# Can you guess a person's personality type just by looking?



## silverlined (Jul 8, 2009)

Photos can be misleading, they just capture a moment in time. The person in the picture could have been bored or angry or something else. That could come through the picture and cloud things up. I get vibes from people in person though, I think typing people based on behavior is a good way to go.
Since people are complicated and have many layers, I hesitate to type them quickly.


----------



## kibou (Apr 22, 2010)

OP, do you believe that you can tell a person's type from things like how they are dressed and look, or based on their demeanors and facial expressions? On the first, I really disagree, even off the top of my head the number of IN_Js in particular that dress and are part of subcultures that you'd imagine for extremely SP people is ridiculous (I'm guilty of it myself). For the latter, there are some tricky problems, but I believe you actually can tell someone's type with the way they use their face and body.


----------



## anon (Oct 19, 2009)

Not always and not really. Sometimes I can guess someone's personality quite accurately just by looking at them, but only because it occurs to me, not because I am deliberately trying to type them. Their demeanor helps more than what they're wearing or how they're behaving per se. For instance, I notice that ExTJ personalities tend to give direct eye-contact yet their gaze still maintains a detachment of some sort - it's pretty impersonal. I have noticed a few of them, they're usually the ones engaged in a conversation with a small group or on-the-go. Still, it's not always easy to tell unless I was observing them for a while to determine what their type could be. Otherwise I just pick up vibes. I've also seen N personalities dress in the more stereotypically "sensor" way, and sensors that put less emphasis on how they dress. It's personal choices and what ever circumstances influences them to dress/behave the way that they do. People are interesting and I love to figure them out exclusively, so when I discover what their personality could be or in fact is, I get excited and think 'wow' and all of that jazz


----------



## kibou (Apr 22, 2010)

Also, guys, if you believe that you can tell a person's type by watching them, you should check out my video and try to type me! Bonus points if you do it with the sound OFF.

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/44542-guess-my-type-my-video.html


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

Since I think this is so interesting, let's play a game. Here's random everyday pictures of some people I know who have taken a meyers-briggs based test and are pretty sure of their type. You tell me which type you think each of them is. You can use the numbers to help make it clear. I'll post the answers later.









The pose/expression isn't necessarily the _most_ characteristic of them but they are all relatively candid moments.

(personally I don't know that you can really tell, I wouldn't be able to, but I think it's interesting to see how people speculate about this anyways, even if it's not terribly accurate)

I'd like to offer a batch of cookies to anyone who guesses right on these  .....but alas, it's only internet.


----------



## jezroue (Feb 5, 2011)

You have to identify people via their Static Features and Dynamic Features. and these aren't the _best_ Candid shots...but I'll play!

1.) glasses in the way
2.) side shot
3.) INFj, ENTp (I wish this picture were closer)
4.) INTj, ENTp
5.) ESTj
6.) ENTj
7.) ENTp

My Cheat Sheet: SOCIONICS: Functions, Types, Tests (Note: site doesn't actually support VI. Pictures provided after diagnosis)

I hope you type accurately. And make great cookies.


----------



## kibou (Apr 22, 2010)

I can't tell enough from a still photo, but this is a fun game! I'm using the MBTI lettering, not Socionics. 

1. INFP?
2. INTP?
3. ENTP (possibly ENFP)
4. INTJ (possibly INFJ)
5. ISFJ
6. ENFJ (possibly INFJ)
7. INFP

All the ones which I can't see the eyes clearly are much weaker guesses.


----------



## 18211 (Jan 30, 2011)

There's no way I could tell someone's type from just a picture, but if I can look at them in real life I am really good at guessing. I just walk through life people watching and thinking, "How ENFP of them..." or something like that. But it's generally their actions or interactions that tell me, not their appearance or how they're dressed.


----------



## Holunder (May 11, 2010)

1)enfj
2)infp
3)infj
4)isfp
5)infp
6)estj
7)enfj


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

I baked cinamon rolls (better than cookies yes?) for everyone who tried my game ^_^










just in case you still want to guess I made the answers hard to see.



Thanks for trying it! I think you all had good suggestions - I could totally see it (when I stop thinking about knowing them and just look at the pictures)
@jezroue 1 of 7 
@kibou 2 of 7
@Holunder alas, 0 of 7 but I'd still give you cinamon rolls 

Answers are: 

1. INFP
2. INTP
3. ISTJ
4. ENTP
5. INTP
6. ISFP
7. ISTJ


----------



## lib (Sep 18, 2010)

Hmm... I might be able to guess someone who's INTJ on his/her death stare and complete lack of fashion statement in clothing or if the clothes are old and worn even though the person can afford new fashionable clothes. But it's still down to probability.
I play another game with myself. As my brain is always on analyzing mode and I'm traveling around the world most of the time I'm meeting many people from many different countries so I try to guess what country they're from. This includes language, accent, words used, race, clothing, behavior, facial expression, wealth, etc. In doing so there's no absolutes - only probabilities and I think it's the same with guessing MBTI type. The more time you have with a person the more data!


----------



## cam3llia (Mar 5, 2011)

1. Intj
2. Enfp
3. Isfp
4. Istj
5. Esfp
6. Estp
7. Intp


----------



## abster (Feb 9, 2011)

no i would not have a clue.


----------



## kibou (Apr 22, 2010)

Looking back on this now:

There are an awful lot of ENFPs in your pictures, although some won't identify as so. 3&6 are more likely to identify as ENFPs.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

I have been studying personalities on faces, as well as manners and behaviors, for over a year now. I can say that my skill of reading personalities keeps getting better, and I feel there is still much to learn. The best evidence for a type besides real-life contact is by videos, where one can glean the most information through sound and picture; photographs and sound recordings alone are not nearly as good. I have found out about physiognomy, which is the assessment of personality based on appearance. It is quite interesting, because the article talks about history of the subject with beginnings in Ancient Greece and its modern revival:

Physiognomy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://face-and-emotion.com/dataface/physiognomy/physiognomy.jsp

Basically, I believe personalities have their particular manners and behaviors, so if you understand that pattern, typing becomes possible. For example, many people have had the experience of finding a total stranger reminding them of someone they know, possibly because the personalities match. This recognition of personality patterns can be done consciously through understanding and using the MBTI. There are many videos on Youtube pertaining to personality, as well as television that one can practice visual identification on. Thank you for reading.


----------



## sriracha (Sep 19, 2010)

@Sparky I agree with you that personalities have their particular manners and behaviors. I've also been studying more and getting better at typing people! Some types are easier for me to spot than others so I still have a lot to learn. Care to share your observations?


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

rawr_sheila said:


> @Sparky I agree with you that personalities have their particular manners and behaviors. I've also been studying more and getting better at typing people! Some types are easier for me to spot than others so I still have a lot to learn. Care to share your observations?


I have found some types are easier to spot as well, and the last time I recognized a new type due to previous mistyping is that of ESTJ, which I thought the people were ENFP. I have trouble putting into words what makes me think they are of a certain type, and relating one type to another of the same type through video seems to be the best method, though others might not see the same similarities. Thank you for commenting.


----------



## OakTreeSquared (Nov 21, 2011)

As I'm typing this I have a book in front of me you might enjoy reading. It's titled "_The Art of SpeedReading People: Harness the Power of Personality Type and Create What You Want in Business and in Life_" by Paul Tieger and Barbara Barron-Tieger.

It has a large section devoted to describing and contrasting the observable differences between the 'typical' behaviors of an "E" vs. "I" preference, and so on with S/N, T/F, and J/P. I found most of them to be right on with my own observations from my people watching. The book is especially helpful in better understanding and 'typing' new acquaintances, since I can't give everyone an MBTI test in the first few minutes I meet them. That would just be awkward.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

OakTreeSquared said:


> As I'm typing this I have a book in front of me you might enjoy reading. It's titled "_The Art of SpeedReading People: Harness the Power of Personality Type and Create What You Want in Business and in Life_" by Paul Tieger and Barbara Barron-Tieger.
> 
> It has a large section devoted to describing and contrasting the observable differences between the 'typical' behaviors of an "E" vs. "I" preference, and so on with S/N, T/F, and J/P. I found most of them to be right on with my own observations from my people watching. The book is especially helpful in better understanding and 'typing' new acquaintances, since I can't give everyone an MBTI test in the first few minutes I meet them. That would just be awkward.


Thank you so much, I will look into this.


----------



## heythereilikeyourhair (Aug 10, 2011)

Yes, I can sort of tell. Like their facial expressions, the way they walk, facial structure (e.g. stiff and sharp facial feautures)etc..
And I can usually tell by the eyes as well... like the deepness, what's inside their eyes, how they look at things/people ... etc.


----------



## Zorgdude (Sep 6, 2012)

I can say I have started to notice a slight trend with certain personalities and physical appearances, but they seem to be gender specific so far. For instance, i have noticed that many of the girls I have a physical attraction to are INFJ's, they tend to be slightly more petite in size, but with an air of tom-boyishness. 
I have also noticed that male ENTJ's tend to be more broad shouldered, masculine, and assertive in stature.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I think it's possible, but you have to essentially be looking out for what's not apparent about the person (so, it often stems from trusting your own expectations of what a person might be like relative to what they are like), so for a dominant intuitive like me, this is right up my alley. It's all about how people are orienting their reasoning, not their reasoning itself and it's content, let alone, whether or not they are doing more thinking, feeling, etc. (because everyone is doing these to unpredictable degrees - these aren't really the "functions," they're just the origins of the functions, so they don't really hold any water for discerning function "order," particularly so-called auxiliary functions, since these don't exist as judgment or perception "chasms" the way the dom/inferior does. So two people of polar opposite types, such as an Fe dominant and a Te dominant, may have nearly identical personas, be making nearly identical points, etc. but their responses to the conditions of the environment or circumstances might reflect the go-to tendencies through which they orient themselves to handle these things (like, I've noticed often that Te dominants will be quick to orient themselves to some anticipated *consequence* of particular factors at play in the situation, etc., while Fe dominants will be quick to orient themselves to some potential *area* of self-expression that they can draw from others or from themselves with reference to inductions of evaluative meaning that may present itself (often the people who are noticeably looking to "hit a spot" in you, so to speak). So, both methods are essentially logical, but the way that people are prompted to respond to variables, etc. may often be indicative of their dominant mode of functioning. The functions are very much the "ways" people default to making decisions (what comes from acting on them may certainly not represent particular functions, but may be able to be deduced as an outcome of some in particular if factors indirectly related to the actual functions are taken into account, such as objectivity/subjectivity, wanting to establish a judgment in a factual or evaluative fashion, etc.). So, it's possible to make any decision in any given way, and often, trying to describe the way people do this might hint at functions, mainly the dominant. The nature of people's discussions might also reveal stuff about the inferior function often, since that one is immune to being hidden by a person's persona in a lot of ways. I tend to find perception dominants (Ne, Se, Ni, or Si) a lot harder to spot on average, since perception is impersonal and impossible to establish or *impose *upon a situation, so often I look for the "purity" of a person's reasoning to discern J dominants and P dominants, where the P dominants are often pulling the strings on their own reasoning so to speak to take it in various directions, so they often tend to keep the personal nature of their judgments more ambiguous in favor of momentary or future outcomes (S and N, respectively), while the J dominants tend to default to not really caring so much about the "ways" people respond, but more just about achieving a clear response that might reveal more personal content about the person (so as they can "judge" rather than "infer," which is more of a P dominant tendency). This stuff takes a pretty discerning eye and rarely guarantees a lot of certainty, although I think some people are more obvious in the type department than others, depending on their personas and probably in how the person orients their dom. to begin with (some people can easily orient it toward stuff that one wouldn't instinctively associate with that particular function at all, so it might be impossible to figure out without going a lot farther in getting to know them, etc.). I think of all of the functions, the F functions are the easiest to literally recognize or deduce from people, since motivation is pretty much an inherent part of them to begin with, so often, I tend to find that the Fe types are just much more open in the evaluation department and tend to anticipate drawing a direct response from you in this department, while the Fi types tend to sort of keep their anticipation to themselves and outwardly orient themselves toward what kind of methods of directing a conversation might get a certain response from someone (so, Te outwardly). The Te dominants in particular tend to be pretty sharp with almost *formulaically* drawing responses from people that hit some kind of expectation they have about them. The Fi types in general just don't seem to care as much about immediate responses of an evaluative nature from people - in fact, they tend to be looking for something more personal in people than transpersonal, if anything at all, really.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

It's not to say that you'll see less perception or judgment from J doms or P doms, respectively, but I think the J doms are literally more interested in rationalizing judgments than perceptions, and vice-versa with the P doms. I tend to find that if the J doms can't really make a statement into a judgment, they often couldn't care less about opening their mouths at all (if they do, they might be more "silly" and such in the P department to try to get judgments out of people, etc.), while if the P doms can't affect people's perspectives and such, they tend to be more apathetic about making judgments and might just be more blunt and half-hearted about them (although outsiders might think they're being sarcastic, funny, etc., while the P dom might just be looking for more than what can be merely set up as a conclusion or decision).


----------



## Raichu (Aug 24, 2012)

Master Mind said:


> When you have the MBT eyes, you can see the letters of everyone's type just above their heads.


lololol this killed me

Really, though, I don't think I look at all like my type. ISTP's are supposed to be athletic, which i'm definitely not. I'm all pudgey. I have a big round baby face. I also usually look deceptively open and friendly in pictures, since my ENFP sister loves taking them, and I know if I don't look cheerful enough the first time she'll just make me take another one. 

Edit: I do think you can possibly tell someone's type by watching them, or even in a picture maybe by what they're doing, how they dress, their hair, etc. but not just by the physical features they're born with.


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

I can tell by looking at the shape and "life" of the eyes but so far only with ISTP, ISFP and INFJ (but I don't think I know any INFJ IRL, only from what I can tell when I see people on TV). 
ISTP is the easiest type for me to spot. They have that coolness about them that can't be missed and it also shows in their eyes, they glisten like ice in the sunshine. ISFPs are laid back as well but their eyes exude some kind of sadness. It's even easier to spot ISFPs when they have that particular shade of green eyes. I believe that Rihanna is an ISFP, she has those sad eyes. I thought Kristen Stewart was an INFP at first but she has that coolness of an ISTP and yet the tortured eyes of an ISFP. And INFP eyes are similar to those of an ISFP but there is also a hint of a smile lingering in their face.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

You can tell about certain aspects of personality from appearance: Science declares VI is real
VI stands for visual identification


----------



## alcaatwork (Jun 12, 2011)

I'm betting JungyesMBTIno is ISxx. (Likely ISTx)



JungyesMBTIno said:


> I think it's possible, but you have to essentially be looking out for what's not apparent about the person (so, it often stems from trusting your own expectations of what a person might be like relative to what they are like), so for a dominant intuitive like me, this is right up my alley. It's all about how people are orienting their reasoning, not their reasoning itself and it's content, let alone, whether or not they are
> .
> .
> .
> (so, Te outwardly). The Te dominants in particular tend to be pretty sharp with almost *formulaically* drawing responses from people that hit some kind of expectation they have about them. The Fi types in general just don't seem to care as much about immediate responses of an evaluative nature from people - in fact, they tend to be looking for something more personal in people than transpersonal, if anything at all, really.


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

raichu said:


> Master Mind said:
> 
> 
> > When you have the MBT eyes, you can see the letters of everyone's type just above their heads.
> ...


:laughing:

On one level, I was curious how many people would get the reference.


----------



## InterPersonality (Jan 25, 2012)

Not a good idea to Type on the basis of looks alone, but it is definitely possible to determine a person's Type in conversation - where you can also listen to language, observe gestures and other habits. Visuals can give you a starting point - certain Types prefer certain colours, have particular types of gait, prefer certain hair styles and accessories etc. - but it's unwise to use these identifiers without being able to listen to language too.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Socionics physiognomy people? really really credible lols


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

This is one of the earliest threads, possibly the earliest on record, that I created not long after joining this forum. I still remember this, and have to remark on how much my typing has improved over the past four years. This is also helped by remarkable discussions, as well as real-life interactions that have fostered this development. 

I hope others can learn to type by looking as well, by drawing relationships or similarities between members of a personality type, and not base it on a predetermined dogma about how everyone of a personality is supposed to behave. If music connects humanity, then the following threads, which I have made to help remember certain INFJ singers or musicians, as well as a tool to help people identify others through type, might assist those who hope to develop their own method of personality typing on the fly:

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/172139-songs-entp-enfp-ne-dominant-people.html

INTJ, INFJ singers

Through experience in observing people, it appears that the vast majority of the population are intuitive dominants (ENTP, ENFP, INTJ, and INFJ), with ENTP and INFJ being rarer than INTJ and ENFP. ENFJ, ESFJ, ESTJ, ENTJ, ESTP, ESFP, ISFJ, and ISTJ, as well as ISTP, ISFP, INFP are relatively rare as well. INTP is also not as common as INTJ. It also appears that an INTJ might not recognize another INTJ, or an ENFP might not recognize another ENFP. This is attributed to variants in a personality type. You can check the following thread for more details, about the origins of those variations:

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-br...ti-personality-types-exhibited-starseeds.html

If morphic resonance is of any help, than the development of recognition for members of the same personality type might be achieved sooner than expected, especially among the INFJ community, of which I am a member. You can check out my INTJ guesses in the INTJ Confirmed and Guessed thread:

http://personalitycafe.com/intj-for...s-intjs-confirmed-guessed-77.html#post4554992

You are also welcome to visit the Guess the Type sub-forum:

http://personalitycafe.com/guess-type/


----------



## Metal Fish (Jan 3, 2014)

I like your threads Sparky.  always got something interesting.

as for this threads original question, MAYBE from facial expressions and body language. But I really doubt there is any correlation for type and, say, distance between eyes, or width of nose, ect.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

Metal Fish said:


> I like your threads Sparky.  always got something interesting.
> 
> as for this threads original question, MAYBE from facial expressions and body language. But I really doubt there is any correlation for type and, say, distance between eyes, or width of nose, ect.


Hi Metal Fish, thank you for supporting. Facial expressions and body language are definitely important, though I also find facial proportions (the locations of nose, lips or eyes relative to the rest of the face) can also help with typing.


----------



## donkeybals (Jan 13, 2011)

Although this isn't always accurate, you can get a good sense by the way they carry themselves, more often than not too the appearance of face can tell you a thing or too. A lot of the time if they have a heart shaped face, it means there an NF more often than not, Heads that are more rounded they are usually some type of an S and square type faces are NTs. Again these are generalizations and not always true.


----------



## spiderfrommars (Feb 22, 2012)

You mean mannerisms? I've noticed these sometimes and they've helped me crystalize a decision about somebody. It's not an important factor, but it sometimes helps. It's a part of somebody's vibe. I usually only notice it once I'm actively deciding between two or three types, as a supplement to analysis. It's possible that sensors would be better than I at using mannerisms to type people, since they'd be more aware of those details.

I wouldn't ever use it to type strangers, because somebody using a particular tone for _one sentece_, or sitting in a particular way _one time_, means nothing. A ESFJ having a bad day could move like a INTJ, a INTP on drugs might more resemble a ESFP. If a ISFP at the table near me was discussing an important business deal on the phone, she might sound more like a ESTJ. Or whatever.

If you mean just physical features and pictures/visual typing, then hell to the no. That's bullcrap.


----------



## Pelopra (May 21, 2013)

i remember seeing a while back a series of videos matching micro-expressions/body language to types.
I wasn't sure if it was bogus but it seemed to be an intriguing and more promising idea than just "physiognomy"

thought about it recently while watching infj, infp videos on youtube... it might be confirmation bias, but i really did notice a difference in the steadiness/intensity of the gaze of an infj vs the more wandering, gentle-eyed look of the infp. more info needed.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

I find it very strange that there has not been more studies and research done, linking personality types with looks and movement patterns. There is more research from Socionics, though I find the MBTI system very adequate to make speed typing possible. 

A certain amount of creativity and imagination is needed when typing from photographs or statues, and that is you have to mentally picture how the person moves when talking. This is done in terms of his facial expressions according to structure, as well as proportions. It is similar to scientists guessing how dinosaurs might have walked or ran, according to their skeletal structures, and matching those with the skeletons of modern birds or reptiles.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

Hey guys, does anybody know of further research into visual typing for MBTI, like with Socionics? Specifically, I would like to see further research done on the INFJ personality type. if morphic resonance is correct, then other INFJ would soon be aware of personality types, like myself. What are your thoughts or opinions? Thank you.


----------



## CandyStarlight (Jul 21, 2015)

That would also depend on your enneagram. For instance, I've typed someone as an enneagram 5 on a forum for fun. He was INTP 8. The 5 corresponded to the INTP, however. You could type a random dude as ESTP but he turns out to be a INFJ with a strong 8 fix! I believe that it would be extremely difficult to hit bulls-eye each time with your calculations, even if you know the person extremely well. But it's possible after much practice and feedback to hit within a range or "rightness."
@Sparky


----------



## Despotic Nepotist (Mar 1, 2014)

CandyStarlight said:


> That would also depend on your enneagram. For instance, I've typed someone as an enneagram 5 on a forum for fun. He was INTP 8. The 5 corresponded to the INTP, however. You could type a random dude as ESTP but he turns out to be a INFJ with a strong 8 fix! I believe that it would be extremely difficult to hit bulls-eye each time with your calculations, even if you know the person extremely well. But it's possible after much practice and feedback to hit within a range or "rightness."
> 
> @Sparky


I currently identify as an INTP 8. This wasn't me, by any chance was it? Because I know a user by the name of @Mason117 who identifies as an INTP 8w7.


----------



## CandyStarlight (Jul 21, 2015)

@Dark and Derisive haha no, it wasn't. This was actually on Typology Central. And I typed you as 4w5, remember? But now that I look at your tritype, it kind of makes sense! Same ballpark, no?


----------



## Despotic Nepotist (Mar 1, 2014)

CandyStarlight said:


> @Dark and Derisive haha no, it wasn't. This was actually on Typology Central. And I typed you as 4w5, remember? But now that I look at your tritype, it kind of makes sense! Same ballpark, no?


Typology Central = The forum of eternal noobery. :tongue: I guess it's the same ballpark. It is strange typing as an INTP 8w9, because I'm a bit less practical and grounded than your typical 8, but more grounded, practical, assertive and commanding than your typical INTP. Thusly, I might come off as an ISTP, INTJ, or ENTP.


----------



## CandyStarlight (Jul 21, 2015)

> Typology Central = The forum of eternal noobery.


LOL. That's why I stopped using it. I like PerC a lot better.



> I guess it's the same ballpark. It is strange typing as an INTP 8w9, because I'm a bit less practical and grounded than your typical 8, but more grounded, practical, assertive and commanding than your typical INTP. Thusly, I might come off as an ISTP, INTJ, or ENTP.


I see what you mean! I come of as an xNTJ or ESTP at times because of my tritype.


----------



## eliotpaek (Mar 5, 2016)

Possibly if you had several pictures of them in their natural habitat. However it would be a lot more telling if it was a video.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Appearances can be telling but they are not everything. 

Example I remember meeting this girl who off the surface looked like ExFP. Even off the surface she seemed like such based on her political opinions. Once I was around her for a half hour it was clear she was no FP at all, but just likely a very strong ESTJ who wanted the illusion of FP and likely had a weird ennegram for her type like a 4. 

Which is why I say you cannot solely judge the book by its cover. I bet that girl would test herself as an FP tho, not recognizing how J she was because of her affinity for desiring a P exterior or something.

The girl was a total ESTJ Te Fi staunchly for sure without a doubt, but dressed like a morbid gothic hipster version and citing liberal politics. Goes to show the glove and the ideology does not mean the type.


----------



## Kitty23 (Dec 27, 2015)

Sort of. Strong Fe users are generally bubbly and warm and strong Fi users generally come off as cold and aloof. Thinkers also generally come off as cold and aloof, especially the Fi user ones.


----------



## me and my spoon (Mar 18, 2016)

To an extent, if you are observant and its over a substantial amount of time, yes you can. Most people into typology seem to be repulsed by the idea that somehow physical attributes allude to personality type, but I don't - in fact I think it's completely logical.

Why? Well the body is not separate from the mind. People separate the two, but it's not true. Furthermore, evolution has had it such that mental states are reflected on the face. This is so we can pick up on cues: we know when someone looks angry, happy, in reflection and so on. 

If personality type is composed of different, differentiable orientations of the brain (I.e. some parts are used in conjunction to others, which is different in relative usage to the parts used in another types brain), and this activity is somewhat reflected in "external" dynamics (especially the face, and, even more especially, the eyes), then I can absolutely see some correlation emerging from the way the brain manipulates the body in ways that reflect function use. 

I'm not talking about genetical "static" characteristics like bone structure, maybe there's even some correlation in that, but I'm far more sceptical about this.


----------



## WhoIsJake (Jun 2, 2015)

me and my spoon said:


> To an extent, if you are observant and its over a substantial amount of time, yes you can.


Everything this dude said. 

I really think clothing choice gives it away for the majority.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

I'm putting together a website that shows visual typing of people. It is useful resource for those who are interested in typing others by looks.

MBTI Typings of Famous People


----------



## visceral (Apr 11, 2017)

aboslutely not.
however i can have some guesses after a prolonged study of 'looking at them'; at what attracts their attention, at what theyre attuned to.

after conversing with someone, you can tell if theyre S or N by how they describe events (ex the S person would give you a lot of physical details, location). basically the idea is to get a model of how they perceive the world (in S or N fashion). 
J or P is also easy to discern after some talking. (ie the J would want to make a call/decision as soon as possible in most cases, whereas P are kidna like wait-and-hold-and-see-what-happens)

F or T is really hard, esp for females.


----------

