Oh, for a while there I thought I could do this leader thing — but the role actually tears me up inside. The sterility. The distance. The lack of contact. The worry about rapport. The need to be a figure, rather than a participant.
But I guess I’m a participant also; we are studying the human soul, after all. So I possess part of the truth that others also may wish to know. I think I can probably add more life to this place with my humanity, than with any illusion of authority. We’re all floating around on a mote of dust after all, right? Who among us has words of stone. My allegiance is to truth, not to any system– whether of my own or anyone’s making. And if I wish to interface with the souls of others — to know them — I have to be willing to share in like form.
Let all speak their reality, let it confuse us all as it’s mean to. If you’re not utterly confused in this complex reality, then you’re not paying attention. And if you seek solidity from anyone else, perhaps you lack equanimity in yourself; a comfort with the eternal unknown. The trick is to be half as tenaciously truth-driven as you are confused. Do so and you’ll be fine.
I wrote this before Animal’s current post here, funny enough. Much of the same sentiment, and part of my own battle to fight my Alpha vanishing tendencies.
Gosh, sometimes I just wanna shout from the rooftops. Celebrate with all humanity; we’ve found it! We’ve found it! Inside myself I feel very different about CT than I often allow myself to express. But lately I realized authenticity is more valuable than coordinated expressions.
To me it’s one of the most important events in the history of the exploration of: Mind. The discovery of cognitive type will forever alter the way we see ourselves. It’s the beginning of a global paradigm shift, and I feel so small and incapable of carrying it forward. And I know I sound like a lunatic. Cuz every lunatic says they’ve “found it” right? But so be it. I decided back in 2014 that I’d resign myself to such a fate when I spoke to another part of myself, and said to it:
at worse case scenario my book will join the ranks of the eccentric mystics of history
i’m fine with that. at least i delivered something to this world. if i am right at all, even if not fully, it’ll be dug up in some future (that i might not be around to see) but what matters is that i spoke the truth of what i perceived..
It’s high time for everyone to know just how batty I *actually* am. Because I just couldn’t… can’t.. let this die with me. In truth i’m an obsessive person, with an obsessive mission. And while all the forces of my being would want to shrivel into myself, hide from reality and just… observe as a consciousness floating just beyond the moon, I drag myself into reality. I have little desire for this world. But I have a desire for truth. All that matters is that I present truth. All that matters is that what I say can be confirmed to be right. Who I am, or where it came from is irrelevant, if the experiment is repeatable. If the message of CT can outlast and endure all tests.
- This reply was modified 2 months, 2 weeks ago by Auburn.
So few are left, ..from the start of this race.
I’ve been isolated on this journey for so long, although not so much lately due to new faces emerging. Lyra, Adymus, Fukyo, Cheese, Nysamis, Kento, Thomas — back then they were pillars I could use as points of orientation. Fellow seekers obsessed with cracking the mystery of the human soul.
So few took the question seriously. Who were looking for the answers of the human race, and not just their own identity. Who were trying to crack the puzzle of our collective truth. Who were equally dissatisfied with the ‘answers’ (or lack thereof) that the scientific consensus had for why we are different. Not satisfied with the Global 5’s lukewarm explanation of who we are.
In my journey I found very few serious seekers that weren’t trying to turn a profit, make a buzzy website with a “new better 8 functions test” or a few corrections to the MBTI. I understood immediately and intuitively that the MBTI was not the end-all of itself. Those who are trying to patch up the MBTI’s holes are missing the point.
The point is that if the MBTI has any validity, it’s only tangential to what it is actually trying to get to — which is something it hasn’t uncovered yet. So the point isn’t to fix a broken system, but to dig deeper into what is the MBTI approximating? What was Jung approximating? What is that *thing* that is there? That treasure chest? And who’s really looking for it?
I was attracted to a few people like SolitaryWalker, SimulatedWorlds and Michael Pierce. I saw as SolitaryWalker fell into the solipsist trap of the INT temperament, and painted a typology that retained the elitist INxx sentiment despite him elevating the functions. I saw his bitterness at misunderstandings, and his gripe at MBTI. I saw *so* much gripe against the MBTI. And I understood it well, and was tempted to grip for a while, until I realized that’s childish.
The MBTI is trying its best– it’s not the culprit. The problem is that we haven’t found “it” yet. Criticizing the MBTI does nothing if you don’t have a better solution. “So, what do you have to offer?” I asked myself. I didn’t have anything beyond impressions.
SimulatedWorlds was part of a new forum called personalitynation.com that was filled with some great ideas. More focus was given to Je/Ji/Pe/Pi and there was a departure away from the four letter code. I found it delightful, but it too was filled with endless back and forths because no firm basis for consensus existed. If someone insisted on their type being something, they could rationalize anything, if they really tried. And for reasons that I never knew, the forum was closed. I think the person funding it decided not to pay for it anymore and move onto other things.
These rationalizations gave no more clarity in the end, as the same bits of data were used to support one type and then shuffled to support another set of functions in the span of a thread. Some of us think we’re smarter than it though. And I thought I was immune to this rationalization / functions shuffling too, until I saw it happen with those close to me. And then I realized it’s a systemic issue. If something is really true, it ought to be provable without a doubt. This heavy reliance on interpretation –elegant as it was to my mind– was not reliably producing the answer.
I’d listen to various ‘experts’ to see if they had a solution to this deadlock. And most of the time the essentialist part of me understood.. they don’t have it. Because intuitively I understood that certain things were not *it*. For example:
- – If someone provides an explanation of type that didn’t allow for you to be a loser of each type, they don’t have it. If type is real, then there will be mediocre versions of them all.
- – If someone provides an explanation of type that’s based on some philosophical stance (i.e. Kant/Plato) they don’t have it. Nice try; a little better. But if I can change my mind about what philosophy I think is most sound within the course of my college career, then it can’t be based on that. And those who have no formal undestanding of philosophy, or have adoted other views, still have a type.
- – If someone uses only famous examples to epitmoize the types (i.e. INTP Einstein, INFJ Mother Teresa) I shook my head. Because if you grab a group of 100 people, you’re not gonna get rockstars like them in it.
And there were many such unspoken things that I knew disqualified most everyone who was proposing an explanation. I came across Dario Nardi and was excited for a while. The prospect of identifying type via neuroscience sounded promising (and it still is). But I soon found that his understanding of functions was quite simplistic, and he himself was msityped (he’s a classic Delta technocrat typing as INTJ). And if his EEG’s are based on data from a system like that, it wouldn’t be very useful at identifying functions — although it may identify other things. I kept a look out on neuroscience for a while, and still do on occasion, but it’s not there yet. And it needs help from a robust psychic model first, in order to run the experiments faithfully and to know what to look for.
And Nardi wasn’t even doing official experiments; just pilot tests. No help seemed to be coming from the science department. No evidence was mounting for Type outside of Big Five’s temperaments, which are not where the answer is. I sat on it for a while, saying “any year now, it’ll happen” and it never did.
It never did.
I also saw other typologists at various points within this exploration journey; having come to deductions here and there. And I eventually came up with a diagram to show what this evolution path looks like.
The only ones I’ve seen get to the bottom of this chart (in one way or another) are Pod’lair, Dave Powers & CT. Nobody else is really even in the game. Because if you’re not trying to use evidence-based approaches, the disagreements will never end. One can twirl around between types forever, in a maze of interpretation. It becomes opinion versus opinion.
When Pod’lair came into the scene, it challenged the entire typology community. They not only understood the deductive pathway I had undergone above, but they had a proposed solution. They:
- – Had an answer to type that was stable across lifetimes
- – Was not dependent on ‘content’
- – Was not dependent on personal opinion or self-reporting
- – Could be falsifiable (in theory) via visual means
- – Was dynamic, including function interplays
- – Was comprehensive, covering multiple sets of four, not just Je/Pi/Pe/Pi but basically all quadrants.
I thought to myself: they “get it.”
The problem was it was lead by a megalomaniac who considered himself the most genius person on the planet, responsible for the greatest discovery of mankind. Pod’lair could be its own thread, so for now it suffices to say that the narcissism of the leader lead to a chronic narrowness of the model. He typed as NiFe, but also typed ~1/4 to ~1/2 of the population that way. And his arguments were circular and unfalsifiable, because they relied on “qualia.” So at the end of the day, the argument was “It’s an artistic sense. You’re just not seeing it.” Adjectives like “dreamy” were used for N functions, with no anatomical specificity to go along with it. Pod’lair believed that specifying precise muscles would be missing the phenomenon, which is necessarily tacit. This immunized him against critique, and kept him in command until a few years ago when his core group collapsed.
Most everyone laughed at Pod’lair or got angry at them. But I sympathized with them. They were trying to find “it”, and more adamantly than most of those throwing shade their way. At least they were trying. At least they were ambitious, and not complacent with a pop psychology system that allowed people to stay in their comfort zones.
In frustration, both with Pod’lair and the typology community, I become a lone researcher. Nobody was gonna come to the rescue, and Pod’lair had at least put an idea in my mind: dynamic signals can be mapped. This was a better idea than the V.I. of Socionics. So I began my own series of experiments, trying out all the ideas I had come across on my journey and discarding those that did not work. And then it came out; there it was. I felt myself touch it finally; the truth beneath it all.
I didn’t make up CT, it came out on its own as I chiseled away the chaff. As one thing became clear, chunks of misconceptions kept falling away. Any idea –whether psychological or visual– that couldn’t stand the test of time was eliminated. And I was prepared to find out that all of it was altogether in need of elimination, and that this was a false trajectory just like so many others. But that’s not what happened. Data points started to converge in elegant symmetry despite my efforts to suspend theory and just look for patterns. Something in you just knows when 4, 5, 6 layers of data converge in such a way that is coherent beyond your mind’s fabrication. Predictions started to come true, and more data validated the previous progress in a way that was not self-fulfilling (i.e. online tests just feed you back what you put into them).
By 2013 I had met Alerith, and she was the first person I shared the entirety of my findings with. Together we ventured forward in this territory, making more and more discoveries. Fi’s connection to vegeterianism. Te’s connection with computer programming and physics. Many fellow contributors have come and gone: Lyra & Cheese, Morsecode & Heron, Peppergirl & Elsa. Teams of vultologists created and then disbanded. Lives lead them elsewhere. Our journeys cross and part ways. And I remain stuck with this burden. This burning potato which I can’t drop.
Nobody’s gonna do it for us.
But the kind of investment that a phenomenon like this requires goes far beyond the intrigue of a typology hobbyist. I’ve essentially lived on scraps these past 6 years, as I pursue my desires and finish excavating. Still in R&D mode. Still hiding away this fact from the world because it’s not ready yet.
Not taking the easy route of monetization or cheap ~15 minutes of fame. Not making a youtube channel with buzzy new qualia adjectives to add to people’s MBTI arsenal and give them more ways to do MBTI. No, I wanted to transcend all this confusion — and the only way to do that is to bypass the whole pop psychology field. So as new pop systems come and go (Erik Thor, OBS, INTJ/INFP Coffee) I grind away at the same reality, because I know what I see is the truth.
And now, in 2019, this behemoth is just barely clear enough for others to see. Just clear enough to be independent of my qualia-eyesight. Just clear enough to get people’s types right despite the massive complexity of development levels. Just barely accurate enough in its profiles that they resonate with the right people most of the time.
So now a new chapter begins. A new community with new faces.
And so I say to you all, …hi. I’m Auburn.
And I seek the truth.
And you are the truth I seek.FaeParticipant
- Type: NeFi
- Development: ll--
- F Attitude: Seelie
This was a very pleasant read, @auburn! I know I’ve said it repeatedly, but I was sold when you described Seelie/unseelie last year as the development levels were coming up. Of all the things I liked, this especially convinced me that you were tracking something real. You first ended my ten year type confusion by typing me NeFi but that heart attitude thing sold me more because you described something crazy intimate that I had only thought of as my own private thing for years: a struggle between seelie and unseelie waging deep in the heart. It was really something to find that this extended beyond me.AlerithParticipant
- Type: TiNe
- Development: ll-l
- F Attitude: Adaptive
And I remain stuck with this burden. This burning potato which I can’t drop.
if CT must be a potato.. then it’sa high-tech GLADOS potato ^__^
Thank you for not dropping GLADOS. She’d be pissed if ya did that D:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.