- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
Still trying to keep up with this thread, so I’ll try to bullet point a few key things (?)
@LadyNerdSky – Totally agree with your point, and thank you for the resource! I’d like to take a good look at it, and I’ve been looking for something like this.
Also, I guess just as a counter-point to your valid point (which you’ve probably already thought about but…) it’s also not statistically insignificant that Ji ll– types are so highly represented in these creative fields. There’s a statistical bias indeed, but for example, if we look at all the musicians/songwriters/singers in the public sector, I think you’d get something like 90% revisers, 10% conductors.
So while the context of “fame” does narrow the demographic scope into a niche, the data is still telling of something. Even statistics about people in fame, are statistics. If nothing else, the database of public figures acts as a sort of “filter” for the results of the winners within a domain of high selection pressure.
It’s a bit how 90%+ of people in prison are male, because prison is for the winners of the “most antisocial behavior awards.” But it doesn’t mean that 90%+ of men are more aggressive than women. It’s just that the effect is magnified at the extremes.
I think we are seeing this same effect in cognitive type. So, some roughly ~90% of famous artists/musicians/songwriters/singers are Ji+Pe types, but that doesn’t mean that 90% of reviser types are artists/musicians/songwriters/singers. We can say the same about other public sector categories. For example, the database shows over 50% of political news anchors in America are Te-leads, and something like 80%(?) are Je-leads when Fe and Te are combined. But that doesn’t mean 50% of Te-leads are news anchors, of course. Statistics are always a curious set of nuances.
Still, it’s amazing that vultology can produce such strong statistical aggregates, and do so consistently, even in the public sector. I remember we had this wow-moment in Discord when we took a look at famous rappers, and found an overwhelming preponderance of Se-leads. That’s very affirming of the model, but if you wrote a personalize profile for the average Se-lead and it said they’re most likely to be a rapper, that would be a misapplication of the statistic, wouldn’t it. Even if 90% of famous rappers are Se-lead, it may only be 5% of Se-leads that are rappers or have a hobby in that field. Rinse and repeat for every other type.
(This is quite a conundrum. I think CT is exponentially harder to apply to the average person.)