If you experience video loading problems, videos load better on Google Chrome.
This article requires a working understanding of the vultology code.NiFeVALEINSpoiler:
This is thread #3 of Development levels, focused on the NiFe type.
All existing NiFe samples have been revisited and grouped together based on even more subtle similarities in vultology. Quite to our satisfaction, and in the same pattern as the NeFi and TeSi threads, this also naturally separated NiFe’s into even more similar psychologies. It appears to be an enduring truth that the more similar two people’s vultologies are, the more similar their psychologies will inescapably be. This has greatly increased our understanding of NiFe’s, and as stated before we’re moving into a very granular quantification of types (1024+) based on the level of consciousness of each function; representing a new standard for CT, and a methodology that will be used going forward. I’m excited to share with you what’s being uncovered.
1) The annotations (l—, ll–, lll-, llll, l–l, l-l-, l-ll, ll-l) signify function consciousness, with “l” being fully conscious and “-” being subconscious or unconscious.
2) The attitude of the ethical function (adaptive/directive) is somewhat less relevant in P-lead types, and especially in P-heavy developments. So when the attitude appears unclear or irrelevant, “directive” is used as the default.
3) That said, it appears that almost all NiFe’s have an irrelevant or directive attitude, or at least there is nothing to suggest explicit adaptive behavior.
One thing that I’ve long been debated about, is how could Justin Bieber be NiFe. It turns out they were right. The vultology team has been discussing this at length, but essentially the signal Ni Hypnotic Eyes was being overused as a sort of exclusive/definitive marker for Ni over Se in the early stages of the database formation. We now know, by looking at personal testimonies of members like Koops, Simonemusic, Edwin etc… that Se-leads can have hypnotic eyes when Ni is conscious but not primary.
The same error was made with SeTi Kendji Girac, SeTi Beyonce, SeTi Ben Affleck, SeTi Ben Jones, and a few others. Basically, a whole group of Se types were mistyped as NiFe. In hindsight, this should have been obvious in the fact that the database (at the time of the career pilot study) had just 16 SeTi samples and 36 NiFe samples, which is more than double. Anyone with some IRL experience knows that SeTi’s are not that uncommon, nor NiFe quite that common. So this new adjustment makes sense of the data in a far more coherent way. Here are a few of the SeTi’s that were corrected:Spoiler:
From a visual perspective, we see higher Pe energy from these samples (hence why they were NiFe-Se subtype originally), but there are two definitive markers that separate them apart.
The NiFe’s in this thread have a forwardness to them. Their comportment is streamlined rather than divergent or scattered. It’s as if their body lands after each gesture, rather than bubbling up to the next. They are sedentary.
NiFe have a… confidence, …an assurance, …a “lend me your ear, and let me tell you about life, hun” sort of qualia. They are paced, timed, and have something of historical or global importance to share. This is not the sort of energy we register from the SeTi’s. SeTi’s have a… “hey guess what I did” or “check this out” kind of approach where they present their information outward with amusement or proactivity. And in the end, they let you do with it what you will. NiFe’s on the other hand carry an undertone to them of how this information should be integrated into a paradigm shift in the receiver or listener.
We see in all the above NiFe samples and unbroken and constant pattern of psychological realities, characterized by an immersion into metaphysics, spirituality, consciousness, etc. The same is not true of the mistyped SeTi samples, who both verbalize different interests and express different lifepaths, better characterized by upbeat music, dance, acting, various types of exploration and fashion.
I apologize for the confusion about these samples. It took looking at the NiFe’s under a microscope to really make these fine distinctions. And it took collecting a wide enough sample base of NiFe’s to really isolate the baseline, and to know where the variance is. I hope this thread is informative going forward.
- This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by Auburn.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.