Zyy'nai, this is more of less the current phase were are on at the moment. As proof of concept and popularity (which is in itself a proof of concept) gains momentum, the third wave begins to get more comfortable with with the idea, that would be the Mojos with Offside Nyy or Nai, the Zai'vyy, Xai'vyy, Xyy'vai, and Zyy'vai, until it is completely integrated and accepted by the Vai and Vyy alphas, or the Mojos with Nyy and Nyy polar.

So it goes from:

Source Interpretive - Concept
Tandem Interpretive - Blueprint
Offside Interpretive - Prototype
Polar Interpretive - Finished Production model

So what I meant was that Pod'Lair is meant to be for all Mojos, however, there are certain phases off acceptance that have to occur with every new idea before everyone starts jumping on board, so it is not a surprise that I am seeing it play out. However it is not meant to be stuck at phase two, it is just that there is a certain amount of momentum that needs to be gained. When enough people are going around reading people, it becomes increasingly difficult for even the skeptics to think that this is just mass hysteria.

 

[Lobstrich]

Until you're able to build a theoretical personality model that does not rely on subjective observation by a panelists of pseudo experts in order to 'read' or 'type' people then you have no claim as to why your model is better than what was done with MBTI.

This is all I want to reply with: I agree.

 

[EyeNTP]

...if you are read as a certain Mojo, it is irrelevant if you don't agree, it is not up to you to decide that. b.) MBTI has no idea what hell a Nai'xyy is in the first place.

This kind of reasoning is exactly why I wanted to start this thread. The logic behind such a statement is so completely flawed and narrow minded.

The sad part is, you're under the guise and leadership by a dellusional Ni&Fe wet dream that your "leader" is dictating.

If you guys had decided to create this as an indepth training product/theory/method to reading cognitive functions and how they manifest outward you'd both not be fighting an uphill battle against the skeptical minds of the NT community and be swimming in cashish as you'd be conducting a ton of seminars/trainings to better MBTI/Jung/Keirsey practiotioners.

Terrible execution, absolutely terrible.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

 

[The Gopher]

We should have a poll just to see what most people agree with (granted most people are normally wrong) but most dare I say INTPs (or what ever mumble they are) Will hopefully lead to an interesting result.

 

[Jennywocky]

This is all I want to reply with: I agree.

And if what I saw elsewhere on the site tonight is true, I think I no longer want anything to do with it. I feel like I'm in grade school again, and it diminished my view of some people's credibility on this forum in ways I never expected.

 

[soraya]

I'm curious because a lot of the stuff, from my understanding of what I have read, is based on physical cues.

For instance, there was a bit on whether a person gestures using the backs of the hands or the front of the hands, but in many cultures using one or the other is viewed as rude. For instance, I live in Japan, where it is EXTREMELY rude to gesture using the front of the hand, pointing, or using a directive gesture. Only the backs of the hands are viewed as polite. When I lived in America, I always gestured by pointing, or the palm side of my hand, but when I moved to Japan I was told by my boss that this was very rude, that my gestures were too aggressive, and so I should stop. Apparently I had inadvertently offended a lot of people, including my department chair. So now I don't gesture at all or, if I do, I use the backs of my hands as I was told to because it has now been so ingrained in me, given the severe negative reaction I met with. So, I think I read that the reading is exclusive of culture or that culture is not taken into account. But I think culture plays an enormously integral role in our physical and physiological cues. Not just because of details like that, but because when you are in one culture or the other your entire physiology shifts. I've frequently been told that I do it. The first time I came back to the US from Japan my physical cues would sometimes shift so suddenly that my parents said it was like I had two bodies. I've seen it myself in so many people. For instance, I've watched many Americans shift in a split second from an American use of their body to a Japanese use of it. The difference is STARK and eerie. I think It's something that should be taken into account.

I also think that environmental or workplace factors can play a big part in the signals that a person gives off. I work with a great many people who are hired specifically to act a certain way on the job. When they're in private though, or don't have to present anything, their entire physical persona shifts completely. I've seen people in certain environments display extremely different hand gestures, body movements, eyes, etc. than they do in other environments. So if someone is trained or conditioned to act a certain way in a given situation it seems like the read would be inaccurate.

Also, it seems that the eyes are very important. But, there are many people, who have had surgery on their eyes to make the eye wider, or open them more, or for medical reasons. And, wearing false eyelashes also opens the eye up quite a bit. In Japan, for instance, going out in public without one, or even two sets of falsies on both the top and the bottom lashes is the equivalent of going out in public naked. The very purpose of them is to distort the eyes and give a certain appearance (not to mention they also agitate the eye like crazy!). I've seen people with them on and with them off and their eyes move and look completely different. I'm just skeptical about the statement that makeup or cosmetics don't affect it. Because, in my experience, cosmetics, especially eye makeup, does dramatically change the way that your face works and the way your eyes move. I also have a coworker who is permanently cross-eyed and another who has a lazy eye. It seems that this could be a factor that would distort things.

Also, botox apparently like freezes the face or something so it seems that it would be difficult to get an accurate read off of somebody who has had a botox injection, especially if you didn't know they'd had one.

Lastly, I wanted to bring into question the importance of the language or languages that a person is thinking in. Obviously, language and culture are closely intertwined so a person's language of thought, or if they speak more than one language, directly affects a person's physical cues. Furthermore, there are scientific studies (I'll be back with my references) showing that the number of known languages stands in direct correlation to the speed of speech and though. What this means is that the more languages a person speaks the more slowly they will speak. This is because they are not working with one operating system, they have to modulate between or amongst languages. Also, the eyes move in coordination with the parts of the brain being accessed for the language and, of course, other physical cues change alongside the language that is being thought in, even if the spoken language remains the same. This is a huge reason that scientists now believe bilingual or multilingual people have a slower onset of alzheimer's. This modulation amongst languages exercises the parts of the brain that alzheimer's deteriorates. But it also means that a person fluent in more than one language gives off distinctly different physical cues than someone who doesn't. Again, I'll be back with the scientific studies on this but it seems like worthwhile food for thought.

 

[Adymus]

I'm curious because a lot of the stuff, from my understanding of what I have read, is based on physical cues.

For instance, there was a bit on whether a person gestures using the backs of the hands or the front of the hands, but in many cultures using one or the other is viewed as rude. For instance, I live in Japan, where it is EXTREMELY rude to gesture using the front of the hand, pointing, or using a directive gesture. Only the backs of the hands are viewed as polite. When I lived in America, I always gestured by pointing, or the palm side of my hand, but when I moved to Japan I was told by my boss that this was very rude, that my gestures were too aggressive, and so I should stop. Apparently I had inadvertently offended a lot of people, including my department chair. So now I don't gesture at all or, if I do, I use the backs of my hands as I was told to because it has now been so ingrained in me, given the severe negative reaction I met with. So, I think I read that the reading is exclusive of culture or that culture is not taken into account. But I think culture plays an enormously integral role in our physical and physiological cues. Not just because of details like that, but because when you are in one culture or the other your entire physiology shifts. I've frequently been told that I do it. The first time I came back to the US from Japan my physical cues would sometimes shift so suddenly that my parents said it was like I had two bodies. I've seen it myself in so many people. For instance, I've watched many Americans shift in a split second from an American use of their body to a Japanese use of it. The difference is STARK and eerie. I think It's something that should be taken into account.

There is are both course and nuanced elements to they way physiological cues are done. For example, you could say that yang or yin gesturing itself would be examples of course cues. However it is not the fact that they are using one or the other kind of gesturing often, or even at all that determines their Mojo, we have seen adaptives that use almost all yang gesturing, as well as directives that use almost all yin gesturing, and that changed nothing. What is important is the nuance behind these cues, including ones like gesturing.

Even when you have a cultural memes that are causing you to ack in accordance to these memes, everyone still has an innate nature and that those itself in what your body is naturally and readily putting more energy and confidence in, and there is no culture on the planet that can take that away from you.

It would be very sloppy to only look at if a person is using Yang or Yin gesturing at all, or how often they are doing it, because as you said, there are many reason (certainly not exclusive to culture) that will change the way a person gestures. Being an adaptive that loves Yang Gesturing, I can tell you that we are definitely not using this rigid binary reasoning.
It is not at all that we don't take culture into account, it is that culture does not mask what Mojo you are, because ultimately you are always going to be your Mojo acting in accordance to different cultural memes, and that will not be equal to other Mojos acting in accordance to the same memes.

As a person that has taken an interest in languages, I think you will be able to appreciate the tacit and nuanced observation that goes into reading people, as it is necessary in understanding and speaking languages as well. Mojo Reading is in itself learning to understand a language, and in all languages, there are always the blunt patterns being transmitted, like words alone, and then there is the nuance behind how those patterns or words are transmitted that can change their meaning entirely.

However, there are also certain cues, such as those that were spoken of in the Simplified Method, that completely precede all cultures and memes, they cannot be learned and they cannot be faked in any way, you simply either have them or you don't. You cannot fake a Xyy Aware Mouth if you don't actually have Xyy, or rather you will never be able to get your expressions to work like Xyy does, you have to have Xyy existent as a conscious power in the Psyche for it to actually be connected to the muscles that are controlling your expressions.

I also think that environmental or workplace factors can play a big part in the signals that a person gives off. I work with a great many people who are hired specifically to act a certain way on the job. When they're in private though, or don't have to present anything, their entire physical persona shifts completely. I've seen people in certain environments display extremely different hand gestures, body movements, eyes, etc. than they do in other environments. So if someone is trained or conditioned to act a certain way in a given situation it seems like the read would be inaccurate.

No, actually it wouldn't. When several people of different Mojos are all told to act a certain way, they don't all just become clones of each other and become indistinguishable. Your Mojo is not defined by the Mah'zute (think of it as the faces and costumes we put on to deal with our world) that you are wearing. When multiple Mojos put on a lets say Assistant Manager Mah'zute, they are not all going to look exactly the same, instead they will be performing their Mojo's version of said Mah'zute. Every Mojo has their own way of doing everything, what is important is how a person is doing something, not whether they are doing it or not. For instance, maybe your Job requires an adaptive Mojo to act more directive, or a subjective Mojo to be more engaging, doing this will mean this Mojo is going to have to use their Modulation powers at intervals that are less conducive to their nature, and this modulation will be noticeable, especially when compared to Directive Mojos that are naturally gaining Momentum in that kind of arena.
MBTI cannot make distinctions between Mah'zute and innate nature, in fact, their whole understanding of 16 types is based on Mah'zute alone, so I can understand why if you are approaching Pod'Lair with that kind of thinking in mind, however, rest assured it does not work that way in Pod'Lair. That's why while in MBTI, saying something like "An INTP who is acting like an ESFJ" makes sense, but in Pod'Lair a statement like "a Zai'nyy acting like a Xyy'vai" makes no sense at all, because it is technically impossible to not act like your Mojo, if you are acting a certain way, then you have already proven that is how your Mojo can potentially act. No matter what you do, it is always going to be done in the way your Mojo does it, this leaves distinctive patterns that are readable by those trained in Mojo Reading.

Also, it seems that the eyes are very important. But, there are many people, who have had surgery on their eyes to make the eye wider, or open them more, or for medical reasons. And, wearing false eyelashes also opens the eye up quite a bit. In Japan, for instance, going out in public without one, or even two sets of falsies on both the top and the bottom lashes is the equivalent of going out in public naked. The very purpose of them is to distort the eyes and give a certain appearance (not to mention they also agitate the eye like crazy!). I've seen people with them on and with them off and their eyes move and look completely different. I'm just skeptical about the statement that makeup or cosmetics don't affect it. Because, in my experience, cosmetics, especially eye makeup, does dramatically change the way that your face works and the way your eyes move. I also have a coworker who is permanently cross-eyed and another who has a lazy eye. It seems that this could be a factor that would distort things.

Also, botox apparently like freezes the face or something so it seems that it would be difficult to get an accurate read off of somebody who has had a botox injection, especially if you didn't know they'd had one.

Okay physical facial structuring is not important to reading people, this isn't VI, this is Mojo Reading. You can have big bulbous bug eyes and still be a subjective Mojo, it is not the literal physicality of how you look that define your Mojo. We use words like "Hooded" and "Unhooded" to describe Subjectives and Objectives in very simple terms, but that actually doesn't have anything to do with how physically big or small their eyes are, it describes the nuanced signals that comes from a person that naturally gains momentum from a power that engages itself with the outside world or inner world.

Furthermore, the face is not the only transmitter of Mojo Reading signals, THE ENTIRE BODY including the voice is one big transmitter.

Lastly, I wanted to bring into question the importance of the language or languages that a person is thinking in. Obviously, language and culture are closely intertwined so a person's language of thought, or if they speak more than one language, directly affects a person's physical cues. Furthermore, there are scientific studies (I'll be back with my references) showing that the number of known languages stands in direct correlation to the speed of speech and though. What this means is that the more languages a person speaks the more slowly they will speak. This is because they are not working with one operating system, they have to modulate between or amongst languages. Also, the eyes move in coordination with the parts of the brain being accessed for the language and, of course, other physical cues change alongside the language that is being thought in, even if the spoken language remains the same. This is a huge reason that scientists now believe bilingual or multilingual people have a slower onset of alzheimer's. This modulation amongst languages exercises the parts of the brain that alzheimer's deteriorates. But it also means that a person fluent in more than one language gives off distinctly different physical cues than someone who doesn't. Again, I'll be back with the scientific studies on this but it seems like worthwhile food for thought.

Let me put it this way, no matter what language you speak, it does not undo your Mojo. Because you Mojo is like your Mother of all Mother languages, and everything else is translated from that language. Even if verbal languages didn't exist, and we were still using grunts and facial expressions, we would all still have Mojos, we would all still have innate natural wiring, and we would all still be giving off the distinct signals of said wiring.
Languages, Culture, Religion, Gender roles, those are all memes that we use, but none of them supersede or undo the natural wiring of your Mojo. The cues that we read are not reflections of anything learned, but of ways your psyche is naturally designed to work, seen in how readily and efficiently your energy goes into using certain powers, and doing certain maneuvers with those powers.

What you are describing are no doubt considerations that need to be taken into account by anyone that is learning how to Mojo read, however they do not undo the possibility of reading a person, because they do not undo any human nature within that person. They still have hands, they still have eyes, they still have ears, they still have cognitive functions, and they still have a natural way these functions are most conductivity used and accessed. It is like if a Man were to act like a woman, they are not actually turning into a female, they are only behaving in the ways their culture told them women are supposed to act.
The idea behind Mojo Reading is to look past all of the Memes and anything that is not how you naturally work, and only see the energy relationships behind your Mojo Configuration. When you can see this, then there is no way that a person can act that will change it, there is only your Mojo using its powers in the ways that it is designed to.

 

[Adymus]

This kind of reasoning is exactly why I wanted to start this thread. The logic behind such a statement is so completely flawed and narrow minded.

Instead of focusing all of your energy on suppressing this idea, why don't you take a moment to think about this rationally?

If you had a way to objectively confirm any persons cognitive configuration, would it matter at all if said person had known themselves? Would it matter if said person agreed with you or not, if you could physically show them why you read them in the way that you did?

When else in reality is the nature of how you work determinable by you? Does thinking you are a female make you have XX chromosomes?

Would it be of any surprise that a person might disagree, knowing that the people are being read are strongly associated with certain cognitive functions, that might not have as high as a rank as other functions, but they have developed in a way that makes associate them, because within their culture, or religion, or family or for what ever reason, that is how they are "supposed to be"?

Would it surprise you that a person might disagree knowing that their current paradigm of understanding of their own nature is an MBTI paradigm, and is terribly flawed in expressing how their nature actually works? And the reality of their nature is much much much more than that?

Our reasoning is 100% logical, the problem with you is that you are looking at this situation from an MBTI point view, with flawed MBTI assumptions in mind. Detach from that, and it will all make perfect sense.

Shouldn't the idea that self-analysis be a clearly flawed idea, when you see time after time in MBTI that people are clearly not capable of reading themselves, when all the have to go by are subjective ideas of how they are "supposed" to act, and especially when they have a need for the answer to be something they want it to be?

If you guys had decided to create this as an indepth training product/theory/method to reading cognitive functions and how they manifest outward you'd both not be fighting an uphill battle against the skeptical minds of the NT community and be swimming in cashish as you'd be conducting a ton of seminars/trainings to better MBTI/Jung/Keirsey practiotioners.

Terrible execution, absolutely terrible.

Okay what fantasy world are you living in where the institutions of science greet ideas that contradict the status quo with open arms? Have you never opened up a history book in your life?

Do you seriously think the ideas Galileo, Doppler, Tesla, Ohm, the Wright Brothers, and many many more innovators of new and groundbreaking theories were welcomed? They were all ridiculed Even when they had the evidence to prove it!
Most of the people ridiculing them were very much like you EyeNTP, blindly suppressing existent phenomena based on nothing more than the circular logic of your chosen paradigm, and acting like you are fighting some fucking holy war against the NF crack pot scourge that threatens to degrade the infallible laws of science. This is not poor execution, this is history repeating itself.

And I don't know if you have been reading anything said in this thread, but we are not fighting anyone, we are going to continue our work and continue teaching our work to other people, reguardless of how anyone feels about it. We don't need to fight to reach out, and that is exactly what we are doing, bothering with fighting would be stupid, considering the predicaments of our predecessors.

 

[Architect]

Do you seriously think the ideas Galileo, Doppler, Tesla, Ohm, the Wright Brothers, and many many more innovators of new and groundbreaking theories were welcomed? They were all ridiculed Even when they had the evidence to prove it!

Adymus - I think many of your posts and theories are brilliant, however this attitude is unsophisticated. Another example, I caught a video of (I forget his name) the originator of PL, and he kept referencing Einstein in the patent office, making the point that he was a modern day Einstein. I've known Nobel prize winning physicists and they would never say this, they'd look rather silly.

In point of fact Einstein for SR/GR, and all of the early quantum theorists came up with work far more revolutionary than anything Doppler, Tesla or Ohm did, and their theories gained acceptance in no time.

In the few videos I've seen of some of the core members it does look like puer aeternis - sorry, as much as I respect some observations that you've shared, I believe you (all) make a mistake by taking this attitude. No wonder people are hostile - you PL people are the ones fostering it.

 

[Cogwulf]

I'm just wondering, where is the evidence that certain things are controlled by certain parts of the brain?

 

[Adymus]

I'm just wondering, where is the evidence that certain things are controlled by certain parts of the brain?

There are observable patterns correlating with the hemispheres of the psyche that can be noticed in reading people. For example when Xai user’s eyes go to the right, it is accompanied by an unaware warming of the expression, and often it is even accompanied by a right head tilt. When a Zai users eyes go to the right it is accompanied by a cooling of the expression, restrained articulation, withdrawal from engagement. It is not just observable in other people, it can be observed in ourselves. For example, why is it that every time I quickly want to make an effort to use my Xyy non-verbal language to show the person who is talking to me that I am actively listening to them, my head whips to the left? Why it that even modulation and momentum in people is accompanied by the corresponding eye shifts and/or head tilts to their Momentum and Modulation sides of the psyche? These are observable patterns that are occurring in everyone, and in repeated and consistent structures. When I say that these patterns are structured, I mean they occur in consistent packages, for example Cool articulation consistently and unexceptionally comes with unaware expression, and warm articulation/aware Expression always comes with cool resonation. We are far beyond the point where we can safely conclude that this is no mere coincidence, as coincidences do not repeat themselves in consistent, structured, and predictable patterns.

From these observable patterns, we can make speculations that these patterns are coming from a neurological source, perhaps corresponding with rough physical geographic locations on the brain. However, It is not important to theory itself to have a concrete mapping of exactly where the Pod Powers are located on the brain. I get the feeling you might have been under the impression that this is a vital assumption to the integrity of the theory, and if it turns out that Pod Powers are not located EXACTLY where we have speculated they are, the entire theory would collapse, and If that is the case, then you are quite mistaken. Mojo Dojo theory is not based on the assumption that Pod Powers are located in discrete locations on the brain, this is not the natural phenomenon, it is based on these physical and observable patterns in people that occur in these consistent and repeated structures, these patterns give indication of a human’s natural and most energy conducive cognitive hierarchy, and one can learn to read and see these patterns in all people. That is the starting point, that is the real phenomenon. What is important is that the phenomenon is there and is readable, not what exact part of the brain is causing said phenomenon. The latter is really just empirical icing on the cake, and in the future when we have the neurological activity that corresponds to the Phenomenon measured, if it turns out our speculations were correct, then cool beans, and if it turns out that for whatever reason we were slightly off, then it is really not a big deal. Because we already know that the phenomenon is there, and this can be physically demonstrated and measured. If our hypothesis for what is neurologically causing said phenomena turned to not be perfectly on target, then this does not negate the fact that the phenomenon is still there, and that there is still a Left/Right/Front/Back correlation to Pod Powers in the Psyche. It is an easily correctable detail of very little importance.

 

[Cogwulf]

I get the feeling you might have been under the impression that this is a vital assumption to the integrity of the theory, and if it turns out that Pod Powers are not located EXACTLY where we have speculated they are, the entire theory would collapse, and If that is the case, then you are quite mistaken.

No, I just wondered if this was your speculation or something you'd derived from other research.