VI: Visual Identification

[SkyWalker]

VI: Visual Identification
----

I know there is a branch of Socionics that say they can type people by visual interpretation.

It would be so awesome to be able to do that. If you say it correctly to strangers, then you will shock the shit out of them! Can you imagine?

What are the best books or websites/links on this subject?

Or can anybody write a quick starters manual here for the visual cues?

P.S. I know from this forum that PodLair also used some of that socionics stuff, but they changed all the names of functions into their own fantastic jargon and the tone of voice on the website is so incredibly annoying that I have not really bothered. They probably took their stuff from socionics anyway. They took it from somewhere, since they are not quite the scientific experimenters/provers anyway (concluding this from their tone of voice). So where is the source of it?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Visual_identification

Visual identification, or "VI", as it is commonly called, refers to the process of identifying socionic types based on visual information alone. Depending what method the socionist has developed, this term may refer to any of the following:

• diagnosing types based on photographs or their appearance and movements in video
• diagnosing types based on people's appearance and movements in real life
• using the above as part of the type diagnosis process, but not exclusively

Among those who apply VI in type diagnosis, two groups can be recognized:

• Those who associate static (unchanging physiological) facial and body features with socionic traits and types.
• Those who associate dynamic (changing, non-physiological) aspects of a person's appearance, facial expressions, poses and movements with socionic traits and types.

I'm not sure of any books on the subject.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Pod'L... ahem.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Pod'L... ahem.

 

[terraxceles]

[1] [2]

There is no universally accepted or applicable standard, however. Filatova's portraits are strictly race-exclusive and can hardly be applied outside of Caucasian components. This is in contrast to Pod'lair who view visual cues as static and unchanging. As I understand of VI, there is a greater emphasis placed on noting nuances within regional and cultural context, and correlation is made deductively.

It seems useful in providing a rough idea of a person's type, however, I wouldn't trust it blindly without taking into account other personality and behavioral differences.

Spoiler

Random tangent:

I noticed today that one of my teachers has a gaze that is incredibly similar to one in the portraits in the link above, most notable in ESTps. This led me to consider if my teacher is an Se Ego type; none of his antics contradict this assessment, so I do believe (at current) that he is ESTp. At any point however should his behavior indicate otherwise, I will alter my perspective to whatever type it resembles most closely, because patterns in behavior + cognition > VI.

There are no hard and fast rules for VI, more-or-less visual impressions and I would be highly skeptical of any sources claiming to have discovered rigid rules for identifying types. There's certain people on 16types who claim to know whether someone is a rational or irrational type by observing their neck-shape. I don't reject the suggestion, I'm just highly skeptical of it because there is no way to verify whether or not it's correct, and I don't believe any number of sampling size can rule out the possibility of the correlation being an extended coincidence, which makes it Podlair all over again.

Anyway, yeah.