- This topic has 13 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
-
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
- Type: TiSe
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Adaptive
Love this! Super helpful and Iām so grateful you made this!
Iām starting to think your first assessment about me was right, @auburn. At first glance when I compare the FiSe and FiNe pictures the FiSe stands out as looking almost exactly like me overall. HOWEVER, when I really examine closely at small details (something I struggle with) I notice that I do have the eyebrows of the FiSe but the shape of my eyes, and the flesh around it, is exactly like the FiNe eyes. Wild! The FiSe eyes are a totally different shape and I can see what you mean now by the ātaughtness.ā There isnāt any of that… puffiness like there is in the FiNe.
The Ne is also quite apparent even when I look at pictures of myself as a kid. Maybe Iām an unusual case because I inherited intensely frowning, arched eyebrows from my momās side, so I just automatically ruled out Ne/Si because of that. Also, I admit I have trouble seeing details in faces and I just look at the overall picture. This tool really helped me see that.
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
And here the images are composited by function quadrants. Again, this is only meant to be used as a baseline setter, and not as anything definitive for typing.
Alpha
Spoiler:Beta
Spoiler:Gamma
Spoiler:Delta
Spoiler:
@elisaday I’m glad it’s helpful. šWell now you’ve confused me since I considered the noise variables you mentioned and how your videos were not the most representative of your eyes. And you said you had lazer beam eyes as a kid! Now we must see to confirm!
- Type: SeTi
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Directive
You do so much for us Auburn. I give you much thankx.
PS: I thought this might amplify this discussion. Produced by an FiNe!
Warning on possible inaccuracies.
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
I like this guy.
I like Socionics’ generalization of the quadras, from what I can tell.
But oh my, the heavy use of qualia is the downside of this method. I do use some qualia in my visual reading as well, but qualia-only vultology is very unreliable. What exactly is “stoney” and can we really quantify that? I’ve found that it’s incredibly difficult to get a group of people to agree on what exactly constitutes these looks, even though in general most will circle around the definition without putting their finger on it.
Though I still fail in some divisions, I try to distill any qualia left in CT down to very physical processes. Something that can be hard-coded and eventually run on a computer algorithm that tracks body motion. I find this to be essential, methodologically speaking. For visual reading (well, we’re bordering on physiognomy in this case) to be meaningful, it has to be described at the facial-muscle level. What muscles are contracted, and in what ways. Furthermore, why are those muscles contracted? What relationship do they have to mental functions? These are not trivial questions.
It’s incredible to see how painstakingly Paul Ekman had to work to establish just the reality of 7 universal facial expressions, so we can all agree what “happy”, “angry” and “sad” look like at the muscular level. Defining terms with accuracy is necessary to propel anything forward.
A relevant quote from the CT book:
It is no surprise that Socionics, having a mostly accurate comprehension of psychological type, should be baffled by the apparent similarities in appearance that are naturally elicited. If only the question of similarities in appearance had been more thoroughly explored, the production of this book may not have been necessary.
The failure of Socionics to fully capture the phenomenon of visual reading is due to an almost complete lack of a systemic progression of signals. The V.I. system of Socionics is far more static, lacking a dynamic flow of causality between all the signals of the sixteen types. What results instead is a type of physiognomy where practitioners have little to use for typing aside from the structural correlations between the faces of their patients. Typings by V.I. are most commonly performed by comparing the subject to static photographs, or to an aggregation of many faces belonging to people of that type. This has made V.I. notoriously unreliable, as the static structure of a personās face is not itself relevant to cognitive type, and type must be visually measured by the manner in which a personās facial muscles dynamically contract or rest in tension.
- Type: TiSe
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Adaptive
@auburn Iām confused too. Very confused. That was just a memory of mine that may not have even happened. My sister tells me I make up most of my past.
I suspect that the chronic dry eye makes me blink a lot more than what seems normal to me from what I remember from before the chronic dry eye. It also causes me to look like Iām in pain, though I tend to just ignore the pain. That may or may not be true though. Thereās no way for me to verify as I have zero video footage of myself from before making those videos for you. Anyway, I donāt think those things would have any impact on the perception axis tho, right?
I suppose all I can really do is finally get these eyes treated and try again when they are healed.
Also, yeah, Socionics has SOME similarities between their V.I. System and CT, but there are some differences. For example, SOME Ne dominant subtypes in Socionics will toggle their eyes, but others wonāt:
Gulenko NeF description: āThe ethical subtype has “shooting”, “darting” eyes, the playfulness of which seems very natural. The intuitive subtype, when not in communication, has an expression of surprise written on his face, which he slightly lifts upwards.ā
Thereās no mention of darting eyes in NeT. He just says their eyes appear āblurry.ā
- Type: NeFi
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Seelie
This was a fun game! It’s funny how Nefi just looks happy, lol. I look forward to the completion of the signals database. Also, when you’re typing celebs, would be great if you could talk along in vids so people can follow along.
- Type: TiNe
- Development: ll-l
- Attitude: Adaptive
oh, it’s the faces! XD
lol
This is a great tool @auburn, I think it really helps drive home the visual differences between the quadras in an immediate way š
Perhaps someday we’ll have an index of actual samples a la what Socionics attempted to do!..
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
Hey, these were the least uncanny of the bunch!
I put double the time into these, to make sure they’re representative of the type. :3
Perhaps someday weāll have an index of actual samples a la what Socionics attempted to do!..
Do u wanna gather celebrity faces again?
- Type: SeTi
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Directive
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
Oh we’re not together anymore. Long story. Still friends though.
But yea, we’re very similar except I think Alerith is more mystical and guided by archetypes and premonitions than I. I tend to come down pretty hard on naturalism, but she believes in magick.
Oh yes, and she’s batshit crazy!
That’s a deal breaker right there. 
- Type: SeFi
- Development: lll-
- Attitude: Unseelie
Ā Alerith is more mystical and guided by archetypes and premonitions than I. I tend to come down pretty hard on naturalism, but she believes in magick.
Well then you’re the one who is batshit crazy!
š
No no I kid, you’re both lovely :3
- Type: TiNe
- Development: ll-l
- Attitude: Adaptive
Oh yes, and sheās batshit crazy!Ā
Ā Thatās a deal breaker right there.Ā Jackass :p
(ever heard of Crazy-Making behavior?)
And I don’t believe in magick, I practice it.
Do u wanna gather celebrity faces again?Ā
lol! Nah not really. That’s not what I meant though, I was thinking eventually we might have a database of samples from volunteers. From what I can tell, that’s how Socionics went about things.
- Type: TiNe
- Development: l--l
- Attitude: Adaptive
Jackass :p
It was meant in jest!
Your experience with the archetypal journey has certainly been very illuminating to me, so I thank you for that.And oh, I see. Well yes I think we can do that when we get enough samples. That will have to be necessary eventually for CT to have non-copyrighted material, so we don’t have to use uncanny-valley composited faces.
Certainly elevating the quality of our resources a bit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
