Reply To: “Art” is not related to Ji nor “Variety” to Pe.

Home Page Forums Cognitive Functions “Art” is not related to Ji nor “Variety” to Pe. Reply To: “Art” is not related to Ji nor “Variety” to Pe.

  • 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 (?)

– 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.)

© Copyright 2012-2020 J.E. Sandoval


The content on this site is not
intended for medical advice, diagnosis,
or treatment. Always seek the advice
of your physician or other qualified
health provider with questions you
may have regarding a medical condition.
For more information visit this link.