Finally

Index Forums The General Hall Finally

  • Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    Hi, I wanted to address some things to Auburn and to this community.

     

    I’ll try to lay it all out.

     

    Context

     

    So, I want to say that before I was designated with the vultological signal of “flat affect” ,now called “fallen affect,” I didn’t consider myself mentally ill.  I have been so isolated and alone, since childhood, that I didn’t know the extent of my mental (psychospiritual) problems, even though now it is so obvious that I had them (and it wasn’t with the help of CT that I became aware, but by divine guidance).  When I came to CT I had just been through a traumatic episode of my own psyche (psychosis) and was trying to get away and move on from it and to try and find “normalcy” again after I felt I had survived and overcome my terrible feelings of suicide/anxiety/depression.

     

    Auburn was aware of this after I had been typed by him and submitted my life summary to him (which was  submitted by me so he could get a more accurate type of me and because I believed in CT and its knowledge/theory). Through studying the theory and its implications (especially the feeling functions) , reading Auburn’s articles and using them as a map, and through mostly following  this new outer voice in my life, a divine guidance (synchronicity), I was able to bring my unconscious functions into consciousness: whereas I was previously double introverted (TiSe I-I-) I came into sudden awareness and flow of my Se and Fe .

     

    Although I initially felt an ecstasy at having this new energy and zest, my psyche was all in a kind of chaos, because I was still mentally ill, as making functions conscious doesn’t itself heal anything.

     

    So my feelings and articulation still being unable to fully comprehend, nor being able to fully understand my condition and what I was going through (mental, spiritual illness and pain), I kept trying to get Auburn’s attention and help, not really knowing how. I needed help and would come to Auburn trying to talk to him and get close to him for some help (and my genuine desire to help CT and community too), but my still newborn childlike feelings, distorted psyche and low self-worth didn’t know how to articulate this and  would feel so hurt by feeling like I was repelled by him. I feel like Auburn knew what was going on with me and was aware and decided to vaguely and politely repel me.

     

    I suspect like there are other situations like these, since it was mentioned some time ago that there were other people with mental illness in CT seeking help. How Court Jester’s own mental illness was handled is the one that was most public, and mine too,  in a different way.  Now that I have largely healed from my illness (but even while was  sick I felt it), I can more clearly see these injustices.

     

    Auburn

     

    First of all, the way I was handled and what I have to say about it: I don’t feel I was handled well, not humanly.  After the fact, I felt I had been used by you, Auburn, and misled, especially by the confusion of whether I was a friend or a test subject, or what exactly was our relation baffled me. If you knew I was in trouble mentally, why not address this and help and give some advice? Why act like a friend or state that you “value” me, and that you feel some grief towards me, and not try to see what is going on? This really pisses me off because I felt so much in my heart, (joy and love) towards you and CT (and if you have seen my videos and me interviewing people and if you were aware of my donations to CT even though I had no money, you would know) and I made my heart known to you and now that I see your capitalizing on what I went through (your recent post on function consciousness/development (which is stating what I went through, and how did you get this knowledge if it wasn’t for me and other people here and their experiences?) makes me want to mishandle you and beat the shit out of you proportionate to the pain I felt being repelled and used and deeply, deeply hurt (and yes I am a very sensitive person, that’s one thing I had to realize, that I am HSP and highly empathic or aka “permeable” in CT-speak). And a Ti user nonetheless, making these feelings very big and hard to deal with, taking a lot of processing (whole days, weeks, months, but over time getting better at connecting my mind and heart strings).

     

    Therefore, I find it cruel that there are people here who also have mental problems and you treat them both as a friend and a “test subject,” when you gave your psychoanalytical assessment of Animal to her in public, it infuriated me and didn’t say anything because I was still in the condition of doubting most of my feelings.

     

    You are manifesting your ambitions by working out your future career and success (like part of CT is also a business) by the accumulated data and theorizing on these people’s  disclosure of themselves. You can’t tell me that you don’t learn about the psyche and spiritual/psychic development from them (especially the afflicted one’s)  to keep working on your model. Jung at least was able to help his patients while learning  and extracting from them and using what he learned to help them back ( even though the knowledge gleaned was his actual intent, not the help he gave, he still helped them), he himself admitted this.

     

    Your intellectually cavalier attitude about the issues of pain and suffering also bothers me, as if your model is more important than the people at your doorstep suffering , taking information from them because they barely have a clue about the disclosure they are showing, usually because they are trying to figure what is going on with them and they see the possibility of help, especially when your friendly attitude portrays that possibility like you can help, only to be met by avoidance.

     

    If helping people is not your concern (which I really feel it is not), but rather the model and your ambitions, then you should really set boundaries and be EXPLICIT about what you are doing and explain to the people who are mentally ill their suggested condition based on the signal (what it really entails, because I have a feeling that you are aware of the kind of suffering they have, even when they are not aware of it themselves and haven’t accepted it) and how you CANT help them and how that is not your intent and that any information they disclose under their mental state will be used for the model and your authorship (your intellectual property aka capitalization aka business). And if they do disclose information from themselves then ask permission to use that information (this should probably be used/done for every forum member before signing up and should be treated seriously). IF you are going to help them and is your concern, then both understand and set the extent and limit of your help that you are willing to give and don’t muddle it with being friendly/nice (as I had fallen into that confusion and blamed myself, like I was doing something wrong, that such a friendly person wasn’t helping me).

     

    However, I suggest you don’t even try to help in any profound way because all you have is knowledge of this and maybe some experience, but I have actually gone through this process of integration and individuation of all my functions and the healing associated with it (due to unresolved trauma) and I can tell that you don’t know what the fuck you are dealing with. And I am proud that I was divinely guided and followed the guidance, despite my heart, to not disclose myself anymore to you or this community as I went through the pain and suffering of getting myself together. These are real people (not mental objects in your head) such that you can just pretend like “oh I can extract information from them and not give a shit because they are practically a click away from my view/sight”).

     

    Finally, you should also acknowledge the people that have helped you with CT somewhere visible in your cite ( I see you have acknowledged  someone, like Renee, in some unseen corner) and not just use the vague word “team” when it really is mostly you, the author (and the associated intellectual rights), and the people who come and help you but are not part of your business in any way. I should be among those credited for sure under the codifier and for collective typing (which you had as an offer as a paid option for people to use). It’s up to you and your conscience who deserves to be acknowledged and also up to the person if they feel they deserve to ask you to put them on it.

     

     

    ——

     

    That’s it for now. If I have more to say/explain, then so it will be.

    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Hey Scientiam,

    There are so many places I could start but I wanna start by saying I’m sorry for any part I played in misguiding you about my abilities to help you. I’m not a therapist, and indeed I really haven’t known how to help people through mental illness. I felt that I’d been transparent about my ignorance, but apparently not enough. Which brings me to…

    If helping people is not your concern (which I really feel it is not), but rather the model and your ambitions, then you should really set boundaries and be EXPLICIT about what you are doing and explain to the people who are mentally ill

    You’re correct in that the website doesn’t have explicit disclaimers conveying that this is not a place for therapy, and given what you’ve said — and after talking it over with mods — I think those disclaimers will be added soon. I am not a qualified therapist and the primary purpose of this project is indeed to do research on body mannerisms and their relation to cognition.

    In the medium-term, it is CT’s goal to publish a followup book which offers suggestions for how existing psychologists may integrate CT into their practice. But that’s the key point, they’d integrate CT into their existing knowledge-base. This would allow CT to eventually have a list of CT-trained/certified therapists and psychologists that we can refer members to in case a member wants to see a specialist with knowledge of CT.

    I do not want to leave people in need with nothing to help them with, but this is the most I can do for now. Helping develop a “practitioner manual for psychoanalysis” in order to help existing practitioners to integrate the CT model into their own practice is my way of contributing to the world and giving back for all the help and insight others have freely offered. Which leads me to my next point…

    You are manifesting your ambitions by working out your future career and success (like part of CT is also a business) by the accumulated data and theorizing on these people’s disclosure of themselves.

    Anything that has been gleaned from people here has been born out of members’ voluntary choice to share about themselves. Sharing has never been compulsory for anyone, and it’s always been …just humans talking. Normal people communing. Making friends. This is something we all do, as we all learn from everyone we encounter. I’m no different in this respect, and it’s not my strategy to compel people to divulge anything about themselves. Nor do I have secret knowledge about them..

    their suggested condition based on the signal (what it really entails, because I have a feeling that you are aware of the kind of suffering they have, even when they are not aware of it themselves and haven’t accepted it)

    In the case of fallen affect, it seems to have been a lucky happenstance that the signal really is consistent in identifying mental illness. But I’ve never known what precise ailment a person has, and even when I could see a fallen affect I remained skeptical about its fidelity in identifying mental conditions.

    Now that I know it’s fairly consistent in identifying mental illness, perhaps it gives me a moral responsibility to divulge that information to others, so they can seek the healing they need — just the same way you’d let someone know if they were bleeding. I can accept that view and will be sure to mention it, as I have been, so they can get the help they need from other sources since CT doesn’t offer assistance in that department. But since this hasn’t been tested under the rigors of science, I can only offer it as a suggestion. (I can’t diagnose anyone)

    If you knew I was in trouble mentally, why not address this and help and give some advice?

    Because knowing there is a problem is easier than helping resolve it Adrian… I am sorry but I have genuinely been unable to help. I was not withholding advice or support from you, as much as I was (1) unqualified to do so, and (2) unable to personally provide it due to my own limited capacity. But you are right that I should have been clearer about this, and should have communicated more strongly that you weren’t doing something wrong — I was simply unable to respond to you.

    So viewed in terms of a good ol’ friendship context, I was being a bad unresponsive friend. That seems to be a point of personal work for me, since I struggle to be fully present with people. But I do want to be clear with you right now, and say that I still don’t have the capacity to help, and I would advise you not to seek help from me only to be disappointed. I should have said more clearly before that I couldn’t help — and again I’m very sorry about that.

    I will make sure not to repeat this with other people, and add the necessary disclaimers to the site so that others don’t get the wrong impression either. Thank you for your criticism and for your honesty.

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    fayest42
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    @scientiam, First of all, I want to say that I’m so sorry you’ve been through such painful experiences, both in your own life and in the realm of CT. And I want to thank you for sharing your concerns because I imagine it must have taken a lot of courage to do so, and I think criticism is a vital part of making something worthwhile.

    I have a different perspective than you do on CT, but that doesn’t invalidate your experience. I do want to share my perspective here so that others reading can see the different ways someone might view CT. My interpretation of CT based on the website was that it was a research project and that by submitting my video to be typed, I was agreeing to be a part of that research (the video submission page does mention this). I didn’t expect any type of psychoanalysis. I never expected to have any kind of relationship with Auburn, who I assumed was just a busy researcher. I’ve been pleasantly surprised to have some friendly chats with him, but I have viewed those as just an enjoyable bonus, not something to be expected.

    That’s my perspective, but the fact that you had such different expectations than I did means that there must be some ambiguity or room for different interpretations of the information on the website/forum/discord. So I hope that something might be added to the video submission page to make the nature of CT more explicit. I also recognize that blurring the lines between friend and test subject could have some ramifications. That particular issue I’m not sure what to do about, but I guess it’s up to Auburn to decide. Personally, I wouldn’t want Auburn to feel that he couldn’t be friendly with people in the community, especially since many of us see ourselves as not just test subjects (though we are that too) but also people who are helping CT progress in its goals. But I do recognize how that could get problematic. I just don’t know what the solution is.

    Anyhow, thank you again for sharing, and I hope this will lead to some healing and closure for you.

    .
    Participant
    • Type: SeTi
    • Development: l---
    • Attitude: Directive

    Scientiam, I’m truly sorry to hear about the disappointment in the experience of thinking someone was genuinely acting as your friend and there to provide insight into you as a person, not just a subject of their actual goal.  These factors of Auburn’s implementation are a clear sign of misdirection for the theory as a whole.  The theory exists in a space of mental study, that of which involves people.  You would think that the clear focus would be on the people as they are, and not the subject that they represent in the confines of what is being studied.  Auburn, you are losing touch with the purpose of what identifying behavioral traits is.  You are focusing on these concepts you have of what people must be, and are trying to fit people to that, rather than understanding them through this process of identification.  When you lose touch with the purpose of psychology, you create something not only disconnected with the subjects you are studying, but disconnected with the meaning of what you have created.

    In the case of fallen affect, it seems to have been a lucky happenstance that the signal really is consistent in identifying mental illness. But I’ve never known what precise ailment a person has, and even when I could see a fallen affect I remained skeptical about its fidelity in identifying mental conditions.

    Now that I know it’s fairly consistent in identifying mental illness, perhaps it gives me a moral responsibility to divulge that information to others, so they can seek the healing they need — just the same way you’d let someone know if they were bleeding. I can accept that view and will be sure to mention it, as I have been, so they can get the help they need from other sources since CT doesn’t offer assistance in that department. But since this hasn’t been tested under the rigors of science, I can only offer it as a suggestion. (I can’t diagnose anyone)

    Auburn, it’s clear by multiple factors that your focus is not on understanding these phenomena, and instead on adding to the confines of what you have created.  For starters, you changed the name Flat Affect to Fallen Affect because of what I assume to be the misconception that could occur due to the medical diagnosis of Flat Affect, which already exists in clinical study. This in itself is telling of the fact that you have seen this concept of Flat Affect, linked it to your theory, and have created from it- a concept of your own.  You are not looking at the people involved, you are looking at the abstracted information alone.  By ignoring the people and the actuality of how they exist, you completely alienate your theory to a space where it can only exist on its own. By these methods of operating, the components you build can only be applicable inside of the theory.  You do not know if Flat/Fallen Affect is actually a “Vultological” trait, but you assume it is, and decide to state that ordinary people, without Flat Affect, exude traits of mental illness through this entirely abstract concept of “Fallen Affect”.  The overarching problem is that you start with the theory, and then apply it to the people.  You are at a point where you need to be pulled out of the headspace of the theory- the logic, the consistency, and start getting down to the reality of how these people exist.  You effectively are building a person, instead of taking them apart to understand.  You take observed traits and apply them to the concepts of different people you have.  How are you supposed to explain someone if you create them yourself?

    Like Scientiam, I am someone you have deemed to have “Flat Affect”, and when I asked as to why I was never given a response.  I do understand you are busy most of the time, though.  I’d like to hear how you actually diagnose people with “Flat Affect”, because I assume that currently it is simply an accumulation of factors you put together, whether it be the focus on the person’s experience with depression told through their words, or the flatness/deadness of their facial expressions.

    In fact, in my typing, you stated that my perception axis had mixed signals, and that my judgement axis was unclear.  When you focus on static details of how someone’s face sits for example, how their eyes may be shaped, you ignore what’s sitting right in front of you: the overall presentation of a person and the focus that they have on the world.  I understand that you have these confines by which you operate on, looking for traits to formulaically classify someone.  But you can’t expect to conceptualize the type of person someone is when you add signals up and let the computer do the work.  You attempt to automate something that is completely human, and it baffles me as to why your focus is not on seeking understanding of the truth of these people’s existences, but to create a tool that is efficient in the classification system you have created.  You are focused on the constructs, not the actuality.  You assume actuality will be presented through these constructs, but how are you supposed to actualize someone when your entire idea of someone’s mind can be confused based off of the shape of their features.

    Take a look at this space you have created around the theory and put yourself in there, it is just as important as the logistics that exist in the abstract confine.  As you say yourself, the body is representative of the mind.

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by ..
    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    @fayest42, Yes, the website is different now than before, I started being part of CT when CT was mostly a forum (old forum) and I got typed by Auburn in a forum. The website didn’t have the “face” it looks now, saying its a “research project” and looking  like people are crunching numbers here and doing science, which, by the way, I would say it’s more of a “face” for this website and perhaps an ambition towards that and an ideal, since I was the one in the first place who said that CT’s typing methodology should be more objective by including other people in the typing process and making the vultology code more able to be based on yes or no signals using the codifier rather than qualia and suggesting that this itself would make it more scientific and empirically provable.


    @auburn
    ,

    You’re correct in that the website doesn’t have explicit disclaimers conveying that this is not a place for therapy, and given what you’ve said — and after talking it over with mods — I think those disclaimers will be added soon. I am not a qualified therapist and the primary purpose of this project is indeed to do research on body mannerisms and their relation to cognition.

     

    Thank you in advance for making the changes to the website to make things more explicit, that was a main point of my disdain and I am satisfied that this will happen. And I hope you are better able to set boundaries between you and the people who are here, who are not all “normal.”

    Which bring brings me to me being stunned, however, by your other answers (still in reflection of the people who are afflicted and what CT and you personally are doing)? (detachment, hiddenness, denial of some things) (the secrete/arcane knowledge of people, arcane articles, (your connection and this cites connection and underlayer of spirituality/occultism, the knowledge ,at least, of people’s layers of consciousness and your collection of their experiences and spirits guides; your own claim that you are bridging heaven and earth and your admission to me that you know your permeability and being able to “sink in into other people’s thoughts” and all the crevices you can find in them  ) and that you did in fact psychoanalyze Animal on this cite) and I am not as angry and passionate as before to just write it out all out fully, its too swampy and sad to nitpick at it and I think goes beyond what you can understand from my point of view, my depth of experience/emotion and your principles/industry/ambitions of this knowledge and yourself.

    I wasn’t looking for you to psychoanalyze me (though I did think about it before my individuation journey), when I was contacting you I just felt that you could help, human to human, to help me “understand” what was going on and process it, to have a talk about this momentous thing. And now I don’t take it so personally, you are just doing your thing, your project, and I just would have wanted a more direct, truthful answer of No and why not, because I can tell when people are dissimulating and not getting the full truth, trying not to hurt my feelings, leaving me more confused.

     

     

    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    Scientiam, I’m truly sorry to hear about the disappointment in the experience of thinking someone was genuinely acting as your friend and there to provide insight into you as a person, not just a subject of their actual goal.  These factors of Auburn’s implementation are a clear sign of misdirection for the theory as a whole.  The theory exists in a space of mental study, that of which involves people.  You would think that the clear focus would be on the people as they are, and not the subject that they represent in the confines of what is being studied

     

    @fuzzy-lastname, thank you for understanding, that was my main heartbreaking experience and I can tell you really feel it. There is some irresponsibility going on here for sure, placing the model and the project and it’s own parameters (“it’s theoretical research”) above the real people who are signing up, some of them mentally ill or suggesting mental illness and just them being processed robotically ( data collection) and used for further theorizing by Auburn’s incognito analysis of them in the forums (aka not face to face) (in my opinion using the popularity of typology and desire to know oneself (and I would personally add the spiritual darkness/fogginess of our times) as the bait).

     

    Rua
    Moderator
    • Type: NeTi
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    @fuzzy-lastname thank you for coming forward with your experience; it seems the common theme of the negative experiences shared so far involve the need for clearer and more consistent communication, and that’s something that I’m certain will be improved so that expectations and reality more closely align for participants. In the spirit of clearer communication I would like to attempt a clarification:

    These factors of Auburn’s implementation are a clear sign of misdirection for the theory as a whole.  The theory exists in a space of mental study, that of which involves people.  You would think that the clear focus would be on the people as they are, and not the subject that they represent in the confines of what is being studied.  Auburn, you are losing touch with the purpose of what identifying behavioral traits is.  You are focusing on these concepts you have of what people must be, and are trying to fit people to that, rather than understanding them through this process of identification.

    CT’s roots are indeed somewhat abstracted and analytical. There are a myriad of lenses to view reality through, and the reality of parsing whole functions and concepts conglomerated from individual, visual data points is no less valid than the reality of personal self-identification and exploration. Similarly, Fallen Affect began as a collection of data points that formed a pattern, this pattern was named and explored, but it is not a diagnosis, and hopefully the doubts surrounding this have been clarified in more recent member reports and on the forums. CT is not at the stage where it can be labelled a holistic and person-centered therapy or form of psychoanalysis, no matter how fruitful those avenues might be. With that being said, it would also be strange if no mention at all was made of the apparent overlap between CT and psychological practices of personhood and integrative healing.

    In the space between these domains it appears that some of our members have fallen through the cracks, and I would like to address anyone that would listen:

    Please seek psychological treatment from licensed professionals if you feel that you need help, because you are worth it, and deserve to be helped. Often the hardest part is believing you are worth being helped, and after that it’s a matter of using whatever resources are available in your area and situation. I am not a licensed case manager or social worker, but I have a basic familiarity with the field, and I’d be happy to do what I can to find local or internet/phone based resources for any members that are willing to reach out for help with this.

    Lastly, adding CT-based certifications for existing practitioners is a goal I know Auburn feels compelled to achieve, but it is not here yet.

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Rua.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Rua.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Rua.
    elly
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Directive

    Omg… please don’t ban me for expressing my opinion in a more blunt and insensitive way, but I really think that someone has to put their foot down here.

    Do you not realize that this place, this forum and website, is Auburn’s – no one else’s? Therefore, as long as he’s not breaking any laws, no one can demand anything from him. It’s his “house” that we’re getting invited into. His “mind”, so to speak. So is this project.
    It’s not like he’s a freaking president who has a responsibility to work for the people. How can you expect that of him?? If he has to be a walking saint, so do you.
    He is not responsible for any of us, even if you’re “friends” with him. You’re an adult who’s responsible for yourself. And there is absolutely nothing wrong if Auburn values and puts CT before any of us. In fact, I would think that is to be expected. Or are we all children here on a playdate? Stop being so creepily attached to him.

    It’s completely unwarranted for anyone to demand Auburn to cater to them in any way apart from giving them a vultological report if they buy one. But anything else, like fayest said, is an added bonus.

    I have known Auburn since 2013 and not once have I had all these expectations on him that you do – because, looking at the context, that would just be weird. CT is an online service on the internet, not your closest best friend whom you’ve known for years who’s also a psychologist.
    Sure, I would probably get angry at Auburn too (as I would with anyone else) if he consciously withheld information about me that could really help me heal some deep wounds (and he knew about that) – but I would never act as if he’s responsible for not taking care of my shit and then make a thread about it putting so much blame on him. And I find that so weird and presumptuous about your post. Do you not see yourself?

    Also, do you think other online services state official credit to everyone who has helped them? Unless you’re a part of an official team or something, as in, you work for them, they don’t. CT is no different. So again – not your place to expect such a thing.

    And on your comment that Auburn should make a disclaimer that CT is basically not a therapy service — is that not obvious..? Honestly – how was that not clear to you?
    Do you expect to be able to buy your groceries in a hair salon? People know that you go to a hair salon to get your hair cut, just like it is already extremely obvious that you go to CT to get a vultology report and/or to learn more about the theory/project.
    CT and getting help for your mental health and personal issues, are so far from each other, I don’t even see how you can connect the two. And honestly, if you do, that’s truly your own stupidity’s fault. You can’t blame Auburn for that.
    I guess the next time I have my annual tomato stand I’ll put up a sign that says “DISCLAIMER, DISCLAIMER: oh, and I’m actually not your mother”.

    And why act so sensitive about the whole “Fallen Affect” thing? It’s just Auburn’s current opinion/perspective on things. It’s not a big deal. If he thinks that it’s an important thing to incorporate into CT, then he’s fully allowed to do that. And if you don’t like it, don’t involve yourself in his project with his ideas and opinions. But if you still want to forward criticism about it, why do it in such a sensitive way, when it is literally just.an.opinion., not a personal attack.

    It’s not that deep. It is just a project online, with one human being (like the rest of us – not some perfect “god”) working behind it, who doesn’t owe you anything. Try to put it into some perspective.

    Or I dunno, maybe you guys are the closest of friends with an incredibly deep relationship. In which case, my stance might be more nuanced.

    And obviously, I’m not trying to speak for Auburn here, who might even disagree with me. I’m just giving my own thoughts on this.

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by elly.
    LadyNerdsky
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    Firstly, sorry to hear about adverse experiences from volunteering. It sounds like something needs to change towards a clear and ethically-aligned communications systems when participating. The medical principles of Autonomy, Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, and Justice come into play.


    @auburn
    There are dual competing streams at play here: the intent of the volunteers wanting personal cognitive information and possibly help and answers, and the academic intent of the researcher.

    I know this isn’t “formal” academic research, but I strongly suggest re-structuring the volunteer process towards Psychology Research Ethics model, rather than a transactional fee-for-service process. Particularly since this research has the potential for psychological harm.

    Specifically detailed pre-information, informed consent, and a formalised debrief process. This website has a great outline on it

    https://www.simplypsychology.org/Ethics.html

    To apply it here, I think there needs to be an “information sheet” style outline explaining the project in detail, so that prospective participants can give informed consent before joining:

    • Purpose of the research
    • All foreseeable risks and discomforts to the participant (if there are any). These include not only physical injury but also possible psychological.
    • Procedures involved in the research.
    • Benefits of the research to society and possibly to the individual human subject.
    • Length of time the subject is expected to participate.
    • Person to contact for answers to questions or in the event of injury or emergency.
    • Subjects’ right to confidentiality and the right to withdraw from the study at any time without any consequences.

    Without necessarily adding the second “consent form” to sign, there definitely needs to be a section outlining what volunteers are consenting to, (possibly with ongoing participation taken as implicit consent, unless an individual explicitly withdraws) and the limits of the project (e.g. not a psychoanalysis service, if you need help seek professional services etc).

    The debrief: Just as important is the post-participation communication between experimenter and subject. The volunteers gets their paid product/service in the form of their vultological report, but I believe there also needs to be a more formal debrief from the academic perspective too, just like in academic psychology research.

    After the research is over the participant should be able to discuss the procedure and the findings with the psychologist.   They must be given a general idea of what the researcher was investigating and why, and their part in the research should be explained. Participants must be told if they have been deceived and given reasons why. They must be asked if they have any questions and those questions should be answered honestly and as fully as possible. Debriefing should take place as soon as possible and be as full as possible; experimenters should take reasonable steps to ensure that participants understand debriefing.“The purpose of debriefing is to remove any misconceptions and anxieties that the participants have about the research and to leave them with a sense of dignity, knowledge, and a perception of time not wasted” (Harris, 1998).
    The aim of the debriefing is not just to provide information, but to help the participant leave the experimental situation in a similar frame of mind as when he/she entered it (Aronson, 1988).

    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    @elly

    Do you not realize that this place, this forum and website, is Auburn’s – no one else’s? Therefore, as long as he’s not breaking any laws, no one can demand anything from him. It’s his “house” that we’re getting invited into….It’s not that deep. It is just a project online, with one human being (like the rest of us – not some perfect “god”) working behind it, who doesn’t owe you anything. Try to put it into some perspective.

    I find it interesting that fayest42  saw this as a scientific research project she was including herself in, but you see it as Auburn’s home in which he can conduct any experiments he wants lol. This is what I’m talking about, nothing is clear in this place, it’s a both Auburn’s home and testing ground (once you really get to be here) and the facade of a science experiment. Which by the way I’m pretty sure is breaking the law, he is not a licensed psychologist nor social researcher, he is not a professional nor a student, he doesn’t have permission from the IRB (Institutional Review Board) to conduct human subject research ( from which all kind of research, including pilot studies are required to be submitted for review to prevent human harm) .

    DISCLAIMER! Some of the general guidelines are right here, when you look for human subject rights online:

    Human subject rights
    In 2010, the National Institute of Justice in the United States published recommended rights of human subjects:

    Voluntary, informed consent
    Respect for persons: treated as autonomous agents
    The right to end participation in research at any time
    Right to safeguard integrity
    Protection from physical, mental and emotional harm
    Access to information regarding research
    Protection of privacy and well-being

    So who needs to put things in perspective honey child! sounds like you need a lot of it because I will also add that although I get you are just defending your friend from me challenging him, you are opposing someone who is trying to prevent the harm and hurt of another person (especially mentally ill) by describing my experience and outlining what should change to protect them. Is this really what you wanna go up against lol this is what you are putting your foot down for? Very Funny.

    And you being creeped out by a person having love inside of them for another person and their work says more about you than me. “Eww love, get that creepy/weird shit out of me” lol

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
    Bera
    Moderator
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Adrian, we will work on this more, as Auburn also said, but these rights are actually respected.

    I will quote the information on the site that people see before ordering a report :

    Opt into Database?
    Would you like to be a part of our research project? If so, click “Yes” on the option above to contribute to your data to our database! By leaving this checked “Yes”, you agree to let Cognitive Typology use a 2:00-2:30 minute portion of your video as an example of your specific development and to use the clip for educational purposes. We take your privacy very seriously and will be sure to not include highly sensitive or personal information in the selected clips. Surnames are also omitted by default and first names may be replaced with an alias upon email request.

    If you check “no”, Cognitive Typology will not use your clip in our public database or in public resources, however please note that by purchasing this product you automatically consent to allow the Cognitive Typology’s core team to use your video for our internal research and vultologist training.  Thank you very much!

    Also

    You must be 18 years or older to submit your video for analysis. Please also note that this vultology report may not match your self-typing according to other typological systems, and only represents a proper typing within the Cognitive Typology system. Also, while we aim to predict your personal psychology through your expressions, this report is primarily a service for the identification of your expressive profile. Our report may not necessarily match your self-perception and is chiefly meant to provide you with a window into how you gesture and how your expressive signature compares to that of other individuals in our ever-growing database.

    I agree there is space for improvement and I would be glad to help if I can, as I have a legal background, but people truly give voluntary, informed consent for their data being used and they know the purposes of use.

    People also have the right to withdraw at any point ! At any point a member can ask for his video to be deleted. Members can also delete everything they willingly disclosed or ask for this information to be deleted or to never be used in any way/in specific ways.

    We need to make this more explicit on the forum though, but this right does exist.

    In my opinion we also have full information regarding the stage of the research. Auburn even posted his work in progress list, so members can see what he is doing at each point, which, to be honest, exceeds any effort in this direction I saw on any similar site.

    I appreciate your honesty A LOT. I value you, despite the fact there have been moments when we disagreed about certain issues in the past. I do think we need to do some improvements but please let’s also look at what we do have here, not only at what isn’t perfect. There is great concern for people’s safety and privacy. Consent is being obtained before proceeding with typing. We have a different policy for minors. Auburn does offer as much support as he can. To give an example, he answered you with an entire video the last time we had a conversation on the forum. I answered with a video too and yes, I disagreed with some of your ideas, but you can’t tell us we didn’t care or didn’t value you as a person. Disagreement is not lack of appreciation.

    We are not therapists but we put a lot of care and effort into this. There are limits – limited time, limited knowledge, limited energy – and it is indeed a good idea to make these limits clear to members, so there is no confusion. It is a good advice you are giving here !

    But please don’t take these limits as being a sign of lack of care or interest in everyone’s well being, because this is truly not the case.

     

     

    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    @bera, all the consent information you showed me is about the video submission and the database. And I gave consent for my video to part of the database.

    However, what is wrong here is that this forum is not consented to. While Auburn mingles here with the “test subjects” he is also collecting information on them and using them for  the theory and model and analyzing their responses here and what they post, not only for the site but for even personal projects (“numinous/occult” aspects of CT) that haven’t been mentioned: this is what happened to me, building a trusting relationship to him as I got to know him more on the forum, and contributing to the model and site itself (like part of a team, becoming part of the research itself) and got to know others too (nothing private about this). He also talked to me like I was part of the team and contributing. All these lines are being blurred: friend, collaborator, test subject. This is bullshit, this fails to be a research project anymore that follows the guidelines for safety of the initial test subject, because something I had no control over, my past and my mental illness, started cropping up, and I felt Auburn knew this (and he did) and could help in all of those blurred lined categories: as a friend, as a test subject, as a collaborator and could have been prevented with more explicit boundaries. If I didn’t feel like I could trust (feelings of friendship and community) giving my information and show myself in my condition and had an awareness of my condition, then I wouldn’t have disclosed as much as I did. It is what it is, it’s in the past. And now I feel used because some of what I went through publicly was analyzed by Auburn and used in refining his model and I felt there wasn’t any permission that I consented to in this forum for this, but rather was an abuse of my trust.

    As an example, you have people like @rua who are also dealing with whether to trust to give information on fallen affect and his mental illness (for the sake of the project). It’s this bullshit self-sacrificing behavior for the project that happens because people become entwined emotionally with the project: it ignores human feelings and the boundaries that need to be put in place for an ethical research project and theorizing. I don’t fall in love with the nameless scientific investigator who is monitoring my sleep cycles in a sleep research study, it wouldn’t happen because their are rules/boundaries in place for that. And also if I was suddenly having a brain hemorrhage in this sleep study, I am sure they would take an effort to get me to a safe place to be taken care of. This is all missing here and it’s reckless and irresponsible.

    Rua
    Moderator
    • Type: NeTi
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    ^^ Ah. I think Bera and Auburn and myself have tried to address the main points you’ve brought up, so I’ll just address your framing of my personal behavior. I have chosen to disclose information about my own struggles not because I feel pressured to do so for the sake of “self-sacrificing”, or for Auburn’s or anyone else’s approval; none of those reasons would actually lead to growth or healing. Rather, I genuinely believe that choosing to disclose could be helpful for others that may be struggling with similar issues. Full stop.

    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    @rua, you mentioned how emotionally draining it was to disclose this information and how it was done for other people to heal and benefit from your personal insight into fallen affect and function consciousness(that is what I see as self-sacrifice, even though you mention it is personal drive towards disclosure too). It is framed under the purposes of illuminating aspects of the contents of the project  and for this forum’s knowledge (would you disclose yourself somewhere else you didn’t trust and felt you could contribute in some way?) and you cannot tell me that there isn’t an implicit goal for many here on this forum that this knowledge and project will help people in some way (while not really helping anyone personally with the contents of the project in a consistent way (if Auburn decides to help you  and favors you then you get some help) but otherwise it is just about the model.

    elly
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Directive

    @Scientiam

    No, you’re wrong. Stop trying to act smart with me when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    First of all, I see things the way you said that fayest does.
    Secondly, I am not defending Auburn – I was merely expressing my own opinion.
    Thirdly, not in any way did I imply that love is ”creepy/weird”. What kind of weird presumption is that?
    Here’s what I actually meant: I was saying that thinking that a person you met on the internet is responsible for your mental health as if they’re your ”mother”, is WEIRD. You’re an ADULT who’s responsible for YOURSELF. And then I used exaggerated language to emphasize that.

    I didn’t think anyone was going to call out your post the way I thought it deserved, so I decided to do that myself. I put my foot down for my own opinion – no one else. Like I said before, Auburn may very well disagree with me but that wouldn’t stop me from having the same opinions. I would have no issues criticizing Auburn or CT if I felt they deserved it.

    It seems like you think you haven’t done anything wrong here, which shows how you still don’t get what I was trying to say. You still need to put things into perspective, you just don’t get what perspective I’m talking about because you missed my point. You really weren’t joking when you said that you are sensitive (you said it – not me).

    But I’m not even that angry; I just strongly disagree with your approach and opinions.

    I’m not going to waste any more time on you now and I still think that I made some damn good points in my previous post that I FULLY stand behind.

    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    @elly @bera

    Ok, well there seems to be a lot of confusion here now.

    I already got what I wanted, changes are being made. I feel like people aren’t allowing me to have and express the feelings I had in the past, they are already happened and were under those past circumstances that I had to describe to get make my point and which  is already agreed upon to making changes. I already said thanks in advance for the changes that already happening in order to prevent harm and hurt. I’m not calling for perfection, I called what I called for already in the first post. (And I don’t call you elly to approve of my feelings and give your opinion on them on whether they are creepy or not, the point was already made and the changes are happening so I don’t understand what you are challenging me about, except that I shared and expressed them to make a change lol?)

    So I hope to see those changes and see where it goes. And that’s final.

    Addendum: @elly, I think I understand now why you see the feelings I had as so weird (Expecting to be “mothered;”  when you said it I had to cry because its true, that is where it stemmed from). My trauma is from emotional neglect, isolation, confinement by my mother (among other things), but my feelings are what they were at that point, I already mentioned I am super sensitive). I say this so you understand what I meant by “mental illness,”  I hope that brings you some understanding, but also why this change was needed and why I want it for other who are don’t fit the “normal” people category . Because it is not explicit, people with mental (psycho-spiritual) illness will expect and feel things others don’t (as was the case with CourtJester as well).

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    I think a lot of very necessary words have been shared, and Scientiam’s core message in the OP is being implemented.

    This will refine over time (I have to look for the best protocols and procedures), but for the time being I have added a disclaimer at the bottom of the site that also leads to this page. This is just an initial draft and the mods and I will talk more about specific refinements.

    Surveys

    There was a brief period where CT had an option to submit a biography for aiding the research. That was cancelled a long time ago, but  soon we’ll be adding an optional psychological survey that members can fill out after getting their type results — in order to see how well our type predictions are matching psychology. The mods and I will look into what would be the best protocol for this a well. I like LadyNerd’s suggestions and the links provided, thanks for these. I like the Psychology Research Ethics model and will see into how CT can approach that.

    Something similar to those will be added alongside the survey, with a debrief as well.

    Forum

    As for the forum, it will remain a place for general discussion and sharing — just as it has been. But I will make an amendment to the Forum Information sticky thread with more transparency — letting members know that their collective participation on the forum may be observed and used to better refine the model and our understanding of the types.

    However, no personal information is retained in this process. If a general principle is extracted from a dozen members displaying a certain reality of their types, I don’t believe that falls under any violation of privacy — as nothing specific is being said about any one person. But I think it is important to be transparent about the fact that this is one way the model refines, so people can make an informed decision if they wish to participate here.

    And since nobody reads the forum rules anyway, what I might do is install a little notice, like those used for cookies:

    …but instead it’ll mention what I just said about participation, and have a link to the “more info”, and an “accept” button. I know this can be annoying for many people so I will do my best to make it aesthetic and you won’t even have to worry about it after the first click.

    This should only come up if someone is viewing a thread.

    edit: update..

    @ this thread

    Given that the primary criticism leveraged is being addressed, I would suggest that any remaining personal remarks that members here have to say to each other can be done via PM. That way we can keep the discussion focused on the necessary disclaimers and their implementations.

    Or scientiam, if you feel they’re already being appropriately addressed I can also lock this thread – let me know what you prefer.

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Auburn.
    Gnosis
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: llll
    • Attitude: Directive

    Yes, I think everything had been addressed. So you can lock this thread, after I give my closing remarks.

    Thank you for those that saw my courage in posting this.


    @Bera
    , I feel like I want to thank you for saying that you did value my input  and me and what I had to say  and  also for giving me a very compassionate remark about your role and everyone who works as a team here and the genuine care you and others do try to show and it’s limitations. My intention however was not to improve CT, it was to break its doors down in order to protect those who I thought are being taken advantage of (unintentionally or not). But I still admired your true ability to see it from many sides and saw my actions as trying to help CT, because in the end I believe it does help it.


    @elly
    , thank you for your courage to stand up to me and show your true feelings. It allowed me to feel and see even clearer how my feelings and past with my mother did put a lot of burden before on @auburn and what I thought he could give to me (which I sincerely apologize to you, auburn, for this, but still think it could have been handled better and the changes I said are necessary will probably help). It brought me a draught of healing, even though it probably wasn’t your intention, but rather to “put me in my place” lol this is the beauty of directive Fe, boxing out our feelings and exposing the truth.

    Peace✌

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Gnosis.
Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)
  • The topic ‘Finally’ is closed to new replies.

© Copyright 2012-2020 J.E. Sandoval
SEE HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

DISCLAIMER

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.

SHARE: FACEBOOK, SUPPORT: PATREON