Home 2023 › Forums › Vultology & Learning Center › [Discord] Signals Clarifying
Focusing more on finalizing the vultology code lately, the task of GIF'ing all the signals brings up the opportunity (or necessity) to move more from "qualia" to precise quantification. I hope to paste a few conversational snippets in this thread from Discord, relevant to that effort. But also open up a larger discussion on how we might make a more "airtight" code and fix any problems it may have.
Of course, seelie and unseelie are still measured, but they are holistic qualia the same way Conductor and Reviser energy are, or King/Senex/Puer/Prince energy. And they are impossible to precisely GIF.
Inversely, Fi Wobbling Lips and Fi Breaking Through Cheeks are more accessible as signals and make for the identification of Fi more precise, I think.
---
Note: I should mention that, in light of what @hrafn said recently here, the aim of the code is to identify something that exists quite apart from the reductionist approach. The 10 signals that are delineated under each function are open slots that can be modified, but are meant to be the ten most helpful quantitative aspects that can successfully approach/isolate the phenomenon (function) in question.
The number ten is arbitrary, as there are dozens of possible signals that could be extracted as we break down a function's holistic reality into more and more parts. But I decided on ten for each function as I felt it was a sufficient number to allow proper triangulation of data, and any more than that would become cumbersome and unmanageable from a practitioner perspective.
To that end, the specific signals picked out for a function are subject to revision, if a better way to approximate their reality can be identified. And I'm always hopeful of new insights from others as well, as to how the functions can be better encapsulated using concrete identifiers.
---
Additional Note: From another perspective, the signals can be seen, in some ways, like "training wheels" -- but necessary ones. I believe we do need to precisely quantify the functions (S) in order to properly gauge their contextually-unbound (N) reality as well. It's like many people say of learning a piano song or instrument: you learn the notes as best as you can, but when it comes to the performance you put it away and operate as a fluid consciousness.
I believe vultology can have both qualitative and quantitative aspects, each equally valid, but they do both have to be given their fair due and we can actually make progress on both fronts -- even if they're diametrically opposed on the surface. So this is an attempt to bring the concrete domain of vultology to a higher resolution, while not forgetting the other aspect is also indispensable.


Coming to think of it, it actually surprises me that "Sassiness" isn't part of the code at present! ...given how central it is to the Te/Fi oscillation. I think it's because a precise description has eluded me? But for example:

^ In the first part of this GIF we see him looking up and doing head shakes..
These head shakes are snippy (= high velocity) yes, but they're also sassy. They have a a swerving quality to them. We see this also in many others like:

^ Here again we see how the head shakes are not only like this:
<--- / --->
but they're also a little like this:
∞
And a few more...

I'm just brainstorming out loud, feel free to let me know what you guys think. I am thinking that, if it turns out this feature is codifiable and essential to Te, I might move out Te9 Blunt Humor (a less reliable psychological cue) for Te9 Sassiness.
@auburn Yeah, this what I think a lot of people notice with high Te users is the "sassiness." On dating sites they call themselves out by saying "My friends describe me as sassy." Usually when I hear that I run.
@jay - Hehe! Yes, we were just talking on Discord about the potential effects of vultology + dating.
Okay, I'm gonna do some real overhault to the vultology code here, cuz its current rendition just isn't going to get the job done. Here goes...

As far as the body is concerned, the difference between Ne and Se is that the body of Ne is buoyant, with a gravity-resisting effect. Movements tend to bounce upward, perking up enthusiastically. This can also lead to a "tip-toeing" gait, and an overall "suspended" energy when walking or even just sitting. I described it before as a balloon or as a puck gliding on a hockey table.
Displaying this proportionally we have:
Ne Balloon Effect

Which is when the buoyant undercurrent (below) creates a full "swooping" motion. If Buoyant Undercurrent is a balloon tied to a chair, then the Balloon effect is when the ribbon is cut and it takes flight.
Ne Buoyant Undercurrent

And this is the baseline level of suspension mentioned above. There is subtle lightness in the body, and an enthusiasm in movements.
Se Gravity Effect

(a sincere thank you to @supahprotist for his generosity in proving a great example of this signal)

The counterpart to the balloon effect is Se's gravity effect, which has a "falling" motion at all times. The movements of Se will often appear nonchalant. Notice the way his hand collapses down and grazes his knee before falling even further down again. The limbs of the Se user have this sort of gravity effect. Now, the other aspect to Se body mannerisms...
Se Bodily Awareness


^ This is, as the name implies, a bodily awareness that Se users have. It manifests in a tactile consciousness which leads to motions such as fidgeting, readjustments, or in this case scratching/etc.
It can also lead to fiddling with nearby pens or objects, or otherwise remaining in some direct connection to the environment. But this signal isn't about any one of those things in isolation. Anyone can pick up a pen or scratch. It's in the fact that there's an attentiveness to the state/position/situation that one's body is in, and a real-time, almost instant, maneuvering of it when necessary.
----
These two aspects were currently lumped together into Se Presence but I think they're much more quantifiable when parsed out. And together, this properly balanced Ne and Se with: [Ne Balloon Effect + Ne Buoyant Undercurrent] vs [Se Gravity Effect + Se Bodily Awareness].. with each relevant aspect being more concretely delineated.
@auburn The Fi signals are much easier to follow. One thing I keep noticing with Fi users, especially high Fi users is that they never directly answer a question on cue. There's an Fi guardedness that diverts questions about generalities to "well, that depends on the situation" or "everyone is their own person, so I can't answer that." I think of it as Fi stonewalling. Is this a thing others have noticed?
I like this. I prefer the code to be as asymmetrical as possible. (Although, grrrr, I just printed tally sheets of the old code. lol)
CourtJest, your observation may be in line with the earlier observation on this thread re: Te/Fi figure 8 movement. Perhaps Te/Fi has to check out not just left to right, but left, right, up, down....
Awesome!
Every time I fear theoretical stagnation your Ne comes out 🙂
.
.
.
