Wolf00, and Exploring Pe ll-- and Ji ll--

Home Forums Vultology & Learning Center Wolf00, and Exploring Pe ll-- and Ji ll--

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #20900
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Heya,
    This is hopefully a discussion about the differences between Pe ll-- and Ji ll--, and an attempt to differentiate them out more, using @wolf00 (and maybe others) as a case study. It's also a case study onto J vs P leads.
    Wolf let me know what your thoughts are and if this makes sense or is compelling. At the very least I'll be presenting the pov of the current codifier/methodology, when applied the way it was intended -- even if that may not be "right" or congruent with a subject's psychology, for any reason. The psychological match or mismatch may be another topic to get into. 🙂
    But here goes.

    I grabbed GIFs by randomizing the timestamp slider on giphy.com, in order to try to get a general slice of everything we see in the video. I'll be dividing these into what I see as Pe and Ji signals:

    Pe

    2:41

    ^ Pe Body Swaying + Pe Bubbling Momentum (+ P Horizontal Body/Hand Movements)
    What we see above is a classic Pe signal, with the body in an ongoing movement, defined by a fluidity of the spine that is directed left-and-right, swaying in a pendulum fashion. As this happens, there's also a bit of a "spunk" or jitter of excitation in the movement, which is Pe's bubbling momentum. So we see body swaying + bubbling momentum.
    But the other thing we see is the hands, which are expanded out to the sides (left and right) in parallel with the body. This is not so explicitly represented in the codifier, but one way to think of J vs P is that J is forward/back, and P is left/right in its movement pattern. "Rigidity", for J, means that movements stay primarily forward-back, and for P the spine is gliding horizontally instead. Taken by itself this GIF would support the notion of Pe-lead. But we need to continue:
    5:28

    ^ P Fluid Posture + P Casual Hands ...transitioning into a Je Head Shake and pointing
    In this GIF we examine two dynamics, the first part of the GIF is Wolf gliding once again left-to-right (i.e. ongoing motions/P) but then at some point he "snaps" into another vector, by shaking his head and beginning to point. This is a transition from P to J.
    But what we wanna look for is priority here. Which one is the default state and which one is "tacked" on top of the default state? Is it P doing a moment of J, or J doing a moment of P? This is one of those nuances of energetics that takes a lot of work to iron out, and it certainly took me years to uncover. What I can say is that this looks clearly to me as being Pe snapping into J.
    We can conceptualize this by saying that when J-lead has a moment of Pe, it is a "burst" that offsets an otherwise calm J core of unflinching poise (Ji) or authority (Je). Oppositely, when a P-lead has a moment of Ji, it's a "burst" of J exacting motions that distrupts an otherwise calm, river-current-esque movement of the body.
    Which one is the "burst", is what matters here. And the above GIF looks like Pe bursting into J. Here is an example of the opposite scenario (Ji using Pe) for contrast:
    TiSe ll--
    0:06 here

    ^ Pe Momentum + Casual Hands ... receding back into a Ji Poise/Core
    The first half of this GIF is the "burst" of Pe, while never really losing the J container, and then a recession back into a very inflexible spine that is not gliding at all. This is Ji ll-- vultology.
    Going back to another GIF of you:
    0:44

    ^ P Ongoing Movements / P Body Swaying ...navigating into a subtle Je head shake + hand gesture
    We again see how the beginnings of your energetics are Pe; the baseline is fluidity, and moments of J are tacked on top of it. So, thus far it would appear that you are Pe ll--. But lets look at the more heavy-Ji signals of your video to make sure:

    Ji

    These might not be the heaviest you display, but the heaviest that came up in the randomization:
    0:28

    ^ P Body Swaying... rigidifying into J halfway through
    Notice here how you are in an ongoing/fluid state... and then halfway through your energy solidifies. Again, is this Pe clamping into J, or J "returning" back to its rigid core? It seems to be the former. You seem to clamp into J, rather than return to it. One more:
    1:45

    ^ Ji Meticulous Hands + Ji Momentum Halting... while within a fluid body sway
    This one also shows the same dynamic. Notice how your body is still swaying like a pendulum, while at the same time your hands are trying to "freeze", and your eyes are disengaging. The juxtaposition here is clear, it's J rigidification of a native P vultology.
    Your activity is therefore most similar to that of our SeFi ll-- sample Daniil Trifonov (https://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/sefi-the-definitive-vultology/#post-19896). He shows his own version of rigidity within fluidity in GIFs like:

    Spoiler

    "The SeFi ll– is a very rare shade and I have simonemusic (Joseph) to thank for bringing this one to my attention. What we see here is what Fi energy looks like contained within the composure of Pe:"

    "^ Ji Eyes Disengage Down + Ji Meticulous Hands (subordinate)"

    [collapse]
    #20903
    Wolf00
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Unseelie

    I thank you for putting the effort in analyzing me. I'm gonna make my case and response further.
    Psychologically, I'm saying that I fit with the prioritization of the subjective factor and a tendency to retreat from the object. I'm also saying that I'm quite detached from the objective concrete world, thing that lead me to thinking I'm Ni dom at some point, due to reading about this happening in the case of Ni dominants. This detachment doesn't happen in the case of my brother, who is most likely SeFi. It can be said that my detachment can be the the byproduct of some psychological situation and I believe I did submerge myself in the unconscious at some point, at least for a bit.
    I've seen that you're open to correcting and revising your takes and thoughts on things, so let's see what I can find further.
    Based on Călin's examples regarding the head following the eyes in case of eye centric motions, I could identify some instances that resemble them in this video of me:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11axEcjYe4Y
    I wasn't aware of this detail about eye centric motions, since I'm relatively new to the system and still learning it.
     


     
    These 2 gifs show a similar eye centric movement. This sort of movement is very consistent across the duration of the video, from what I could gather and I don't see a reason to post more gifs on it.
    6:27

    This gif provides something more interesting though. The first motion of the head determined a slight tilt of the torso to the right while the eyes were in a Se fixated gaze. The second motion however is determined by the head following the direction of the eyes and the torso, in turn, following the head.
     

    This is another instance of an eye centric motion that is also similar to one of the sample gifs for eye centricity from the codifier.
    I don't think that my understanding of the signals is bad 100%, but I have the tendency to force things that I want to prove and while doing that I don't pay attention to things that would otherwise be clear to me. This can be seen in the present situation quite clearly.
    I can have an overly cocky attitude about the things that I see as right, and this trait can be seen as either positive or negative, depending on the perspective.
    So, I made claims that go in accordance to your analysis and I also made some points regarding my interpretation of my state and my situation.

    #20910
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive
    ^ Nice. I agree with your analysis of the above GIFs - I'm seeing a similar sort of pattern with the eyes, even though I didn't focus on eye-centricity as much in my writeup. But it's there. 🙂

    I don’t think that my understanding of the signals is bad 100%

    I agree-- I actually think you have an eye for these things.
    Having confidence in one's current interpretation is good, because it allows one to build the strongest case for it. Then, if the case is brought down, it's presumably brought down by more compelling arguments, making the overall communal knowledge greater for everyone. I think we all learn more by seeing competing cases hashed out with rigor, and challenging each other to do our best. Glad to have you aboard!

    Psychologically, I’m saying that I fit with the prioritization of the subjective factor and a tendency to retreat from the object. I’m also saying that I’m quite detached from the objective concrete world, thing that lead me to thinking I’m Ni dom at some point, due to reading about this happening in the case of Ni dominants. This detachment doesn’t happen in the case of my brother, who is most likely SeFi. It can be said that my detachment can be the the byproduct of some psychological situation and I believe I did submerge myself in the unconscious at some point, at least for a bit.

    As for the psychological component, I think we need more information about you. Someday soon we'll have a psychological survey ready, to compare vultology against. Unfortunately it's still a work in progress, but anything you'd like to share about yourself would be very helpful! Like a mini bio or something?
    It may be the case that SeFi ll-- doesn't describe your psychology, but perhaps I can talk a little about what SeFi ll-- would mean in CT (since it's not exactly the same as any other system).
    Increasingly, CT is coming to eliminate the words "concrete" and "abstract" from the vernacular of the model, and in the upcoming version they will be wholly removed as associations to S vs N. This was an early error and hangover from MBTI that has since been clarified. In short, "abstraction" -- the capacity to generalize knowledge away from specifics -- is an attribute of human intelligence more generally. There's no incompatibility with an Se-lead that is highly abstract.
    But then, what does it mean to be Se? Well in CT it means a combination of being Pe-lead (explorer), having the Ni/Se oscillation, and approaching mental objects as discrete entities. Se-leads are not bound only by what is evident in front of them in terms of physical objects, they are fully capable of the highest object-abstraction. However, at each step of the way, their treatment of mental/abstract objects is definitive and actual. The boundaries around an object are understood implicitly; it's mental start and endpoints are registered, so that something "is what it is" and they don't tend to confuse topics.
    This is in contrast to Ne which we might say registers mental objects associatively as fading into one another, in a sort of hazy probabilistic superposition. For Ne, the barriers around objects are porous, prone to change at any moment. The ability for Se-leads to have clarity of mind in terms of "what is" (no matter how conceptual that "is-ness", is), is what gives them an acute tunnel focus in any endeavor they pursue. The endeavor can be wholly non-physical, like math or politics, and yet it's approached literally and targeted.
    If an Se-lead is a philosopher (a combination some typologies don't often consider), they'll often be realists -- in favor of looking at reality forthrightly. Thus there's a sort of "no-bullshit" element to Se-leads, and they tend not to be distracted by untethered ideas and farfetched hypotheses.
    Now, this still doesn't mean that you're SeFi ll-- psychologically but I wanted to take a second to at least explain what CT means by Se-lead. The other part of this is that, beyond what has already been said, a Pe-lead with a development of Ji (or ll--) will be prone to have their ego and fixation on their Ji function. This is not only true of Pe-leads but most types. In general, a person with any other development aside from l--- will tend to have their mental focus in the function that is developed.
    Therefore, quite ironically, the FiSe ll-- type is more focused on their Se, while the SeFi ll-- is more focused on their Fi. This is because the psyche of a person has to "move away" from their native function in order to develop it. The SeFi ll-- can therefore be described as an SeFi who is channeling and championing their Fi, while never ceasing to be a flow-based, dynamic explorer of information worlds. The FiSe ll--, on the other hand, can be described as an FiSe who is channeling and championing their Se, such as by diving into creativity and art careers, all the while doing it for the integrity and purpose of their Fi's desire to unfurl certain precious axioms onto the world. At the behavioral level, the SeFi ll-- is more like an FiSe, and the FiSe ll-- is more like an SeFi. (But the underlying cognitive doesn't change, and they're both still what they are.)
    This was initially quite a counter-intuitive discovery, and it's still being checked but it seems to be holding true so far in most cases.  But we're still learning about these development levels and what they mean and it's important to really double-check this against people. So far this is the best profile we have, aiming to describe the SeFi ll-- https://drive.google.com/file/d/18y3ipe0JU-b08_gj-iH80rekV2Kpx97i/view?usp=sharing I wonder how you feel about it and if it resonates with you?
    Any feedback is welcome, and can help get to a better definition in the future.
    Thanks!

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
A forum exploring the connection between Jungian typology and body mannerisms.

Social Media

© Copyright 2012-2021 Juan E. Sandoval - Use Policy
searchhomecommentsenvelopegraduation-hatbookearth linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram