Location Used To Save The Other Threads

[dark]

I am making this so the Pod'lair arguments can stop cluttering perfectly good threads that could possibly mean something.

I hear claims that Pod'lair has never lost an argument, but all I've seen was avoiding serious questions and saying we are right because Thomas said we are, of whoever the hell he is.

Also from what I have recently read, the makers of Pod'lair were once a group of people doing Jung stuff, then deleted that, removed it and changed the name and claimed they were brand new, revolutionary, never been done before, all these ideas are completely new, yet we can convert them to the exact same meanings as Jungian functions, yet they are "different!"

Next problem, the entire thing is shrouded in mysticism, very INFJ like, which could by why they type almost everyone as an INFJ, I am not going to use the Pod'lair terms since most here speak in MBTI language, to simplify things everyone else should do the same, if you refuse to do so, the rest will look at you as an ass because you may as well be speaking another language entirely, and we don't want to be switching to google to translate shit.

The INFJ problem, apparently almost everyone is an INFJ because they just are. INFJs can do everything everyone else does, they can perform any role, and type, they are just awesome! That doesn't even make sense. If I take that as truth value, if the functions INFJs are running on, which are NiFeTiSe, allows them to be everything, couldn't any other function arrangement do this also? I think so.

Main problem I see with the visual identification (Pod'lair says it isn't that it is "Mojo Reading," but it's the same shit), the readings are done on a database of what is found to be common for each function. So if a person moves their face in a specific manner, they have this function. I find a problem with that. It is very much possible for someone without that function to move their face the same. It may not be natural, but they can, they still have the muscles. It is like wiggling your ears, the ears move up and down each time you smile widely enough, try it. Now try to move your ears up without smiling. If you haven't practiced this, you probably won't be able to, I can't. Now if you practice smiling and moving your ears up, your body will get used to the movement of the ears, it will rearrange the signals in a manner so the muscles that lift the ears will becomes more controllable, eventually you can move your ears at will without smiling.

The same is true with all the muscles in your face. For someone to claim that they have found a way of reading people by their facial expressions seems to fall apart since it can be worked around. I was typed myself twice as an INFP and INFJ, each time I imitated someone I thought to be the types. So I give Pod'lair credit there, they do have that down, they know who does what. But when someone does as I did, which was completely accidental, because I was reciting from memory something someone else had said, which when I do that I end up mimicking the person, the system can fall short.

Pod'lair claims that is impossible to do just on the basis that it is impossible to do because we are only capable of acting a specific way according to brain patterns, but as I stated before, if we learn to use the other muscles, we have found the way around it. For the common person, yes this is true, they have not tried to use the other muscles, but for someone who constantly mimics others, this is a possibility.

At first I took Pod'lair for face value, they claimed I was this or that, and went on to tell me what I was able to do, my superpowers of some shit, come to find out, I couldn't do any of those. Either I am a shitty person without the superpowers that comes with the type or I am not the type, either is possible.

The people that talk about Pod'lair seem to have a hostility I find among a lot of INFJs that I encounter and debate with, "I am right because I am right regardless of your logic." Not that bad, but the exaggeration gets the point across.

My main annoyance with Pod'lair is they claim it to be new revolutionary science. First off it is not revolutionary, just fancy new names for an old idea. Secondly it is not science, it is just as much science as astrology is. Just because you can test something a million times and it always comes out true, it is not science, that is not the terms of science.

Pod'lair acts as a cult, yet if you mention it to them, as you will probably see here, they become offended and claim that it is SCIENCE, we are seeing real work things happening! Big deal, doesn't make it science. Also Pod'lair people don't try to claim MBTI is some old religion we are holding onto, we don't claim it to be science, it is a psychological theory, which we know is most likely wrong, at least most of it, it is here so advancements can be made, it is not absolute. Science never claims anything to be absolute, even laws. Physics claims very proudly that the laws of gravity and other things may someday be dis-proven and we will rewrite it all. Remember everything can seem perfectly correct until someone finds that way back long time ago, one little thing was done wrong, and it changes it all. Pod'lair is pseudo-science, that is the bottom line, it doesn't matter that no one is giving it time or whatever. No one likes a pushy prick making their way into a club they don't belong when we already have enough assholes we are trying to push out. It is the same fallacy the atheists use to claim that they are scientific and shit.

Next, the website is horrific, looks like the collaboration of an INFJ and an ISFP after tripping to much. Comic Sans font is more bearable than the website.

What I see is a collection of ideas that are basically good, but where they go wrong is claiming that things can't be questioned, (try that in their forms and you'll get kicked, Socrates would be gone in a minute,) and the claim that things are new and revolutionary. The events that brought it to existence sounds too much like "1984" and this Thomas person is Big Brother.

Anyhow, have fun, I'll take Pod'lair seriously if they actually start acting like a real organization searching for the truth instead of saying, "HERE IS THE UNQUESTIONABLE TRUTH, EITHER BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE OR YOU ARE WRONG MOTHERFUCKER!"

Good'day.

 

[Chimera]

The same thing was tried here.
Doesn't work too well.

I have immense respect for Adymus, who happens to be one of Thomas's star pupils. In light of that, I won't be saying that all Pod'lair followers are cracked in the head or anything.

Personally, I find their antics amusing. Particularly their labels. Mojo Dojo? I'm having Powerpuff Girls flashbacks here.

If Pod'lair posts bother people so much, why not just...not read them? Just skim through, smile at the labels, and move on. Works for me.
​

 

[dark]

Same for me, I found that the debates are cluttering too many nice arguments about other things, so here we can talk about anything if we wish about this topic.

Back when there was a heated debate between Socionics, MBTI and Pod'lair, all against one another, I just quit, every thread was plagued by it, an example, "Oh look a thread on people walking across the street... [opens and prepares to read, scrolls down after first post] oh wait... another casualty of the war... I'll go elsewhere since the OP isn't even being addressed anymore."

Pretty much the place to help the train wrecks I used to see, and I incidentally took part in recently so here we go.

 

[Logic]

I hear claims that Pod'lair has never lost an argument, but all I've seen was avoiding serious questions and saying we are right because Thomas said we are, of whoever the hell he is.

Go ahead and ask questions, I'll try to respond as clearly and effectively as possible. Yes, Pod'lair has never lost an argument, the understanding stands the critiquing of all that have tried to "de-bunk" it. Most times people don't have a freakin' clue what Pod'lair is and they end up coming to false conclusions.

Also from what I have recently read, the makers of Pod'lair were once a group of people doing Jung stuff, then deleted that, removed it and changed the name and claimed they were brand new, revolutionary, never been done before, all these ideas are completely new, yet we can convert them to the exact same meanings as Jungian functions, yet they are "different!"

My gosh, I can't believe that I'm going to explain the differences between Pod'lair and MBTI again. They do not share the same meaning, I explained this point already.

A Mojo is not the same thing as a personality type!

Personality Type: This is the sum total of all the experiences you've had, it includes your ethnicity, Mojo, background, Intellect, sex, gender, sexual orientation, who you hang out with, nature, nurture, etc, etc, etc...

I would estimate that a person's personality is so incredibly difficult to precisely understand that it's impossible.

Mojo: The innate configuration wiring that a person uses to learn, develop, and grow into a more powerful individual. You can develop your Mojo infinitely.

Next problem, the entire thing is shrouded in mysticism, very INFJ like, which could by why they type almost everyone as an INFJ, I am not going to use the Pod'lair terms since most here speak in MBTI language, to simplify things everyone else should do the same, if you refuse to do so, the rest will look at you as an ass because you may as well be speaking another language entirely, and we don't want to be switching to google to translate shit.

This is another point that I or Adymus have addressed in the past. Do your homework before you start tossing your weight around against me.

We at Pod'lair aren't deliberately trying to say that all people that we read are all Nai'xyy's just because we want to. When we say that your a Nai'xyy or a Zai'nyy or whatever, it's because you really are that Mojo, period. The data is showing us that the people who are joining Pod'lair are mostly Nai'xyy's and then Nyy'xai's. The conclusion that we've come to is that Interpretive alphas (that means they have an interpretive power as their source power) are the most attracted to new ideas compared to all the other Mojo's. After the interpretive alphas will come the Values'-Based Alphas, then the Logic-Based Alphas and then finally the Literal Alphas last.

From what we are seeing from our results, Mojo's are evenly distributed among all populations. So that means that 1/16 people will be one of the Mojo's. I can further say that out of all the Mojo's, half will be male and the other half will be female. This isn't because we want it to be this way. At first I was a bit skeptical myself when I found out this fact but that's just how it is.

The INFJ problem, apparently almost everyone is an INFJ because they just are. INFJs can do everything everyone else does, they can perform any role, and type, they are just awesome! That doesn't even make sense. If I take that as truth value, if the functions INFJs are running on, which are NiFeTiSe, allows them to be everything, couldn't any other function arrangement do this also? I think so.

Like I said, we aren't saying people are Nai'xyy's because we want them to be, they are because that's how they're configured. Through our abilities in Mojo Reading we are able to accurately figure out just who is which Mojo.

Your right, The Nai'xyy is capable of doing anything that any other Mojo is capable of doing, but that doesn't mean that the other Mojo's aren't. The Nai'xyy isn't some god like Mojo that everyone must bow down to like you think. All Mojo's are equal and they all serve a purpose. Every Mojo is capable of doing anything that any other Mojo is capable of doing. So a Zai'nyy is capable of doing what a Nai'xyy can do and vice versa. However I will say this. Every Mojo has a distinct specialty in a specific area. These special areas have to do with the fact that different Mojo's have different Powers. Something like Abductive Reasoning is something that comes easier to a Nai Mojo than it does to a Mojo that doesn't have that Power as their Conscious Power, but that doesn't mean that the Mojo in question isn't capable of doing any sort of abductive reasoning. Are you starting to get it?

Main problem I see with the visual identification (Pod'lair says it isn't that it is "Mojo Reading," but it's the same shit), the readings are done on a database of what is found to be common for each function. So if a person moves their face in a specific manner, they have this function. I find a problem with that. It is very much possible for someone without that function to move their face the same. It may not be natural, but they can, they still have the muscles. It is like wiggling your ears, the ears move up and down each time you smile widely enough, try it. Now try to move your ears up without smiling. If you haven't practiced this, you probably won't be able to, I can't. Now if you practice smiling and moving your ears up, your body will get used to the movement of the ears, it will rearrange the signals in a manner so the muscles that lift the ears will becomes more controllable, eventually you can move your ears at will without smiling.

It isn't V.I. from Socionics, that system is so screwed up that it isn't even funny. The system also isn't helping humanity further its understanding as a whole because it's telling people to use stereotypes.

V.I.: Looking for similar physical appearances and claiming that people who look the same are also using the same set of functions. So if you and Joe Blow look the same, act the same, dress the same, then that means you are the same personality type. You can't have your lenses be cluttered up with nonsense like that.

Mojo Reading: With Mojo Reading you're looking for something much more credible than what can just be seen on the surface, you're looking to figure out someones Mojo. Each Mojo gives off a distinct signal that can be seen (with practice) and used to determine what the Mojo is of someone.

For example: If you were to have 16 different instruments with each of them looking exactly the same, how would you be able to tell what sort of music one would make? You would have to listen to each one. One instrument makes the sound that sounds very familiar to a piano, so if you had to guess what would you say is the name of the instrument being played? Piano! Mojo Reading works very similarly to that. You can't tell what a person's Mojo is from using something as messy as V.I. The only way to do it is to use Mojo Reading, which tunes you into the notes that are being played.

It isn't the movements themselves that will always be exactly the same every time, it's that the overall pattern of the movement shows us that a certain power is being used. Just raising your eyebrows doesn't mean squat shit. Pod'lair is NOT that sloppy. When we are observing someone the person in question cannot help but use their innate powers. You can't turn it off just like you can't stop breathing.

The same is true with all the muscles in your face. For someone to claim that they have found a way of reading people by their facial expressions seems to fall apart since it can be worked around. I was typed myself twice as an INFP and INFJ, each time I imitated someone I thought to be the types. So I give Pod'lair credit there, they do have that down, they know who does what. But when someone does as I did, which was completely accidental, because I was reciting from memory something someone else had said, which when I do that I end up mimicking the person, the system can fall short.

No amount of acting or deception can fool a Mojo Reader. You can act like whatever you want to, but you can never act outside of your Mojo. Why? Because it's innate!

For example: You can have a Neanderthal create a spear and you can have a Homosapien create the exact same spear. Does this mean that they're both the exact same species? Of course it doesn't! Have you ever heard of the saying that there's more than one way to skin a cat? The exact same principle applies here.

With the MBTI test you can fool it to give you different results but with Mojo Reading there is absolutely no way you can get it wrong. You can be upset or tired or happy or w/e, you will always be the same Mojo. All your doing is functioning within those parameters. You can draw anything you want on a piece of paper, but you'll always be drawing onto paper.

You're confused though because you're not really attacking Pod'lair, your just highlighting a flaw with the MBTI test.

Pod'lair claims that is impossible to do just on the basis that it is impossible to do because we are only capable of acting a specific way according to brain patterns, but as I stated before, if we learn to use the other muscles, we have found the way around it. For the common person, yes this is true, they have not tried to use the other muscles, but for someone who constantly mimics others, this is a possibility.

The same result can be produced in many different ways.
2+2=4, 1+3=4,etc.

At first I took Pod'lair for face value, they claimed I was this or that, and went on to tell me what I was able to do, my superpowers of some shit, come to find out, I couldn't do any of those. Either I am a shitty person without the superpowers that comes with the type or I am not the type, either is possible.

What did Pod'lair read you as? If you're not capable of doing the sort of things that your Mojo says you should be able to do, then that means you're not as fully developed as you ought to be.

The people that talk about Pod'lair seem to have a hostility I find among a lot of INFJs that I encounter and debate with, "I am right because I am right regardless of your logic." Not that bad, but the exaggeration gets the point across.

Not every Nai'xyy is looking to debate, I'm not that kind of Nai'xyy, lucky you .

Secondly it is not science, it is just as much science as astrology is. Just because you can test something a million times and it always comes out true, it is not science, that is not the terms of science.

You're misunderstanding what science is because what is known to be true is in fact considered to be science. If at any point that point is proven to be wrong than it is no longer a part of science. If you could prove something is correct a million times over and it is never proven to be incorrect than it must be accepted as a scientific truth. Let's talk about Newton again. When Newton made his contributions to science they tested to see how solid his ideas really were, and he passed their tests. If he was proven wrong then his ideas would be thrown to the wayside. You see, science is a process, you can never know for certain that you've figured out nature absolutely, and you would agree with me on this point. However, science is a living thing and is constantly being revamped with new discoveries and new perspectives so when something is proven to be true it has to be accepted as a scientific truth until it is proven incorrect or shown to be incomplete.

Pod'lair acts as a cult, yet if you mention it to them, as you will probably see here, they become offended and claim that it is SCIENCE, we are seeing real work things happening! Big deal, doesn't make it science. Also Pod'lair people don't try to claim MBTI is some old religion we are holding onto, we don't claim it to be science, it is a psychological theory, which we know is most likely wrong, at least most of it, it is here so advancements can be made, it is not absolute. Science never claims anything to be absolute, even laws. Physics claims very proudly that the laws of gravity and other things may someday be dis-proven and we will rewrite it all. Remember everything can seem perfectly correct until someone finds that way back long time ago, one little thing was done wrong, and it changes it all. Pod'lair is pseudo-science, that is the bottom line, it doesn't matter that no one is giving it time or whatever. No one likes a pushy prick making their way into a club they don't belong when we already have enough assholes we are trying to push out. It is the same fallacy the atheists use to claim that they are scientific and shit.

MBTI isn't a science, it's a failed theory. Believing in something like that is no different than believing in the existence of fairies. MBTI has been proven several times over that it's a useless system. I've already made it quite clear as to how MBTI isn't worth spending any more of your or anyone else's time in. Advancements have been made, the new system is called Pod'lair! Come one come all!

Pod'lair doesn't claim to be perfect either, it's not absolute. We are constantly checking and re-checking all the ideas that build into what Pod'lair is. Not only that but we keep making more new discoveries that help give us a better understanding of everything. Because we've done our job at making sure the theory is bullet proof there is virtually no way you will be able to disprove it. You can try to, but you will most likely get skewered from our counters.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

Not trying to be.... confrontational(?).... yeah that's the word I want... But anyway, I kind of agree with Dark on this. Even in this post you didn't actually put any evidence as to why pod'lair works. You pretty much just said that people have mojos because they have them.

Not saying I think the system is bullshit, I just don't understand why it works. Please do explain.

 

[nanook]

i liked their youtube videos.

the VI which focuses on static aspects has it's limits in percentage, but that does not mean it cant be done right, meaning it does not have to produce false results. rather, if done right, it wont produce any results for many of the individuals that it is applied to. (for those who are not defined/phsyically-individuated, who more closely resemble their parents than themselves, who are too fat.... or just to alien to the readers set of experience)

it is also a skill that must be mastered, and mastery may take so many hours of obsession, roughly seven years if you have a lot of free time to obsess about faces. you can't judge the method, as if a socionics-method even exists. socionics has zero influence on the pattern recognition of any individual reader. it's all up to their brains.
you can only judge the individuals skills of pattern recognition at any point in his self-training. if you are judging the results/examples, that you can see on famous websites, you are not judging socionics, but individual readers. in that context socionics does not exist. it also makes no sense to say, that socionics does not pay attention to dynamic aspects, just because it doesn't claim to. any reader may pay attention to them, at least unconsciously. how could you possibly avoid it? not even by using only static fotos, because often, the dynamic patterns manifest on fotos too.


the VI based on dynamics/movement is a very valuable addition, to the static one. it helps to avoid confusion (there are many type-mirroring-patterns in the world of static shapes). it might be more easy to learn, but that ultimately depends on the individuals skill for recognizing patterns in movement vs in static shapes.

so you don't have to make up a fight between those styles. they should both be integrated into a readers skillset, unless the reader proofs to lack any talent for recognition of either of those two types of patterns.



i was glad to see, that they (thomas and friends) are able to assign the right functions with the right people. (in the videos. they could at least demonstrate coherency of patterns.)

contrary to the mbti-internet-scene, which assigns roughly half of those with equal functions to the opposite type than the other half. opposite on the P-J dichotomy. let aside those who are completely mistyped.

so i was surprised to see that thomas is more friendly with mbti than he is with socionics (socionics does not have this scizophrenic 50% split, and coherency is win, imho).

 

[terraxceles]

INFJs are not "mystical". The only type that I would use that term to describe is INFP, because their inferior Te insists on seeing life for "what it doesn't offer" rather than seeing it for what it is and what can be quantified.

The people that talk about Pod'lair seem to have a hostility I find among a lot of INFJs that I encounter and debate with, "I am right because I am right regardless of your logic." Not that bad, but the exaggeration gets the point across.

More like Inferior Ti.

I sincerely believe that Thomas is Ni-ENFj in Socionics, and by extension, ENFJ in MBTI.

PS. I agree.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I sincerely believe that Thomas is Ni-ENFj in Socionics, and by extension, ENFJ in MBTI.

PS. I agree.

I think he's Ej-Ni, in Socionics, too. Not subtype Ni but Ni ego.

 

[terraxceles]

I think he's Ej-Ni, in Socionics, too. Not subtype Ni but Ni ego.

Do you think Adymus is INTp? It would somewhat make sense if he and Thomas were mirrors, but somehow I keep getting the nagging suspicion that it's a very well-balanced supervision.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

http://podlair.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=90&id=1073&Itemid=35
http://podlair.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=90&id=1029&Itemid=35

//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+//(:+

(damn smileys)

I haven't seen them actually say anything about having any proof that their theory is consistent, only what it is that they look for basically. And honestly, I think that the basic idea really is correct, but I don't know whether to trust a lot of their data thus far.

Note:

INFJs can do everything everyone else does, they can perform any role, and type, they are just awesome!

If their readings are correct, then this is a key factor. It's not that INFJs necessarily have more abilities than other types, but that they can play into roles. They can take the ideas from another type, and then propagate those with a fresh perspective. INJs are, in Pod'lair terms, interpretive worldview types - which means their primary goal in life is the formation of a new way of viewing things. They may well not get anything done in life apart from this, but just putting forward a new perspective is enough to put someone down in history. Then consider that INFJs are much more focused on getting their ideas put forward into society than an INTJ would be, and the high proportion of celebrity INFJs may make sense. Whatever environment they are put in, they take in the key ideas and input them back out for a clearer vision than what was there before.

 

[Bird]

Dark, no one's mentioned Pod'lair here for months...

You're sick of hearing about it so you start a thread
out of nowhere?

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Note on Pod'lair criticisms:

Criticisms must be separated into at least two basic categories:
a) those that pertain the group - how it is conducting itself, what its apparent motives are, etc
b) the theory as separate from the people and how they are portraying the theory

Most criticisms have been at least partially a), which is to be expected, since knowledge of how the theory is being portrayed precedes the knowledge of the theory itself, however we need criticisms which are based on an understanding of how what they are doing actually works, so we can actually determine whether or not their theory is superior or not, or at least what potential lies in it.

Dark, no one's mentioned Pod'lair here for months...

You're sick of hearing about it so you start a thread
out of nowhere?

It has been brought back up in a few threads.

Logic answers threads according to Pod'lair concepts -> discussion on Pod'lair ensues

 

[dark]

Dark, no one's mentioned Pod'lair here for months...

You're sick of hearing about it so you start a thread
out of nowhere?

I haven't been around in months, I left when it was a huge debate, and came back and it there it was again, partially my fault, so instead of derailing the strategic tactical thread anymore, I moved the discussion here, was my mistake, I moved this here in regards of Logic's request.

 

[dark]

Yeah I don't doubt they aren't correct, reading into people is something people have been doing for centuries, like the fortune telling ladies and shit of old. But it seems Pod'lair, (as did Socionics before, which apparently didn't do well from what I hear) may actually be making progress into understanding what it is that these expressions mean, which is pretty cool in its own right, like everything being created, it has its flaws, but someday it could be something cool, but they need to play fair with everyone and cut out the hostility. It is an odd hostility, coming across as nice and arrogant at the same time, at least that is how I see it. But I do realize I shouldn't judge everyone member of something because of how a few people react, and I guess I responded in hostility too so that didn't help. So instead of our previous encounters, let us engage into a real debate to actually learn some things, Socratic possibly since the current sophist type speaking gets annoying.

In my free time I will start to give Pod'lair a look over since it seems difficult to get an objective answer from most followers. I do admit the idea is cool, but I don't find it practical, I don't want to prejudge everyone, I'd rather not know how to read people and give them a chance.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Piecing together Pod'lair theory from an outsiders perspective:

- we're looking at the same basic types as before
- what's different is we have a possible method of identifying types
- on the basic level this corresponds to identification of cues according to type groups
-- note that it's not just the cues, but the energy/momentum the type has while using the cues
- also associated are analogies to the dichotomies/quadrants in terms of ideas which we already intuitively know, to make the ideas easier to grasp
- this includes the four dichotomies (I think?), the eight functions - taken at times in pairs, and general perception dominant vs judgment dominant

- I vs E is about whether you are energised primarily engaging with the environment, or detached from the environment and engaging your own subjective picture
- N vs S is about whether you 'interpret' information, or take it literally as given. We see perception in the eyes especially, where Si and Ni detach from the environment, with Si checking according to previous data, and Ni doing more of a "feeling out" according to a more abstracted understanding, which we see as quick checks vs a drift. Se is denoted as "laser eyes" in that it focuses on a particular object, compared to the dancing eyes of Ne which isn't focused so much on the physical properties of what it sees, and instead searches for possibilities
- F vs T corresponds to the use of feeling, seen especially in the face, though also partially in the eyes. Adymus made a thread showing how the different smiles relate to different positioning of F. Basically, the more F, the higher up the emotion tends to go in the face. Fe vs Fi is about using feeling to push your message, vs using it to tell if you "resonate" with what is being said, which is reflected in the terms aware mouth and unaware mouth. Ti is similar to Si in the eyes in that it is a checking of information, though it checks judgments rather than perceptions and looks different as a result
- P vs J is adaptive vs directive. Apart from the functions as already outlined, this can be seen in gesturing which is termed yin vs yang. In adaptives we have a go-with-the-flow gesturing, where there are smooth movements used for the sake of the person using them, compared with the gestures of directives which are used to put their message across to the other person, correspond to a stiffness in the wrists, and a conductor like approach. Also note the general 'hunter' vs 'gatherer' approach to perception - the P is focused on gathering information, whereas the J is focused on hunting, looking for information which furthers their goal. This can be noticed intuitively.
- as mentioned, perception can be seen in the eyes: interesting to note is that perception, even when not relating to our field of environmental sight, is situated in the eye region, both from a subjective and objective perspective. In perception dominants, the eyes aren't taking place in the communication process, and are essentially always elsewhere, whereas in judgment dominants, the perception is always in terms of their judgments which are seen and felt in the face as a whole - there is no division between seeing and doing like there is in perception dominants.

note: all of this, except for the stuff I've said which is wrong, is contained in their videos so watch those to learn their ideas.

So, the question as to the correctness of the theory, would be whether we can indeed identify types according to spotting their use of these particular cues. Presumably, each person only uses one half of each of the cues corresponding to their type, and will only be able to properly be exercised and gather momentum through the use of their primary functions, so for example you can see if someone is over using their tertiary because no momentum will be gathered - they always want to let the dominant + auxiliary take over, but for whatever reason this just isn't happening.

Most of what they see can immediately be noted to correspond very well with the theory as is, and is very nice in the correspondence it demonstrates between physical cues and what is going on in someone's mind - something we probably intuitively know, but haven't really brought to the level of idea as well as we would hope to.


Challenges to test Pod'lair:
- show that the reads they done aren't consistent, e.g. that many of the Nai'Xyy readings they've done aren't Nai'Xyy at all, or that some people can be demonstrated to be of two different types
- demonstrate that the cues they are using don't actually correspond to the kind of cognition going on that they suppose, making the method, even if consistent, arbitrary to a large degree and not terribly useful
- [other]

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

It seems that MBTI, in the true sense of what MBTI is, has been superseded - something that had happened anyway, in that much of official MBTI dogma has been often criticised in the Typology community, but was never really replaced by anything. MBTI(tm) is dead, and has been for quite some time.

However, what we might see is a nice argument put forward by the Socionicists, which should be interesting.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Yeah I don't doubt they aren't correct, reading into people is something people have been doing for centuries, like the fortune telling ladies and shit of old. But it seems Pod'lair, (as did Socionics before, which apparently didn't do well from what I hear) may actually be making progress into understanding what it is that these expressions mean, which is pretty cool in its own right, like everything being created, it has its flaws, but someday it could be something cool,

Agreed. Even if they turned out to be incorrect, they've certainly done a lot of work to open up scientific investigation into an area which, surprisingly, apparently hasn't really been looked into much (probably due to a divide in those who do science, and those who are people focused - a reconciliation between science and social intuition will be very nice).

but they need to play fair with everyone and cut out the hostility. It is an odd hostility, coming across as nice and arrogant at the same time, at least that is how I see it.

Yeah, this is very odd. However, it may be a big part of what is fuelling them to keep working, who knows. They'll have to drop this if they want to properly spread their message.

But I do realize I shouldn't judge everyone member of something because of how a few people react, and I guess I responded in hostility too so that didn't help. So instead of our previous encounters, let us engage into a real debate to actually learn some things, Socratic possibly since the current sophist type speaking gets annoying. In my free time I will start to give Pod'lair a look over since it seems difficult to get an objective answer from most followers.

Yes - it is important to separate the people and emotion from the ideas being put forward.

I do admit the idea is cool, but I don't find it practical, I don't want to prejudge everyone, I'd rather not know how to read people and give them a chance.

Yeah, this is an important point - while they may have some great ideas, are they ideas that we really want to know? It will certainly change how we interact with people, and it is uncertain whether it would be for the better or worse. Psychology in general is a dangerous science (but isn't all science?).

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Do you think Adymus is INTp? It would somewhat make sense if he and Thomas were mirrors, but somehow I keep getting the nagging suspicion that it's a very well-balanced supervision.

Oops, meant Adymus. :S

I don't know Thomas personally, at all.

 

[dark]

One thing I think that Pod'lair has right is that we can't truly know ourselves in an objective enough manner to where we can actually type our own self via a test.

What I would like to see is something that can actually type us by how we type or speak. That in my opinion is more tied to the brain than our looks. Since we all talk slightly different, but each type seems to be very similar, a linguistic should have no trouble at all differentiating one type from another.

 

[nanook]

i don't think we use different grammar, although i have seen those computer programs which try to type a website based on cues like vocabulary, which obviously can't be more accurate than other methods, although it is impressive. (it types my blog rather correctly, but not precisely correct)

what we write differs in content, but content can't be processed according to an objectified method. on thing, that is obvious, is that people talk in tongues a lot. they imitate everyone from carl jung to that latenight guy, to mainstream memes.

another thing is stages of developement. types at different stages communicate and write very differently. not only do they use different or more functions (fewer shadow function, more tertiary quart..whatever) but the content of the functions will be totally different, as well.

the style of a type who uses only his first function is almost 100% different, from the style of the same person 10 years later, when he uses 2 or three functions consciously.


then you have spiritual influence. like a person with lsd writes different from one without. now, some people are tripping by nature. really. its common among manic poets but also among many who write on spiritual message boards.


of course you can type people's writing sometimes, if you have an understanding of cognitive functions, which is not just made up entirely or based on a reductionist "definition" you have read, but which is based on genuine theory of mind, like jung's original understanding used to be.

but 'no trouble at all' ? no way, it's a big trouble. VI is far superior to any other attempt at analyzing people, besides testing probably, although i haven't seen a good test. haven't looked to hard either, lately.

now all my successful experience with typing people based on how they write was made with mostly introverted people on message boards with deep subjects. they often express themselves completely.

i wouldn't even know how to begin typing chatterly extroverted folks who don't have enough attention span to write more than three words in a row. or what about that one guy, who only posts pictures. ESTP? ISFp? INTp? ISTj? who knows.

 

[dark]

Well the reason I suggested that was because actual people who study hand writing, like people with PhD in it, are actually capably of amazing feats. From my religions class I learned that there is a very high possibility that the first so many books of the Christian holy book was written by 5 different people. And it is obvious once one points it out because each person writes it so different when writing the same thing.

So I think that if someone took the time to study writing styles into correlation to the brain functions as we know them now, we can locate patterns and be able to tell what each person is using at any given time, you would be able to see their weaknesses in the functions and their strengths. One person may be overly strong with one function, like Te coming out so strong you could smell it while Fi so weak that it sits in the background.

 

[dark]

Reading through the various things in Pod'lair, they are very pretentious, and it gets annoying, sounds like listening to a crazed INFJ, shit my exgf acted that way sometimes, one reason we broke up. Who ever is writing this shit needs to stop worshiping Thomas and calm down a little and read the Dao De Jing. Also who ever is in charge should fire the writer and get someone who can use their "powers" to actually make people want to join Pod'lair, if could be good, but currently, not many people will want to even care about it because if how the information is being directed to the reader.

 

[dark]

I also must post, even Pod'lair, someone else who is typing things nicely, mentions that you need to send more than 1 video. The reason for this is because they need to check it multiple times to get a better reading on you. I think this is so because they are searching to see what functions are always dominate on you. Which if someone would just say this, it would make things so much easier. Though I find it weird to talk alone to a camera for 10 minutes. Think I will work through their leveling up thing and see what they finally conclude me as. Two times I have been given different reads. First they saw Fi and Ne, second they saw Ni and Fe. So I think the more I give them, the better they can tell me about myself. Just like any form of statistical thing, eventually the patterns will emerge and the functions being used will seem evident, now I just need to think of a topic to talk about.

@ Logic, how does the Mojo reading work if I am reading something? The whole thing where you watch eyes seems to fall there because I have read Adymus' thing on how the S/N are seen in the eyes, and it would seem that everyone would have similar eyes because if they didn't they couldn't actually be focusing on the words, or does it go deeper as how the words being spoken contract and retract the pupils according to how it makes the reader feel and stuff? Also if you know how to read, I have some serious questions if you are willing to be civil and not like the writers on most of the pages I've read so far.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I agree that typing through typing (lul) should be possible - or at least, typing through conversation certainly is.

The problem with reading a single post and typing based on that is that your words don't necessarily reflect your actual thought processes due to heavy editing, and so it probably won't be reliable in general. You need to know how the person -actually- works according to factors that can't change.

As for typing through speech: tone of voice should potentially be able to tell the position of F, though perhaps with a significant degree of error. N/S might require paying attention to the content of the speech.

 

[alrai]

I agree that typing through typing (lul) should be possible - or at least, typing through conversation certainly is.

The problem with reading a single post and typing based on that is that your words don't necessarily reflect your actual thought processes due to heavy editing, and so it probably won't be reliable in general. You need to know how the person -actually- works according to factors that can't change.

True., but not if your unorganized like me, and have your stuff all over the place, its much easier to construct sentences by other means before inserting them.

 

[pjoa09]

not arguing for pod'lair but we don't seem to argue about why we use E,I,N,S,T,F,P, and J.

Yes it makes sense but still there are some factors obviously missing. Big 5 personality test covers them and a couple other strange online personality tests confront them as well.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

not arguing for pod'lair but we don't seem to argue about why we use E,I,N,S,T,F,P, and J.

Yes it makes sense but still there are some factors obviously missing. Big 5 personality test covers them and a couple other strange online personality tests confront them as well.

Extraversion/Introversion, Sensation/Intuition, and Thinking/Feeling are universal dichotomies that every system uses as a foundation for its concepts. They aren't disputed because they form the initial assumption that gives us psychological types, which every theory agrees exist in some way, shape, or form. They differ in the interpretations, especially in that Rational/Irrational is only preserved by Socionics, while J/P is used for all others.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

not arguing for pod'lair but we don't seem to argue about why we use E,I,N,S,T,F,P, and J.

Yes it makes sense but still there are some factors obviously missing. Big 5 personality test covers them and a couple other strange online personality tests confront them as well.

Typology isn't trying to describe personality in the colloquial sense of the term. It is describing the general way we structure the world according to perception and judgment.

What do you think Big 5 does that Typology doesn't? 4/5 of the dichotomies are much the same as the Typology ones, but based on behavioural stuff rather than the perceptual distinctions. Neuroticness is the main additional factor there.

So it seems that it doesn't really take into account differentiation in emotion, but that stuff is probably not innate/fixed anyway in the sense that personality theory would want. Like, if being neurotic can be fixed with medication, does it really fall under personality?

But whatever, we're looking at a specific structural property of the human psyche, so anything else, while interesting in itself, isn't too relevant here.

 

[pjoa09]

Typology isn't trying to describe personality in the colloquial sense of the term. It is describing the general way we structure the world according to perception and judgment.

What do you think Big 5 does that Typology doesn't? 4/5 of the dichotomies are much the same as the Typology ones, but based on behavioural stuff rather than the perceptual distinctions. Neuroticness is the main additional factor there.

So it seems that it doesn't really take into account differentiation in emotion, but that stuff is probably not innate/fixed anyway in the sense that personality theory would want. Like, if being neurotic can be fixed with medication, does it really fall under personality?

But whatever, we're looking at a specific structural property of the human psyche, so anything else, while interesting in itself, isn't too relevant here.

Wasn't looking to be relevant. I was just wondering... there could be some other forms of typology.

Like that Lucher's color test. It was pretty accurate but hell if I didn't like red that much tomorrow I'd be having another core issue.

There is emotional stability and levels of being neurotic but in the end it just ends up finding its own synonym for INTP.

Plain out I don't think there is much way to learn another's type other than spending that hour with them.