- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
@ladynerdsky – I’m wowed that you took the time to do that – thanks so much!
I’m still combing through it all, but a few notes– I did include myself among the 12, so the stats are probably somewhat less generous than they appear. Still, if I’m not mistaken your analysis appears overall positive in terms of identification of whole-functions, even if there is some disagreement on which elements are at play.
This certainly gives me a lot of useful feedback on how to refine things. The attempt of the codifier is indeed to reduce the qualia in most signals down, and treat them as motion vectors, but some of the clarifications (in the tutorials for instance) haven’t yet trickled into the member-base, since they’re rather new distinctions. So there’s more potential upside here with more training. But also more we can do to perfect the model too. 🙂
That’s a much tougher ask, but academia may treat CT like Phrenology or palmistry without more solid evidence connecting metabolism to vultology, and vultology to behaviourism.
A much tougher ask indeed.
I realize that inter-rater reliability is just the first step. The big bridge to cross is the one between the physical and the psychological. But for example, this sample positively correlates to the previously established behavioral datasets of SeFi female types. This is her:
SeFi & Makeup/Beauty Behavioral Correlation
Her channel itself is called “ScarlettHeartsMakeup”, and it’s focused on beauty, modeling, makeup, as well as other general Pe things like daily life documentation.
SeFi “Crystal Witch” Correlation
And the “crystal witch” SeFi nickname is one that we’ve given to SeFi’s who channel their Ni into things like wicca, tarot and crystals. Although many types can be into this, SeFi’s are over-represented in this domain.
Naturally not all SeFi’s are into this, but there is an over-representation of SeFi’s in certain domains such as these, and these statistical leans are found everywhere in CT and are continually being re-affirmed. This happens over and over with things like us finding vultologically Fe-lead people who are “life coaches” and preachers, teachers, etc. Now, I haven’t designed the most rigorous experiments on how to test for these vultological+behavioral aspects yet, but a case could certainly be made. Metabolism is another beast.
But without needing to go into neuroscience yet, we could conceivably test vultology against behaviorism by making predictions — both in the positive and negative (present/absent) sense. This would, at least as a next step, establish that “for some unknown reason” …people with [X] vultology correlate strongly with [X] behaviors/habits/lifestyles/traits.
Naturally, even in that case, the argument would persist that correlation does not = causation, …but if I’m not mistaken this is a reachable next-step to try and affirm, right?