# Identifying Cognitive Functions in other people



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

@_Mindgamess_, thanks for posting this. Like you said I wouldn't use this on its own, but I still find it entertaining.
Yep, maybe it is based on confirmation bias, but it's still fun if you don't take it too seriously.

Having said that, all INTPs that I know reasonably well (2 friends, one boss) look _the same _to me and did so even before I knew about this system. 1 is a man with green eyes and blond/grey hair, 1 is a woman with blue eyes and brown hair and the other is also a woman with blue eyes and blond/grey hair. So it can't be based on actual physical resemblance.
Having said that, the INTPs on this page http://www.cognitivetype.com/visualreading/ don't do much for me. There gestures are much too fluid. My INTPs will sit like a robot, then suddenly erupt in gestures that seem spontaneous yet laborious and 'calculated' ("How do people gesture? Am I doing this right? How many times should I do this? Look at me, I'm gesturing! This is my weird gesture for XYZ, I hope you know what it means because it's really logical") then become aware of their gesturing and stop it. 
I've also noticed that both my ENTP boss and my ENTP brother roll their eyes around a lot. I'm not sure I'd even be physically able to do that. I've tried to roll my eyes around like that at home, but even then my eyes feel 'stuck' and I look like a mad cow.

What about shadow functions/ socionics* (though?). E.g. whenever my dear ENTP boss gets a chance to intimidate me, he uses the good old Te browrise on me and his eyes look the same as those of my ENTJ colleague.
*each type has all the functions, but is better at using some of them than others.

I also get what @_Teybo_ said about these adjectives not being "quantifiable". I think a lot depends on the observer as well as the observed. For example, my ENTJ colleague's Te-look seems "naive" and "innocent" to me. I don't find it cold, or threatening. It's just like "I'm telling facts that are true, facts are neither good nor evil, they just are". She even seems like a "warm" and "helpful" person to me, whereas others find her scary and intimidating. But of course, I share all her functions, so she would seem harmless to me because she seems familiar. Now give me a cuddly nice little ISFJ and I'm immediately creeped out by their "evil" "clingy" feely-rays, whereas an Fe user would find them warm.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

FlaviaGemina said:


> @_Mindgamess_, thanks for posting this. Like you said I wouldn't use this on its own, but I still find it entertaining.
> Yep, maybe it is based on confirmation bias, but it's still fun if you don't take it too seriously.
> 
> Having said that, all INTPs that I know reasonably well (2 friends, one boss) look _the same _to me and did so even before I knew about this system. 1 is a man with green eyes and blond/grey hair, 1 is a woman with blue eyes and brown hair and the other is also a woman with blue eyes and blond/grey hair. So it can't be based on actual physical resemblance.
> ...


There are no shadow functions with this system. In the case of your boss, he/she might just be an ENTJ wearing an ENTP mask. Also, as the "cognitive types guy" has said, ENTJs get typed as ENTPs all the time but ENTPs are a lot of times introverts in the colloquial sense while being extroverts in the jungian sense.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> There are no shadow functions with this system. In the case of your boss, he/she might just be an ENTJ wearing an ENTP mask. Also, as the "cognitive types guy" has said, ENTJs get typed as ENTPs all the time but ENTPs are a lot of times introverts in the colloquial sense while being extroverts in the jungian sense.


No. He's definitely an ENTP. His Ne is HUGE, he's all over the place, his sense of time is non-existant, and he's a big old Fe softy and he mirrors people all the time (it could be that he's copying MY Te-look cause he knows it will work on me). He gets cranky as soon as anyone mentions any kind of planning and says that he has his plan in his head. He also naively assumes that people are rational and then when he finds out that they aren't he complains about it forever. 
He doesn't give orders or harass anyone at all. He always says "We will have to do this and that...." in a typical P way.

He doesn't intimidate me very often, usually he flees from me because he thinks I'm after him to hassle him when all it was is that I gave him a friendly, sociable look.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "introverts in the colloquial sense" but I think he could be called that. He's always complaining that people talk too much to him. Also, when I first got to know him (and didn't know that much about typing), he reminded me of my INTPs, only that he seemed like a "bigger", more open, chattier and less complicated INTP. Now that he has completed his troll incubation period at work and has gotten to know everyone, he's a lot noisier.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

WamphyriThrall said:


> This sounds a lot more like Fe, and I'm not sure how a perceiving functions has anything to do with concern over how a Ni-dom is viewed while... introverting. An INFJ, possibly, but INTJ? I honestly can't see one consciously observing every one of their quirks in real time, let alone 'hiding' them. Then again, an INTP wrote this article, so perhaps he's projecting his own experiences with his inferior?


Yes, I've seen this more with INFJs than with INTJs (hiding them) however, in my experience, Ni types tend to be some of the most secretive and most hidden behind a veil. Many of them that I've talked to feel like they can read into peoples souls or just get a very intense vibe about people, so naturally, they are worried that other people can do the same with them, so they try to hide.

Also, the interesting thing you bring up about hiding, yes, you can hide body language, facial expressions, you can act differently, but you can't change your function make up. And if function use really IS tied to eyes (unverified by science, but seeming true from my experiences), then they can't hide that. They may make some of them less obvious, but your strongest functions and usually at least one perceiving function will show. Not many people can hold a conversation without looking away (to think about something)at least one time while talking. They will be using the same functions to act differently. I can act like an INFJ if I tried, but I'd still be an ISTJ using Si, Te, Fi, and Ne. My eyes will still give me away when I dig into my brain for information using Si.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

LostFavor said:


> I think this fits with what you're describing (1:23 about):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I do agree with you about Te here. He is very intense most of the time, with little facial expression, but here and there he'll have a genuine smile that to me conveys (I'm very happy about what I've built and what I've achieved, which is very personal). He doesn't smile because he feels like it's socially appropriate, he does so because that is how he feels about a topic of such importance to him.

This is a perfect example to of how I use this system. From this video, it's too hard to tell if he is a N or an S based on his eyes. So if this was a person I met in real life, I he seems a Te / Fi user, and likely more T than F based on the way he talked and what he's done with his life. So he _likely_ a xxTJ. As I got to know him more, there would be more tells (wording, habits, maybe eye patterns IF they became apparent / consistent) of if he is an Ni person or an Si person. Then I could identify his type. Once I came up with a type, I would share a test with them / page with description of type I think I've narrowed it down to.

However, I would NEVER try to legitimately type a person this quick (One video / few minutes) with eye patterns. I would make sure I notice this eye pattern many times before deducing that they use that cognitive functions_. _It can give me a jumping off point or an idea, but that doesn't mean I won't change my mind later.

Edit:
Apparently there is a big debate over whether Mark Zuckerberg is an INTJ or an INTP. If you look at this video, you can see some obvious Ni patterns (especially at 0:32, 1:07) when he looks away. He NEVER uses an Ne bounce.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYVNh1p2ZhA&feature=player_embedded#at=52

The way he talks, I don't hear Ti. I hear Te just by the things he says.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Ok, but how does Si differ to Se then? Just listening to Cruise's reasoning in that video, it seems more like weak Ni than Si dominance to though to me.


I would agree with that statement. I don't know who typed Cruise as an ISFJ (it wasn't @_Mindgamess_, as she said she is not the author of this article) but I've always seen him typed as an ISTP, and I think that's correct, and I think he completely acts like one in the video. (Speaking here as an ISTP who has an ISFJ brother.) If there's any Fe in that video it's completely buried under Ti. He doesn't even attempt to establish rapport with his interviewer. He argues exactly the way I would. I mean exactly. My brother would pull out the Ti to argue his position (I've taught him well  ) but only after establishing rapport with the interviewer. To him the relationship is always more important than the matter at hand and he always maintains basic respect for the person, at least until it reaches the point where he is so offended by the person's ideas or behavior that he writes the person off and it's over. Cruise doesn't even attempt to Fe there, he just steamrolls his opponent with reasoning.

How does Si differ from Se? Se is constantly exploring the environment. It has quick reflexes. Si doesn't look around but inward, as Mindgamess has described better than I can since she uses it and I don't. I can just say about Se that I'm extremely distractible by sensory stimulation: if I hear someone sneeze in class, I automatically turn around to see who; if something moves in the corner of my eye my vision goes straight to it, if I suddenly smell something I'll stop speaking mid-sentence until I figure out what it is and where it's coming from, etc. I'm very much in-synch physically with an ESTP friend of mine: we're both tuned into things going on around us that no one else is. I can see him reading my body language, and I can see him seeing me seeing him reading my body language. It could be an occasion of severe awkwardness but I think it just works out to make us both aware that we're alike in some way that makes us different than most other people. I'm not sure how that helps visually identify Se; I suppose if you notice that someone has a habit of rapidly scanning their environment (similar to the way Ne-doms seemingly rapidly scan their minds), chances are there's Se at work.

Personally I love this article because as an Se user these are the kinds of things I can and do notice about people. For example, my ENFP friends totally do the rapid-eye-bounce-thing. Of course the eyes don't reveal _what _we're thinking about, but they can reveal _how _we're thinking.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

petitpèlerin said:


> I would agree with that statement. I don't know who typed Cruise as an ISFJ (it wasn't @_Mindgamess_, as she said she is not the author of this article) but I've always seen him typed as an ISTP, and I think that's correct, and I think he completely acts like one in the video. (Speaking here as an ISTP who has an ISFJ brother.) If there's any Fe in that video it's completely buried under Ti. He doesn't even attempt to establish rapport with his interviewer. He argues exactly the way I would. I mean exactly. My brother would pull out the Ti to argue his position (I've taught him well  ) but only after establishing rapport with the interviewer. To him the relationship is always more important than the matter at hand and he always maintains basic respect for the person, at least until it reaches the point where he is so offended by the person's ideas or behavior that he writes the person off and it's over. Cruise doesn't even attempt to Fe there, he just steamrolls his opponent with reasoning.
> 
> How does Si differ from Se? Se is constantly exploring the environment. It has quick reflexes. Si doesn't look around but inward, as Mindgamess has described better than I can since she uses it and I don't. I can just say about Se that I'm extremely distractible by sensory stimulation: if I hear someone sneeze in class, I automatically turn around to see who; if something moves in the corner of my eye my vision goes straight to it, if I suddenly smell something I'll stop speaking mid-sentence until I figure out what it is and where it's coming from, etc. I'm very much in-synch physically with an ESTP friend of mine: we're both tuned into things going on around us that no one else is. I can see him reading my body language, and I can see him seeing me seeing him reading my body language. It could be an occasion of severe awkwardness but I think it just works out to make us both aware that we're alike in some way that makes us different than most other people. I'm not sure how that helps visually identify Se; I suppose if you notice that someone has a habit of rapidly scanning their environment (similar to the way Ne-doms seemingly rapidly scan their minds), chances are there's Se at work.
> 
> Personally I love this article because as an Se user these are the kinds of things I can and do notice about people. For example, my ENFP friends totally do the rapid-eye-bounce-thing. Of course the eyes don't reveal _what _we're thinking about, but they can reveal _how _we're thinking.


Cruise is definitely not an ISTP, if anything his interview is evidence of weak Ti. What you're seeing there is aggressive and confrontational Fe.

Notice how he makes his points:
- He says Matt's name frequently. "words words words, Matt", "Matt, seeing what I'm saying?", etc. (not those things exactly, but you can see what I mean. He's aggressive in a really personal way.
- He says he said is doing it because he really cares about Brook Shields, and he's doing it for her own good.
- He provides no evidence and his argument makes absolutely no sense. Notice how he claims to know the history of psychiatry but makes zero references to even a single fact.
- He makes arguments by stressing point with verbal intonation. In the begging he talks about electroshock therapy, listen to his voice, he stresses that people are getting treated by being electrocuted. He's manipulating the situation when he does this, he doesn't provide any evidence that this is inherently bad, he's counting on the negative connotation of being electrocuted to convince you. He talks about medications as "drugs", which they are, but he's using the same tone of voice as you would as if you were talking about heroine. "Drugging children with them not knowing", see the manipulation?
- He does the mini Fe/Ti pauses to emphasize his points "Do you know what ritalin is...do you realize it's a street drug?"
- Claims he knows the history of psychiatry and Matt doesn't, yet won't explain himself, he's refusing to have a logical conversation.

If he was a Ti dom or aux like an ISTP or ESTP there is no way the conversation would go like that. It would probably end in 5 minutes, Matt would ask him why he did it and he would give his reason. Instead he doesn't answer a single god damn question.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

I'm willing to consider that he may not be an ISTP. I'm just trying to see where the points you've presented are strong evidence against dominant-Ti use or ISTP-ness in general. I'm capable of using a person's name frequently while arguing with them aggressively. I'm capable of saying I'm doing something for the good of someone I really care about (and I'm capable of really doing it). I'm capable of stressing points using verbal intonation and pauses. I'm capable of "manipulating" my presentation with them. I do these things, they're very basic things, and I don't see how they're specific to any function or type.

When Ti-doms argue they tend not to make references and present facts (that's more Te use) but to reference themselves and their own thinking and their own "rightness", as Cruise does. When I believe I'm right I really don't need anyone or anything else from the outside to support me in it. I know I'm right. Then sometimes I'm proven wrong. Which doesn't bother me; then I just adapt to my new understanding of what's right. And Ti-doms don't always explain themselves very well: they can explain their logic but not make clear everything that has informed it. Communication is not our strength. I see Cruise having the same type as me. Of course if someone can point out stronger evidence of another type and functions I'd be happy to accept it.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> Cruise is definitely not an ISTP, if anything his interview is evidence of weak Ti. What you're seeing there is aggressive and confrontational Fe.
> 
> Notice how he makes his points:
> - He says Matt's name frequently. "words words words, Matt", "Matt, seeing what I'm saying?", etc. (not those things exactly, but you can see what I mean. He's aggressive in a really personal way.
> ...


Yeah, I've typed Cruise as INFJ before based on how he came across in the Actor's Studio and based on an interview I found of him when he had just broken through as an actor. I thought that interview was good because he was young so his other functions wouldn't be as differentiated. He seemed very much like an introverted type with F as a preference to me, and the way he recited his childhood seemed more reminiscient of an Ni perspective. 

If anything, I would say the way he comes across in the interview provided here is more a combination of Se Fe backed up with CP6 behavior. I have no doubt in my mind that Cruise is an enneatype 6.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

petitpèlerin said:


> I'm willing to consider that he may not be an ISTP. I'm just trying to see where the points you've presented are strong evidence against dominant-Ti use or ISTP-ness in general. I'm capable of using a person's name frequently while arguing with them aggressively. I'm capable of saying I'm doing something for the good of someone I really care about (and I'm capable of really doing it). I'm capable of stressing points using verbal intonation and pauses. I'm capable of "manipulating" my presentation with them. I do these things, they're very basic things, and I don't see how they're specific to any function or type.
> 
> When Ti-doms argue they tend not to make references and present facts (that's more Te use) but to reference themselves and their own thinking and their own "rightness", as Cruise does. When I believe I'm right I really don't need anyone or anything else from the outside to support me in it. I know I'm right. Then sometimes I'm proven wrong. Which doesn't bother me; then I just adapt to my new understanding of what's right. And Ti-doms don't always explain themselves very well: they can explain their logic but not make clear everything that has informed it. Communication is not our strength. I see Cruise having the same type as me. Of course if someone can point out stronger evidence of another type and functions I'd be happy to accept it.


As a food for thought - did you ever consider yourself an Fi dom type? Inferior Fe eruptions are very different to what you're describing. It sounds like weak T and more specifically something I can see many inferior Te types do who reject Te so much out of their psyche that they cannot see the importance of referencing to external systems. They deny that part of their own thinking. A strong T type such as an auxiliary or dominant user will always be able to explain their point of view and do so without falling back on F logic to support their position like Cruise is doing here. It's not inferior Fe eruption because that would look... awkward as hell. Not to say that Cruise's aggressive behavior isn't awkward but inferior Fe logic isn't awkward in this kind of way. It's ten times worse because you would see how the emotional appeal would ultimately fall flat since they are relying on their inferior function to get the point across which is akin to what you see happening in inferior T types who try to reason in an emotionally charged debate. Their logic doesn't hold. 

Also, the whole "I'm right because I know I'm right" is an Fi ethical position. Ti doesn't concern itself with right or wrong.

I will try to look out for an inferior Fe eruption in a video to show you the difference. In the meantime, this is a perfect example (probably part because it's exaggerated) of inferior Se backed up with Fi lmao:


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Kind of an example of very weak Fe:





'

A better example of inferior Fe (Dexter), especially the scene that starts at 2:31. That's like inferior Fe dream lol:


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

In some ways I wish I were more Fi-dom but for better or worse I'm stuck with Ti for life. :\ When I say "I'm right because I know I'm right" it's not so much from an ethical or values-based position as I see in my Fi-dom friends but it's that I trust what I think. And they see me as sort of emotionally stoic (or else just void) and extremely rational. In any case I don't have the overwhelming sensitivity they have. I'm one of the most strongly T females I know and developing and using F is work for me. I think maybe it's a Ji-dom thing to have such high confidence in our interior judgments, whether they're Fi or Ti.

I can see your point about Tom Cruise as INFJ. If it's right it would make sense that some mistype him as ISTP and some as ISFJ: the same functions as ISTP and Pi-Fe like ISFJ. I haven't looked too far into it beyond that video and his devotion to Scientology. I do sense that his functions are most likely the same as mine. (I get that even with ENFJs.) He has an ISTP sort of image but he is an actor after all and many Ni-dom guys have a serious sort of fascination with Se: one taught me to drive a motorcycle and another nearly killed me in a car taking a curve too fast.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

petitpèlerin said:


> In some ways I wish I were more Fi-dom but for better or worse I'm stuck with Ti for life. :\ When I say "I'm right because I know I'm right" it's not so much from an ethical or values-based position as I see in my Fi-dom friends but it's that I trust what I think. And they see me as sort of emotionally stoic (or else just void) and extremely rational. In any case I don't have the overwhelming sensitivity they have. I'm one of the most strongly T females I know and developing and using F is work for me. I think maybe it's a Ji-dom thing to have such high confidence in our interior judgments, whether they're Fi or Ti.


You're not describing cognition as much as you're describing persona. I trust what I think too but the question becomes why you do so - what evaluative perspective do you rely on when doing this? Guess my type.


> I can see your point about Tom Cruise as INFJ. If it's right it would make sense that some mistype him as ISTP and some as ISFJ: the same functions as ISTP and Pi-Fe like ISFJ. I haven't looked too far into it beyond that video and his devotion to Scientology. I do sense that his functions are most likely the same as mine. (I get that even with ENFJs.) He has an ISTP sort of image but he is an actor after all and many Ni-dom guys have a serious sort of fascination with Se: one taught me to drive a motorcycle and another nearly killed me in a car taking a curve too fast.


How do you think they are similar to yours? Also, inferior Se doesn't appear as much as being a thrill-seeker necessarily. Check the video I provided of inferior Se and Fi from Soul Eater again:






Inferior Se is more like, woaah, this sense world, where the heck did it come from? This is freaking awesome! kind of deal like you see with Death the Kid here being an INTJ. This sun, it's so yellow, this grass, it's so green, the sky, it's so blue! 

If anything, I think thrill-seeking could be more a result of Ne, seeking action in the present moment and predict the outcomes of those actions. Ni-Se is calmer in a sense. Inferior Ne would be more like, omg, life's wonderful, everything's possible! kind of deal. Also, enneatype sx dominants like myself are also prone to be thrill-seekers although in my case it's also probably a combination of just possessing a pretty high testosterone levels.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

LeaT said:


> You're not describing cognition as much as you're describing persona. I trust what I think too but the question becomes why you do so - what evaluative perspective do you rely on when doing this? Guess my type.


I think maybe I look a lot at persona, because it reveals a lot of cognition and it's accessible to Se-Ni perception. When a person's persona is authentic then I think it really can indicate cognitive type. When it's not authentic, though, I usually see through it. (Nothing unusual: most people can spot a phony.) I know, for example, that both my INTJ and INFJ guy friends are just not as daring and competent in risky or adventurous pursuits as I am, and they sort of admire me for it; in them those things are a much bigger rush, whereas I feel more at ease in my physical environment than they do. When my INFJ friend talks about road trips and adventures and motorcycles, etc., I can see that he wants to see himself as being all maverick badass, when in fact he's rather a homebody, a tortured genius who sees and understands way too much of people and situations, and that's his real strength. My INTJ friend wants to see himself as physically strong and agile, but his real strength is related to the fact that he understands absolutely everything he reads on nearly any subject in profound depth. If either of these guys played up the Se thing and adopted it as a persona they'd be inauthentic. I've always liked to see myself as competent in typical ISTP things and unfortunately I don't really have any strengths besides what is known to be native to ISTP.

Evaluative perspective? Really simply, I take things in with Se and a little bit of Ni and I make sense of it using Ti. At least, that's how it seems to me. I would struggle to explain it any more in depth than that as you NTs seem to be able to do with ease.



> How do you think they are similar to yours?


When I listen to xSTPs and xNFJs talk or see them in action it all flows. When I listen to strong Si users and strong Te users I feel major blockages in my ability to relate to how they're functioning. (Keep in mind that ISTPs are all about understanding how things work - in this case, how people work - and we sort of have a natural drive to feel it out and figure it out: Se-Ni-Ti.) When I listen to strong Ne users and Fi users it's less burdensome and frustrating as dealing with Si and Te, it feels lighter, but I'm very aware that they're functioning in a way that I do not. With xSTPs and xNFJs I just feel a strong affinity with them, no blockages, even when they're strong where I am weak, such as my ENFJ friends.

I'm not saying that I definitely feel that with Tom Cruise, I don't have enough experience even watching him (as himself, not a character) to say. I'm just saying that from that one video I get the sense that that's the case.



> Also, inferior Se doesn't appear as much as being a thrill-seeker necessarily.
> 
> Inferior Se is more like, woaah, this sense world, where the heck did it come from? This is freaking awesome! kind of deal like you see with Death the Kid here being an INTJ. This sun, it's so yellow, this grass, it's so green, the sky, it's so blue!


Agreed. Especially true in the INFJ females I know, but I see some of both tendencies in both.

Love the videos.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

I'd say very _reason_ INJ exercise Se rather than Si in some sense is that Si beholds the way the sensory details of an experience register to the user - the images evoked, etc, etc by them, whereas Ni is supremely uninterested in this perspective -- when an Ni-dominant is considering how an experience registers in him or her, the consciousness will be completely on the intuitive picture evoked, if anything. Otherwise, the experience, I'd imagine, would just be lost. 



As for the little Fi discussion going on here, I think it might be clarifying to say that the picture of Fi seems to very little exclude "stoic" as far as engaging friends, because Fi is so extremely internal a thing.

Also as a remark, I could imagine Ti-Se invoking facts/evidence, simply that Ti-reasoning would be less likely than Te-reasoning to be based on that which can be assessed/evaluated on objective standards.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

bearotter said:


> As for the little Fi discussion going on here, I think it might be clarifying to say that the picture of Fi seems to very little exclude "stoic" as far as engaging friends, because Fi is so extremely internal a thing.


True that. In that sense my Fi-dom friends are indeed stoic, the way they hold fast to their ideals. They see me as stoic in the sense of not being cursed with the profound sensitivity they have. For example, my ISFP roommate struggles to say "no" to people's requests of her time and energy because she sympathizes with how they're feeling. I don't have that dilemma: I say "no" without any pangs of guilt and once they're out of my sight I don't think about it again.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Right, and the way a Fi-dom's sensitivity might differ from that of say, an Fe-dom, is that the Fe-dom's entire outlook is colored by the idea that the objectivity of the situation greater dictates the kind of reasoning/response they may provide, than internal intensity. The Fi-dom might say _NO WAY_ unabashedly regardless the objective situation, much as a Ti dom may reject the dictates of external standards for reasoning. The very fundamental abstract feeling images an Fi-dom turns to in judgment carry deep internal "feeling" personal to them, and if that is not triggered, the objectivity of the situation will tend to have no effect on them.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

@LeaT You have a strange definition of what an inferior would be like LeaT. Not only that, but I would've typed Death the Kid as a Te dom if anything else. One that is also pretty damn Se as well. I mean, just look at his reaction whenever anything ISN'T symmetrical at all. He is more or less the poster child of inferior Fi getting bitchy, and generally treating everyone that doesn't get along with their model of reality like shit. (Or he just has a bad case of OCD)

Also isn't the inferior function supposed to be a very rough spot for anyone in reality? As in they'll just sort of get really indignant and pissy about having to deal with a lot of things. I would also imagine inferior Xe would generally make someone extremely impulsive, but in a way that is extremely wonky and awkward to deal with. Particularly inferior Se more-so than Ne (which comes up as paranoia than anything else).

There is no fascination with the inferior function, just a bunch of negatively charged emotions and awkwardness down there. Even if they do have a good sense of potential that they are hiding beneath what their ego would allow them to see. Though it can get to the point where their inferior function takes over them completely, and they become blinded that their "dominant" perspective is actually the one that they rejected until then.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

LeaT said:


> Also, the whole "I'm right because I know I'm right" is an Fi ethical position. Ti doesn't concern itself with right or wrong.


  Well, as a window into your conception and understanding of type, your post goes pretty far in explaining why you're an INTP who thinks she's an Fi-dominant.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I always thought detecting the feeling function differences between differentiated Fi and Fe types was pretty easy, mainly because these types tend to show characteristic complexes and highly differing levels of subjectivity/objectivity that stand out. For instance, it's very common for the Fe types (all of them) to kind of show a resistence to self-referencing in general (e.g. they tend to not disagree beyond "technical" diagreements - they avoid evaluative disagreements a ton, which might make them seem shallow/fake to the Fi type (sort of like how Ti types tend to view Te types as intellectually superstitious or intellectual materialists) - if you like something, they'll have to reference the collective standpoint to determine their opinion - they won't just automatically have an opinion with a differing basis from yours - they'll just account for what might have objectively went into yours from outside consensus, yet find a way to use this against yours) - they are usually highly focused on what others around them are thinking/doing and not really on what they judge to be "the best way to go for themselves" or "their rights" or whatever. The Fi types often walk around with a kind of bluntness or apathy toward playing up to the standards of the outside world in terms of other people (or just a kind of detachment from the obvious factors of their experiences (to them, their own inner experiences mean more than what everyone is experiencing) - they'll usually avoid commenting on the obvious, like "It's a lovely day" or whatever) - they tend to be highly self-motivated and not prone to perhaps "selling their souls" out to more traditional ideas and sentiments (the quoted is sort of an inferior Ti tendency - might be the person who overquotes and/or over-identifies with some outer enterprise or something, certainly common in organized religion and seen in some Fe doms always focusing on everyone being on board with them - I've had teachers/professors like this - this is NOT Te, contrary to popular misunderstanding - Te is more of the kind of person who wants everyone to live up to their formula, mainly because they largely do not want to deal with anything outside of the formula - I don't think most Te doms could care less if anyone agree with or disagrees with their formulas, which are more of a means-to-an-end for them - it's used more in favor of the self than the object, hence why some of these might show a kind of narcissism at times - that's not really to say that Fe doms are nicer people than Te doms, necessarily, although I'm sure there's a common tendency for both to fill out these stereotypes, not that it really means anything though - frankly, Jung sort of archetypally painted these types as kind of the self-sacrificing guaradians of public values and concerns, just in different ways). I mean, with Fe, you get the person who, according to Jung, follows the "guiding line" of their feeling, so their responses to any irritation are likely to probably seem cold and objective (mechanistic as well, based on the consensus) - they might frankly be a lot more honest about their feelings than the Fi types, who might be concerned about being taken the wrong way or misrepresenting their high ideals. It's not uncommon for the Fe types to be the people who have no problem telling you that you're annoying, but the Fi types might view this as potentially disrespecting the greater hidden values of the person beneath the surface, based on their conceptualizations of the person (if they came to the conclusion that you suck though, then yea, they might give an honest opinion of you when need be). Fe is more like merely responding to experience at face value (in fully differetiated form) - if something you do bugs them, then it's just a problem to be solved (to the benefit of others who feel the same way) and not representative of you on the subjective level (it's not like these don't notice the latter, but it gets downplayed and repressed in them).


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

@JungyesMBTIno

Explain to me the difference between the kind of observations you're making here about personality and the kinds of observations that you dismiss as reflecting "just persona" (re: the gender and Feeling thread). If personality and cognition is fundamentally "unmeasurable" in a psychometrically valid way, how can you make any reasonable conclusions about what a Fi type is like or what a Te type is like? Or to put it back to the question I asked before, where's the line between persona and personality?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

St Vual said:


> @_LeaT_ You have a strange definition of what an inferior would be like LeaT. Not only that, but I would've typed Death the Kid as a Te dom if anything else. One that is also pretty damn Se as well. I mean, just look at his reaction whenever anything ISN'T symmetrical at all. He is more or less the poster child of inferior Fi getting bitchy, and generally treating everyone that doesn't get along with their model of reality like shit. (Or he just has a bad case of OCD)
> 
> Also isn't the inferior function supposed to be a very rough spot for anyone in reality? As in they'll just sort of get really indignant and pissy about having to deal with a lot of things. I would also imagine inferior Xe would generally make someone extremely impulsive, but in a way that is extremely wonky and awkward to deal with. Particularly inferior Se more-so than Ne (which comes up as paranoia than anything else).
> 
> There is no fascination with the inferior function, just a bunch of negatively charged emotions and awkwardness down there. Even if they do have a good sense of potential that they are hiding beneath what their ego would allow them to see. Though it can get to the point where their inferior function takes over them completely, and they become blinded that their "dominant" perspective is actually the one that they rejected until then.


I really disagree about your assessment regarding Death the Kid and your understanding of the inferior. I don't think inferior eruptions must always be seen as something bad and negative. If that's true, I wouldn't Te as I do either. The inferior is not always regarded with suspicion or seen as something dangerous. It can go both ways. Just because Death the Kid has OCD regarding symmetry as a concept, you really don't see him expressing Fi eruptions about anything else. Rather, we have scenes like these that in fact seem rather out of character for him whereas the Fi eruptions regarding symmetry are seen as pretty natural. Obstinate perhaps, but I don't see how his Fi fits the inferior position. I've personally experienced inferior Fi eruptions in Te dominants in debate and Death the Kid doesn't cut it. His Fi isn't, if I am going to put it this way, neurotic enough. 

As a contrast, I could just compare Diethard and Lelouch in Code Geass, the latter an obvious Te dominant which is clear in how he approaches strategy and is even more inclined to disregard anything regarding human emotions over effective solutions. Also, you see Lelouch having pretty wacky Fi moments too, for instance his Fi eruptions regarding his relationship with Suzaku but it doesn't mean it's actually inferior. It's just... bad, being unconscious, but not bad enough for inferior position. Similarly, I can easily imagine Lelouch having a moment Death the Kid had that in that very scene although I can't quite think of one from the top of my mind where he exhibited an obvious inferior eruption. 

Also, I don't think inferior Se would necessarily always result in a need for action. That's forgetting the nature of Se itself which is simply the focus on the sense world in an objective way. Ne can lead to paranoia, but so can inferior Ni, more so than Ne, but inferior Ne can also lead to a sudden amazement about the world's possibilities, as if the world suddenly became "open" conceptually. This experience can be seen as both positive or negative depending on the situation and the person who's experiencing it. 

I really don't think the inferior must always be regarded so negatively. I don't see my inferior that way. 


Teybo said:


> Well, as a window into your conception and understanding of type, your post goes pretty far in explaining why you're an INTP who thinks she's an Fi-dominant.


Because I type as an MBTI INTP because that's the result I get on tests and that's the result people who have taken certificates would tell me. However, in a Jungian sense, Fi-Te fits much better. 

I think this is also pretty much what @_JungyesMBTIno_ is trying to say. We're in the cognitive subforum now, not MBTI. I'm clearly an MBTI NT as evidenced by the thread you did about MBTI feelers experiencing themselves a certain way which I clearly do not relate to.

To provide my reasoning why since it still kind of ties into your post commenting on me, it's simply evaluating and judging what's going on behind surface level. It's not so much about that a person told another person she was rude, therefore it must be this type, rather, it's about looking at the logic underlying said action itself. Did the logic seem based on what the group thinks/feels or was it because the person itself thought it was necessary in order to live up to one's personal ethics? 

You have a theory that explains the principles of how the functions operate within the psyche. It's therefore not that difficult once you grasp said theory to measure and compare how people operate around you against this theory, but that assumes that you are in fact capable of differentiating between behavior and the motivations/logic behind behavior. A lot of people get stuck at behavior aka persona level. She seems like a people-pleaser so she must be an feeler. By that logic yeah, I can't be a feeler because I'm the complete opposite of being a people-pleaser.

The MBTI operates on this logic. If it didn't the test wouldn't focus on asking questions on whether you like being a good party host or whatever. What has that to do with my cognitive functions? Zip. 

I'm retaking the test on mypersonality.info and I can already tell I will score NT about halfway through simply because the way the questions themselves are phrased. For example, this one: 

I am more... tough-minded or soft-hearted

It's pretty obvious what I'll pick and it's not the latter option. It's a question meant to reveal T/F bias in your personality and I'll get T because I don't see myself as soft-hearted. And this is just one example of many MBTI tests that do exactly the same errors. Even Lenore Thomson's test does this which is quite disappointing since I do enjoy her function descriptions.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> For instance, it's very common for the Fe types (all of them) to kind of show a resistence to self-referencing in general (e.g. they tend to not disagree beyond "technical" diagreements - they avoid evaluative disagreements a ton, which might make them seem shallow/fake to the Fi type (sort of like how Ti types tend to view Te types as intellectually superstitious or intellectual materialists) - if you like something, they'll have to reference the collective standpoint to determine their opinion




Yes me in a nutshell {Fe as opposed to Fi comparison}, except I tend to suppress the very fact that evaluation is even a part of the discussion because I'd not know how to handle it if it were.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> make any reasonable conclusions about what a Fi type is like or what a Te type is like?




You can't conclude they must have a certain persona, or that a certain persona reflects that type, but one can illustrate how a certain persona _can_ emerge from a certain cognitive outlook. I'm answering generally - not sure if there's some more particular meaning to "persona" we're exploring here.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Surprise!










And yes, I answered honestly without manipulating the results since I could potentially do that.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

@_LeaT_ I wasn't questioning your type. I apologize if you took my statement that way. I was trying to say something along the lines of "If this is how you understand Fi vs. Ti, it makes sense that you are an INTP who identifies with Fi." 

Your understanding of Fi vs Ti does not match my own understanding, but it makes sense to me that you feel the way you do given your point of view on the matter.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Teybo said:


> @_LeaT_ I wasn't questioning your type. I apologize if you took my statement that way. I was trying to say something along the lines of "If this is how you understand Fi vs. Ti, it makes sense that you are an INTP who identifies with Fi."
> 
> Your understanding of Fi vs Ti does not match my own understanding, but it makes sense to me that you feel the way you do given your point of view on the matter.


Well ok. According to some depending on the definition you use to understand Ti, I _do_ think in terms of Ti, because I'm inclined to think of things as logical structures and the way I write seems deconstructionist. You can even make the point that since I'm so touchy with Fe mush it must be indicative of it being inferior. As an example of another way to understand Ti, I could cite the author Chuck Palahniuk whose writing style reeks of this, being overly detail-oriented. 


> On a large enough time line, the survival rate for everyone will drop to zero.





> You buy furniture. You tell yourself, this is the last sofa I will ever need in my life. Buy the sofa, then for a couple years you're satisfied that no matter what goes wrong, at least you've got your sofa issue handled. Then the right set of dishes. Then the perfect bed. The drapes. The rug. Then you're trapped in your lovely nest, and the things you used to own, now they own you.


For example, and this is a comparison to some of my fiction:


> _You suffer from depression,_ he said. _You need to deal with your experiences, work with them. Your insomnia is just a defense mechanism._





> She had studied every crack, year ring, branch spot and other dots and stains very carefully during the past hour.





> As the machine is working in its typical frantic manner I watch the steam slowly soar towards the ceiling. I can hear some rats being skittish outside my apartment and I pour the dark liquid into a coffee cup.


Also out of curiosity, so according to your understanding of the theory then, what type am I?


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

Cellar Door said:


> Cruise is definitely not an ISTP, if anything his interview is evidence of weak Ti. What you're seeing there is aggressive and confrontational Fe.
> 
> Notice how he makes his points:
> - He says Matt's name frequently. "words words words, Matt", "Matt, seeing what I'm saying?", etc. (not those things exactly, but you can see what I mean. He's aggressive in a really personal way.
> ...


I very much agree with this list. His points are more emotionally driven and weakly logically supported. None of the Ti dominants I know would EVER argue like this. It's not that Ti people "don't care," but Cruise is trying to make people feel bad for what is happening with very emotionally charged words (drugging children, electrocution, these drugs are on the street) rather than supporting his anti psychiatry stance with logic on why it is bad. His arguments are riddled with Fe and weak Ti. 

Other than eye movements, by the things he says, it's hard to argue for or against Ni / Si from this video alone. I would have to look at more instances of things he says / does to decide (and even then, I don't know him personally.) I just know as an Si dom, every Si dom I know, including myself, does that EXACT stare. I know that's not "real proof" and I get that.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Mindgamess said:


> Yes, I've seen this more with INFJs than with INTJs (hiding them) however, in my experience, Ni types tend to be some of the most secretive and most hidden behind a veil. Many of them that I've talked to feel like they can read into peoples souls or just get a very intense vibe about people, so naturally, they are worried that other people can do the same with them, so they try to hide.
> 
> Also, the interesting thing you bring up about hiding, yes, you can hide body language, facial expressions, you can act differently, but you can't change your function make up. And if function use really IS tied to eyes (unverified by science, but seeming true from my experiences), then they can't hide that. They may make some of them less obvious, but your strongest functions and usually at least one perceiving function will show. Not many people can hold a conversation without looking away (to think about something)at least one time while talking. They will be using the same functions to act differently. I can act like an INFJ if I tried, but I'd still be an ISTJ using Si, Te, Fi, and Ne. My eyes will still give me away when I dig into my brain for information using Si.


Yeah, like someone else has already said, the whole 'left brain, right brain' theory is quickly losing credibility in psychology, so the whole 'right brain types look left, etc' doesn't really fly well with others like me: even reading _Personality Type_, I'll usually skip over the whole brain structure bit when searching for information on the sixteen types and their functions. Personally, I catch myself glancing my eyes in several directions in between words, so draw your own conclusions.

*shrugs* The INTJ I've talked to always have a focused, intense look when communicating, and occasionally will 'zone out' when paying attention. It's not uncommon for them to be completely unaware of how they come across to others, and ISTJ sometimes have this problem, too. 

How do your eyes give you away? If I were to use that list as a guide, I'd relate most to the Se description, but again - I wonder if that might be enneagram related?


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Yeah, like someone else has already said, the whole 'left brain, right brain' theory is quickly losing credibility in psychology, so the whole 'right brain types look left, etc' doesn't really fly well with others like me: even reading _Personality Type_, I'll usually skip over the whole brain structure bit when searching for information on the sixteen types and their functions. Personally, I catch myself glancing my eyes in several directions in between words, so draw your own conclusions.
> 
> *shrugs* The INTJ I've talked to always have a focused, intense look when communicating, and occasionally will 'zone out' when paying attention. It's not uncommon for them to be completely unaware of how they come across to others, and ISTJ sometimes have this problem, too.
> 
> How do your eyes give you away? If I were to use that list as a guide, I'd relate most to the Se description, but again - I wonder if that might be enneagram related?


Yeah, I don't put stock in that either. Experience has told me, direction is meaningless.

The INTJ look you are describing would make a lot of sense. The focused, intense look would be indicative of Te. The occasional spacing out look would be them using Ni to intuit some information. INFJs are typically more aware of how they are appearing than the INTJS, however, the INTJs are more likely to adjust their body language and try to mask their intentions especially if they get a "bad vibe" from someone else (two male INTJs have expressed this same exact sentiment and the INFJ as well).

I couldn't tell you if that was enneagram related at all, as typing someone's enneagram is just something I don't even TRY to do unless I know them intimately well. Even then, you can never be sure. A lot of those fears / desires are on a subconscious level. I also don't know as much about it as I do MBTI or cognitive functions.

My eyes would do that Si look / Ne bounce when I was trying to think of past, detailed information, or if I was trying to make an intuitive connection, no matter how much I was adjusting my speech / body language / actions. That's what I mean by my eyes would give me away.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

WamphyriThrall said:


> *shrugs* The INTJ I've talked to always have a focused, intense look when communicating, and occasionally will 'zone out' when paying attention. It's not uncommon for them to be completely unaware of how they come across to others, and ISTJ sometimes have this *problem*, too.


Problem? How is this a problem?


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

St Vual said:


> There is no fascination with the inferior function, just a bunch of negatively charged emotions and awkwardness down there. Even if they do have a good sense of potential that they are hiding beneath what their ego would allow them to see. Though it can get to the point where their inferior function takes over them completely, and they become blinded that their "dominant" perspective is actually the one that they rejected until then.


There is certainly a fascination with the inferior. I have it myself, and I've witnessed it in others in all the functions as inferiors. In my experience the inferior function behaves sort of "manic-depressively": the highs are high and the lows are low. It's off or it's on, but when it's on it's sort of screechy and staticky and it uses a ton of power.

When you have an inferior like Fe you either become a total recluse in your adolescence or you learn to use to your inferior function, since your dominant one will serve you not even a little bit in getting along in the world of people.



LeaT said:


> Also, I don't think inferior Se would necessarily always result in a need for action. That's forgetting the nature of Se itself which is simply the focus on the sense world in an objective way. Ne can lead to paranoia, but so can inferior Ni, more so than Ne, but inferior Ne can also lead to a sudden amazement about the world's possibilities, as if the world suddenly became "open" conceptually.


An ISTJ professor of mine said recently that he thinks "there's a little genius in each of us". It was partly what he said and partly the charming, child-like way he said it, like the world _was _open to possibilities and he was open to discovering them. Sounded just like fascination-with-inferior-Ne to me.

Ne paranoia is sort of "imagine all the things that could go wrong". (Which seriously limited the things I was allowed to do as a child, with my ISTJ father.) Ni paranoia is more an overwhelming fear of one particular thing gone wrong, or a general "the future is bleak". Se also has its paranoia: fear of danger in the environment. And my Fe is paranoid: I imagine that people secretly dislike me, and the more I like someone the more paranoid I am that they could never like me. So, my point is, I think the inferior is tied to both fascination (the high) and paranoia (the low).

Right on about inferior Se. I lived for a few years with an unhealthy INFJ roommate and I'm intimately acquainted with a whole range of good and bad manifestations of inferior Se.



LeaT said:


> Also out of curiosity, so according to your understanding of the theory then, what type am I?


Since I didn't respond the last time you asked me, I think you're typing yourself accurately. I find you're more analytical and precise (Ti) than anything, and definitely NT.

We've talked before about how Fi can show up in Ti-doms, just like Se can show up in Ne-doms (for example, some ENFP friends of mine are natural athletes), and some Fe can show up in Te-doms, etc. When your dominant orientation is interior judging, for example, it's not such a leap to go from Ti to Fi sometimes. I use Fi, too, much more than any of my other shadow functions. Si and Ne are nearly painful for me to use and I don't like Te but I can use it when I force myself (it just switches the orientation of dominant Ti). Fi I can use without effort, really.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

petitpèlerin said:


> There is certainly a fascination with the inferior. I have it myself, and I've witnessed it in others in all the functions as inferiors. In my experience the inferior function behaves sort of "manic-depressively": the highs are high and the lows are low. It's off or it's on, but when it's on it's sort of screechy and staticky and it uses a ton of power.
> 
> When you have an inferior like Fe you either become a total recluse in your adolescence or you learn to use to your inferior function, since your dominant one will serve you not even a little bit in getting along in the world of people.





> An ISTJ professor of mine said recently that he thinks "there's a little genius in each of us". It was partly what he said and partly the charming, child-like way he said it, like the world _was _open to possibilities and he was open to discovering them. Sounded just like fascination-with-inferior-Ne to me.


Agreed. The black-and-whiteness doesn't just apply to the lows and we are oblivious to the function the rest of time. It also applies to the highs. The fact that Death the Kid acts if as he's never seen the world before in the video I linked perfectly demonstrates the high impressions of inferior Se. It's what Jung said when it comes to Te dominants and how many of them will in fact work to improve society. It's the inferior Fi high pushing them out seeing the good of humanity and people which is very contrary to dominant Te judgement which usually completely disregards this element. 

Also, knowing an ExTJ myself, I can safely say that I've seen enough inferior eruptions in all shapes and forms to tell it apart from tertiary eruptions. When his values are crossed in debate he will be very obstinate and stubborn, and it's interesting to note that these values are often something positive to him like seeing the importance of all life. I've also seen him donate money to charity which I think is also a good example of his inferior Fi at work, or similarly, laugh at people and their misery because he can't put himself in their shoes. The inferior may be very black and white in its appearances, but it can appear in many ways.


> Ne paranoia is sort of "imagine all the things that could go wrong". (Which seriously limited the things I was allowed to do as a child, with my ISTJ father.) Ni paranoia is more an overwhelming fear of one particular thing gone wrong, or a general "the future is bleak". Se also has its paranoia: fear of danger in the environment. And my Fe is paranoid: I imagine that people secretly dislike me, and the more I like someone the more paranoid I am that they could never like me. So, my point is, I think the inferior is tied to both fascination (the high) and paranoia (the low).


Heh, yeah. I think most people think this is inferior Ne forgetting the high part of it when the inferior Ne type realizes there's more to this world and it's so open and full with possibilities outside all this sense-stimuli they've gathered over the years into Si impressions. Stability isn't always necessary, sometimes change over a night can be plenty of fun. I think inferior Ne types are the ones most likely to do very randomly spontaneous actions and carry them through without seeing the consequences of them. Let's get married on Hawaii, who cares about the money and the costs. Let's buy a new house, let's quit our job. That this kind of think is exemplary of the inferior is that a strong Ne type would be able to process the chain of events further than the very immediate possibility-seek. They will see that if you quit your job, you have no money so where are you going to get it from?


> Right on about inferior Se. I lived for a few years with an unhealthy INFJ roommate and I'm intimately acquainted with a whole range of good and bad manifestations of inferior Se.


I've been speaking to an inferior Se type for many months now so I've gotten quite acquainted with how it appears, too.


> Since I didn't respond the last time you asked me, I think you're typing yourself accurately. I find you're more analytical and precise (Ti) than anything, and definitely NT.
> 
> We've talked before about how Fi can show up in Ti-doms, just like Se can show up in Ne-doms (for example, some ENFP friends of mine are natural athletes), and some Fe can show up in Te-doms, etc. When your dominant orientation is interior judging, for example, it's not such a leap to go from Ti to Fi sometimes. I use Fi, too, much more than any of my other shadow functions. Si and Ne are nearly painful for me to use and I don't like Te but I can use it when I force myself (it just switches the orientation of dominant Ti). Fi I can use without effort, really.


Why do you find Te difficult unless you force yourself but Fi not? 

Personally, I think the highs of my inferior can express itself in that I can be very fascinated by people who are very good long-term planners such as chess players and I might run off to try to do it myself, or be very fascinated by things with very intricate logical structure that runs at maximum efficiency and a disruption to said structure will make it fall apart. I wonder if that's why I like the enneagram theory. 

To me, inferior eruptions can be that when I'm pissed off enough, I'll be logically obstinate and I can super-impose structure on people and set up very black and white rules. This is my way or the highway kind of deal.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

> Also out of curiosity, so according to your understanding of the theory then, what type am I?


ENFJ.

Haha, no, I have no reason to doubt your typing as an INTP.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

petitpèlerin said:


> We've talked before about how Fi can show up in Ti-doms, just like Se can show up in Ne-doms (for example, some ENFP friends of mine are natural athletes), and some Fe can show up in Te-doms, etc.







> sometimes. I use Fi, too, much more than any of my other shadow functions




I'm curious actually - do you find it easier to reason from the Fe or Fi perspective? Or is it roughly equal? 

What I'm getting here is that there are two sides to say, Fi dominance (as an instance of Ji). The "F" and the "i". If one is extreme in favoring both ends, it seems Ti will be rejected, because one's Ji is ruled by F. But here I'm seeing a suggestion that only one out of the two constituents is necessarily completely clear, and technically that makes some sense to me. In the descriptions, I see a clear statement of similarity between the reasoning processes, except that in one case the objects of reasoning are _felt_. And here what seems to be suggested is that such a distinction at times never was made totally to the exclusion of the other in the actual individual. 

I'm sure there are people with the interpretation that if the F v. T in Ji is not clear, then perhaps neither is the person's dominant, but I don't necessarily buy that until there's a more viable notion of dominant suggested than the framework adopted, and reason for its viability.


----------



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

So what's the difference between Se and Ne? Could you clarify what you mean by "bouncing" and "darting" (as noted in your descriptions).


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

Wh1zkey said:


> So what's the difference between Se and Ne? Could you clarify what you mean by "bouncing" and "darting" (as noted in your descriptions).


They're similar in theory but different once you see them, the important thing to remember is that Se, the eyes will be darting because of PHYSICAL STIMULUS. Things that are going on around them. REMEMBER, ALL people look at things around them, but an Se type will do it A LOT and they will also use Ni eye movement from time to time. There are lot better tells for Se than eyes in my opinion though.

Ne bounce will happen when they are excited about an idea, and you will see it a lot when people go into a "stream of conscious" style of speech. Also, the eyes don't look like they're darting to look at anything in particular. They just move side to side rapidly. Think of it as their brain is making "mini connections" which their eyes are showing them moving from idea to idea to idea in order to find a connection or pattern.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> Loved it! Thanks for posting this. In case you haven't seen this yet:
> 
> http://www.cognitivetype.com/visualreading/


Wow. This is really good stuff. It fits with everything I already understand but makes things clearer and takes them to another level. On the bright side I'm revamping everything I know about cognitive typing. On the other side, I just realized that I've had my favorite person in the world typed wrong: new friend, slowly working on getting to know and understand him better. Clearly I wasn't doing such a great job. Wow. This makes such perfect sense of things I couldn't quite make sense of before and that I just chalked up to differences in culture. I was so wrong. (<-- words a T-dom does not like to hear herself say) Okay. Time to overhaul friendship strategy. Damn. How does an ISTP win over an ENTJ? ESTP I could handle, ENTJ I'm not so sure. (<-- inferior Fe stressing and putting Ti to work)


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

I find this to seem like a very inaccurate way of typing people.
The Ne bouncing for example could be close to eliminated if the person is brought up in a family where they are thought that it is rude and that they should keep their eyes on the person they are talking to.
Also, I've been told by some Ne users that they just do it because they find it uncomfortable to stare into the eyes of other people.
I've also been in discussions with a clear ENFP who would just stare into your eyes without moving them, only reaction was some small movements to not seem rude and some blinking.

Actually, most people keep their eyes steady in a discussion and most people start to get their eyes moving when they are trying to think etc.


----------



## petitpèlerin (Apr 23, 2012)

LeaT said:


> It's what Jung said when it comes to Te dominants and how many of them will in fact work to improve society. It's the inferior Fi high pushing them out seeing the good of humanity and people which is very contrary to dominant Te judgement which usually completely disregards this element.
> 
> Also, knowing an ExTJ myself, I can safely say that I've seen enough inferior eruptions in all shapes and forms to tell it apart from tertiary eruptions. When his values are crossed in debate he will be very obstinate and stubborn, and it's interesting to note that these values are often something positive to him like seeing the importance of all life. I've also seen him donate money to charity which I think is also a good example of his inferior Fi at work, or similarly, laugh at people and their misery because he can't put himself in their shoes. The inferior may be very black and white in its appearances, but it can appear in many ways.


Good to know. Right now I need to study up on ENTJ. (See my last post.) But anyway, this makes incredible sense of the ExTJs I know, including my ESTJ mother, and helps me type my ENxJ friend who I couldn't quite place. (ENTJ.)

Which got me thinking. What if you're cognitively an ENTJ? What if your strong identification with Fi is indicative of it as an inferior function? The way you say you react when you're angry (Fi) is typical of ENTJ under stress. Whatever your type I think you're a T-dom and an NT but if you say that functionally you're more Fi-Te than Ti-Fe and inferior Fe doesn't really fit quite right and neither does INTJ then maybe ENTJ . . . ?



> Heh, yeah. I think most people think this is inferior Ne forgetting the high part of it when the inferior Ne type realizes there's more to this world and it's so open and full with possibilities outside all this sense-stimuli they've gathered over the years into Si impressions. Stability isn't always necessary, sometimes change over a night can be plenty of fun. I think inferior Ne types are the ones most likely to do very randomly spontaneous actions and carry them through without seeing the consequences of them. Let's get married on Hawaii, who cares about the money and the costs. Let's buy a new house, let's quit our job.


Haha! This is so true of my ISTJ dad and makes perfect sense of why he once uprooted us and moved us halfway across the country for no really good reason. (He thought his reasons were good. My mother disagreed and didn't want to move but went along with him, fortunately.) And it makes sense of why he suddenly decides he needs a new used car every couple years when the ones they have are working fine, and he's normally the most practical guy on earth. I guess every once in a while inferior Ne just has a little brain explosion and the rest of us just have to adapt.



> Why do you find Te difficult unless you force yourself but Fi not?


Maybe simply because I grew up with an ESTJ mother who thought that the (missing) key to my success was getting myself organized, and something inside of me resists everything Te and Si. But I think it's more basic than that. I think maybe it's just a bigger leap and takes more effort to extrovert an introverted judging function (Ti->Te) than it does to switch to the other introverted judging function (Ti->Fi). Maybe likewise it's harder for an ENxP to use Ni (Ne->Ni) than Se (Ne->Se). This is definitely true for the ENFPs I know.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Actually, most people keep their eyes steady in a discussion and most people start to get their eyes moving when they are trying to think etc.


That's the point. Most people are going to do something with their eyes when they're thinking (they are using their cognitive functions). They don't do it all the time when talking. It's not an eternal state of Ne bounce or Ni drift, SI stare, etc. They're little flashes here and here. If you talk to someone a lot, you will start to notice eye patterns if you're paying attention to it. Most people don't pay attention to / notice those kinds of things though, so people aren't trying to hide them as often.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Mindgamess said:


> That's the point. Most people are going to do something with their eyes when they're thinking (they are using their cognitive functions). They don't do it all the time when talking. It's not an eternal state of Ne bounce or Ni drift, SI stare, etc. They're little flashes here and here. If you talk to someone a lot, you will start to notice eye patterns if you're paying attention to it. Most people don't pay attention to / notice those kinds of things though, so people aren't trying to hide them as often.


What I specifically meant was that there was too little difference to actually see any benefit from it.
It would be more reliable to listen to how they talk and what they say in the time it takes to observe enough eye movement to determine the type of a person.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> What I specifically meant was that there was too little difference to actually see any benefit from it.
> It would be more reliable to listen to how they talk and what they say in the time it takes to observe enough eye movement to determine the type of a person.


Not sure how many times I'm going to have to keep saying this, but this is not meant as a standalone method. It is a method to help you CONFIRM people's type. You use it in CONJUNCTION with other methods of typing. Sometimes you may notice it before you've decided what functions they use and it can give you a jumping off point. Sometimes you will notice it after you've decided a set of functions of types and then you see the corresponding eye movements as confirmation.

It just is an ADDITIONAL set of data you may find useful in HELPING determine type.


----------



## TheRevaN (Mar 15, 2012)

50 cent is ESTP...... maybe ESFP ...... also he plays a lot of theatre for marketing reasons and that's why he seems so strange; definetely not ISFP! definetely not introverted!


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

TheRevaN said:


> 50 cent is ESTP...... maybe ESFP ...... also he plays a lot of theatre for marketing reasons and that's why he seems so strange; definetely not ISFP! definetely not introverted!


Based on what? Post the interview you're thinking of.


----------



## TheRevaN (Mar 15, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> Based on what? Post the interview you're thinking of.


based mainly on his music.... his movies..... some interviews I watched in the past ( too lazy to search for them now )

If I remeber something important I will tell you. Until then go and watch " Get rich or die trying " and " Before I self distruct " . That is a very good start.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

TheRevaN said:


> based mainly on his music.... his movies..... some interviews I watched in the past ( too lazy to search for them now )
> 
> If I remeber something important I will tell you. Until then go and watch " Get rich or die trying " and " Before I self distruct " . That is a very good start.


What about the interview that was posted in this thread? So you're argument is based on the fact that you don't think an ISFP can make the music or movies he's made? Aggressive energy is an Se thing, not an ESTP thing.


----------



## TheRevaN (Mar 15, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> What about the interview that was posted in this thread? So you're argument is based on the fact that you don't think an ISFP can make the music or movies he's made? Aggressive energy is an Se thing, not an ESTP thing.


Fi doms are highly unlikely to deal drugs. For a lot of reasons. And I never said that that agressive energy is an ESTP thing. Actually Te doms are more aggressive. I would have typed 50 cent as ENTJ or ESTJ, but he has that go with the flow attidude specific to extraverted percievers. Also he is extraverted, because all his life he adapted to the environment fully and willingly. Introverts adapt to the environment only when they have no other choice (and not even then completely).


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

@Mindgamess
Here's a vid of Patrick Stewart. He's typed as an ENTJ on some website or other. I can see a lot of Te-browrise, Ni eyes, and Fi asymmetrical smile there. What do you think?


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

FlaviaGemina said:


> @_Mindgamess_
> Here's a vid of Patrick Stewart. He's typed as an ENTJ on some website or other. I can see a lot of Te-browrise, Ni eyes, and Fi asymmetrical smile there. What do you think?


I can see what you're talking about quite clearly here. He does a few obvious Ni stares around 1:50, 2:26, 3:03. I rarely see Si / Ne people look up when thinking.

He also does have the die hard Te look. Expressionless, very severe look, faint smile here and there when he is talking about something that is important to him.

The only thing that throws me off in this video is that he does a lot of side stares which can *mimic* the look of Si. It is possible he has trained himself to do Ni to the side as it's been pointed out that it can look like they are spacing out and not listening. But by the looks of this video my guess would be Ni Te, and I'd analyze from there, compiling as much relevant data as possible when typing someone.

Also, Someone brought up an interesting point about shadow functions and I'm not sure how i feel about that in this context, but it's an interesting thought.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Mindgamess said:


> IThe only thing that throws me off in this video is that he does a lot of side stares which can *mimic* the look of Si. It is possible he has trained himself to do Ni to the side as it's been pointed out that it can look like they are spacing out and not listening. But by the looks of this video my guess would be Ni Te, and I'd analyze from there, compiling as much relevant data as possible when typing someone.
> 
> Also, Someone brought up an interesting point about shadow functions and I'm not sure how i feel about that in this context, but it's an interesting thought.


I think I sometimes do Ni sideways. Or I'll just look at the floor. I have trained myself not to stare at people too much because it intimidates them. Actually, when I stare I'm not even looking at _them_ most of the time but making up stories or images about what they are telling me. Alternatively, my staring can be a result of an alliance of evil between Se and Ni. I'll get interested in some random detail of a person's clothes and stare at it and make up stories. E.g. "Oh... a grey woolly tie! Where did he find that? Did he excavate it from a huge pile of clothes that's been sitting in his attic since the 60s?"


I will have to observe my husband, he's an ISTJ and I think he does that sideways thing sometimes, but he also 'looks at his nose' or at the ceiling a lot when he's concentrating. (Only when he hasn't got study materials in front of him.) Or sometimes he'll sit on the sofa, point his nose in the air and move his eyes sideways as if he was scanning the room. I thought that was Ne, but when I ask him what he's thinking about it's usually reminiscing and being nostalgic. 
 It was me who mentioned shadow functions


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

LostFavor said:


> I think this fits with what you're describing (1:23 about):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, I just wanted to come back to this post.
In your opinion Zuckerberg has Te-Fi in his top 4 functions. Yet, Pod'Lair identifies him as Nai'Xyy which would correlate to INFJ.
They would probably say that Zuckerberg is overmodulating with his Ti, reining in his Fe, that's why he has this robotic face but that he nonetheless has aware expression (around the mouth), which is Fe not Te according to them. Fe is warming up to the front, Ti is cooling to the right. Te is cooling to the front, Fi is warming up to the right.
Fe warm articulation/Te cool articulation.

What I'm trying to say is, if everything was so clear cut we should be all able to see the same thing right away and settle on a type for any person. And yet we don't. :sad:

EDIT: He looks like an INTP to me.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

yedra said:


> Ok, I just wanted to come back to this post.
> In your opinion Zuckerberg has Te-Fi in his top 4 functions. Yet, Pod'Lair identifies him as Nai'Xyy which would correlate to INFJ.
> They would probably say that Zuckerberg is overmodulating with his Ti, reining in his Fe, that's why he has this robotic face but that he nonetheless has aware expression (around the mouth), which is Fe not Te according to them. Fe is warming up to the front, Ti is cooling to the right. Te is cooling to the front, Fi is warming up to the right.
> Fe warm articulation/Te cool articulation.
> ...


Yeah, I get what you're saying, but honestly ALL personality typing is completely subjective. Our understanding of cognitive functions is ALSO subjective. None of any of the things we talk about here can actually be scientifically proven to be accurate because we cannot see into others' brains. It may not be that clear cut in videos of people I've never met before, but in my personal life, I see the clear cutted-ness of it because I've seen it before over and over again. My perception of what is going on (coupled with some pretty detail oriented SI) I'm able to identify similarities pretty easily once I've seen them once or twice.

This system may not work for many people. And it may be impossible to deduce with certain individuals. I know a LOT about MBTI and functions, but there are some people I interact with on a daily basis that for the life of me, I can't pin-point their MBTI.


----------



## Yedra (Jul 28, 2012)

Mindgamess said:


> Yeah, I get what you're saying, but honestly ALL personality typing is completely subjective. Our understanding of cognitive functions is ALSO subjective. None of any of the things we talk about here can actually be scientifically proven to be accurate because we cannot see into others' brains. It may not be that clear cut in videos of people I've never met before, but in my personal life, I see the clear cutted-ness of it because I've seen it before over and over again. My perception of what is going on (coupled with some pretty detail oriented SI) I'm able to identify similarities pretty easily once I've seen them once or twice.
> 
> This system may not work for many people. And it may be impossible to deduce with certain individuals. I know a LOT about MBTI and functions, but there are some people I interact with on a daily basis that for the life of me, I can't pin-point their MBTI.


Yeah, I know what you mean. I just wish this theory could evolve and be more exact as I see a lot of potential in it. The possibility of the psyche and the body being intertwined like that seems really plausible.


----------



## Aquarian (Jun 17, 2012)

*alternative reason to attend to visual cues by cognitive function*

So it's one thing to try to read people's cognitive functions _without_ knowing their type. But I have another use for knowing visual cues related to cognitive function: to assist in communication and understanding when we already know each others' types.

I started looking at visual cues related to cognitive function to try to resolve a source of tension. My INFP mate kept pointing out this _thing_ I (INFJ) do with my eyes. It coded as something problematic, in her understanding. It was helpful to identify that this is not this thing I do as some sort of personal quirk indicating absence (I am NOT absent), but rather a Ni-drift thing that Ni-doms like me do. This gave me a way to be able to speak descriptively about what's happening inside me when this is happening, and it gave us both a way to look at differences in how we each move in interaction. It shifted what seemed like an individual thing into a broader context and that has been very useful.

I just wish those people who did the NiFe video and others would come out with the FiNe one already! Is their pause in new video production indicative of a halt to their project?


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

@Mindgamess, I got my husband to watch the interview with Patrick Stewart, because my husband knows next to nothing about MBTI. So I wanted to get the opinion of someone who doesn't have any preconceived ideas.
I did tell him that Patrick is an ENTJ (which doesn't mean much to my husband, so I just said a bossy extravert  ).

Here's what he said (I have bolded all the emotions my husband saw in him because I wonder whether someone who doesn't have Te and Fi would recognise them so easily/ describe them in the same way my husband did)
:
around 2.03 He seems to be evading her, he is looking down
around 2.43 he tries to be very serious, he's thinking about what he should say
around 4.21 He rambles quite a lot, he's trying to crush her arguments, he wants to show off his knowledge but not in an annoying way
around 8.12 *Now he's getting really excited*, he's trying to say a lot at the same time, he's trying to get it all into the right order, he's *very enthusiastic*; you can tell that apart from his Shakespeare work, this [Picard] is his role, *he really loves it
*around 15:12 In this you can see that he's extraverted because he takes up a lot of space, he sits with his legs open and gestures a lot, *he likes to sit there and talk about himself*; maybe I would sit a bit more modestly
around 18.08-38 [I asked my husband to watch out for the eyebrows and tell me what they mean] He tries to make gestures with his eyebrows.... I don't know if he wants to make a point. It's hard for him to talk about it [his abusive father] in public, *it pains him*....
[I asked him whether it sounds like facts or like feelings]... it sounds more like facts

*[At the end I asked him whether Patrick seems cold or warm] He seems warm and open and tries to include you. He doesn't want to block you out. [Me: What is it that makes him seem warm?] It's his gestures, I'd say. His gestures look a lot like hugging, like he wants to embrace you with his gestures. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FlaviaGemina said:


> @_Mindgamess_
> Here's a vid of Patrick Stewart. He's typed as an ENTJ on some website or other. I can see a lot of Te-browrise, Ni eyes, and Fi asymmetrical smile there. What do you think?





Mindgamess said:


> I can see what you're talking about quite clearly here. He does a few obvious Ni stares around 1:50, 2:26, 3:03. I rarely see Si / Ne people look up when thinking.
> 
> He also does have the die hard Te look. Expressionless, very severe look, faint smile here and there when he is talking about something that is important to him.
> 
> ...


I agree with NiTe if I were to read him. The reason for this is part because the Fi isn't that strong a force in him overall as it is in Te dominant types. Tertiary seems to be a nice fit. Also listening to him talking, it becomes evident he's not Te dominant because while he does talk a lot about Te-Fi, if you listen to him, you hear that it's overall more Ni.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

FlaviaGemina said:


> @_Mindgamess_, I got my husband to watch the interview with Patrick Stewart, because my husband knows next to nothing about MBTI. So I wanted to get the opinion of someone who doesn't have any preconceived ideas.
> I did tell him that Patrick is an ENTJ (which doesn't mean much to my husband, so I just said a bossy extravert  ).
> 
> Here's what he said (I have bolded all the emotions my husband saw in him because I wonder whether someone who doesn't have Te and Fi would recognise them so easily/ describe them in the same way my husband did)
> ...


What does this mean though? So does your husband think he's an introvert or extrovert? Also, ExTJs can be very warm and passionate too, depending on what kind of. I also think it's important to remember that Stewart is old in this interview and he would be at a point in his life where he's most likely quite comfortable with his own cognition, both conscious and unconscious. 

I think it would be relevant to look at how he appeared when young for a comparison. Generally speaking, I think young adults are the easiest/best to type because young adults tend to have a clearly differentiated dominant function and a preferred auxiliary although not always differentiated. But we're after the dominant function first when typing, auxiliary is less relevant anyway.


----------



## Mindgamess (Mar 23, 2011)

LeaT said:


> What does this mean though? So does your husband think he's an introvert or extrovert? Also, ExTJs can be very warm and passionate too, depending on what kind of. I also think it's important to remember that Stewart is old in this interview and he would be at a point in his life where he's most likely quite comfortable with his own cognition, both conscious and unconscious.
> 
> I think it would be relevant to look at how he appeared when young for a comparison. Generally speaking, I think young adults are the easiest/best to type because young adults tend to have a clearly differentiated dominant function and a preferred auxiliary although not always differentiated. But we're after the dominant function first when typing, auxiliary is less relevant anyway.


This is so true. The older a person is, usually the harder it is to type them. They have developed more and their functions are much less obvious. Also, if they were married, they may mimic their partner in certain aspects. (My ISFP dad does this a lot with my ISTJ mom [married for 30 years])

Usually someone in their late teens-to late 20s are the easiest to type as they aren't as developed and have a strong bias for their dominant functions.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

At LeaT, my husband thinks Patrick Stewart is extraverted. 
Looking at your arguments, I'm somewhat undecided between ENTJ and very confident INTJ. 
However, there are two passages that make me believe he's ENTJ: When the interviewer asks him whether the abuse really happened he says something like "That was the reality of the situation". Now the way he says that does have an emotional undertone, but on the other hand it sound very Te-dom like in that it doesn't question reality. At this point of the interview, he just says that these things are real. (Of course later on, he says that it's wrong, but he mainly stresses that something can be done about it. INTJ would probably a) launch a tirade about what should be and all the things that are wrong in the world b) find it more difficult to convince themselves that their volunteering will have any effect.
Also, he says he's a Labour supporter throughout and suddenly he says "It [presentation skills] worked for Thatcher". --> He's interested in whether things work or not. INTJ: Is it OK to copy Thatcher's style? It did work... but then she's a witch... if you copy her style, doesn't that mean you become like her in some way? Like you'd start to believe that style matters more than content or something????"

Anyway, this is an interesting discussion. I'll try to find vids of when he's younger.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I think T doms like to lie to themselves that they never evaluate, but I find that's a lie most of the time (I mean, ever spend enough time around some Ti doms who go on their anti-social rants about people or who get touchy and competitive when topics of evaluation come up, and you know it's not true - I mean, they usually tend to be amazed when people aren't feeling the same way as they do). Some even play this victim mentality around evaluation, even though they may never see it in themselves or bring themselves to see it (like, you get the Te doms who think no one can ever persuade them of anything without harming their freedoms, or you get the Ti doms who play the whole "I'm being misunderstood" spiel over and over again for reasons I don't think logic can answer).


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Yedra said:


> Ok, I just wanted to come back to this post.
> In your opinion Zuckerberg has Te-Fi in his top 4 functions. Yet, Pod'Lair identifies him as Nai'Xyy which would correlate to INFJ.
> They would probably say that Zuckerberg is overmodulating with his Ti, reining in his Fe, that's why he has this robotic face but that he nonetheless has aware expression (around the mouth), which is Fe not Te according to them. Fe is warming up to the front, Ti is cooling to the right. Te is cooling to the front, Fi is warming up to the right.
> Fe warm articulation/Te cool articulation.
> ...


That's why it's important that models get tested against reality. My experience, and the models that I use, tell me that Zuckerberg is probably an example of Te-Fi. I don't claim to know it as fact, nor would I ever based on viewing someone in an interview. 

I don't really believe in speed typing or celebrity typing. In the latter case, I'd have to know the celebrity in person. People put on a lot of fronts for various reasons - one would need extensive experience with confirmed people from every type to start recognizing what's happening around the fronts.


----------



## Anonymous Attributes (May 3, 2017)

Premises are meant to be tested.

The palimpsest that follows will address oculesics and no other nonverbal communication. The effect on the OP is hopefully one of evanescence when introduced to proper oculesics, i.e. NLP.

I don't know any of those other labrats well enough in the videos save for Tom Cruise the 3rd one down who will be the only one I can therefor address by type which I will do first. Tom is hardly an ISFJ, (Si Fe Ti Ne) but better fits the ISTP (Ti Se Ni Fe)

A person uses their cognitive functions based on the ones that come naturally to them, their habitude. Example, writing with your preferred hand as opposed to your non preferred hand. When you want to write you automatically without thinking pick up the pen with your preferred hand.

Tom Cruise loves driving fast cars, he is a jet pilot, he rides motorcycles, rock climbs, I remember one time he almost tipped a car he was racing and laughed about it, he does his own stunts still at the age of 55, he loves the thrill and the speed, the danger. In his last Mission: Impossible film one of his stunts was holding onto the side of a plane while it took off.

This easily is recognizable as a natural Se user, not Fe or Si for that matter, but were talking auxiliary function here which is a persons goal oriented function, which says a lot when you flip it.

If he is an Fe user, well basically an Fe auxiliary function manifests as the urge to apply one’s understanding of a given situation in a way that will satisfy the needs and desires of others.

But if Se is the auxiliary function, Se basically manifests as the desire to experience and
experiment with the sensory aspects that the user has determined to be the
most enjoyable or useful. Se Auxiliary users tend to have an awareness of their bodies and are often times found in in some kind of sport or athlete.

16p also typed him as an Se auxiliary user (ISTP) https://www.16personalities.com/istp-personality Scroll down to the characters. I am not using 16p as proof of this.

Here forward I will go chronologically.

So what about the other videos, are they typed right? Frankly I do not know and don't have the interest to find out. But knowing how easily people mistake type based far too often on stereotyping and lack of knowledge of the functions im in much doubt as to the rest.

These kinds of eye patterns are better understood through NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming)
This video will prove as an example of how it works, not as proof of NLP. 




NLP is understood and attested by con-men, magicians, mentalists, police, investigators, detectives and body language/oculesics professionals (Such as myself) and is used as a tool to help derive at more information than is usually being communicated on the surface.

Knowing this, a person is "apt" to show these eye patterns based on
Creating Images,
Remembering Images,
Creating Sounds,
Remembering Sounds,
Sensory/Feeling emotion.
and Inner mental voice and dialogue.

Some people show more eye movement than others.

NOTE: Just because you look to a certain direction does not mean you are doing one of the aforementioned.


For the first unfortunate test subject (Jesse Jackson) the writer of the post says "When they do this, you will see they move their eyes generally to the upper left corner [direction isn't THAT important] in a kind of dreamy like look"

To address this, the upper left corner (From his perspective) is associated with remembering images understood through NLP and has nothing to do with Ni directly. (Reversed for left handed people) It's amusing that the writer puts emphasis on the "dreamy look" but the direction inst that important. How unscientific.

My aim here is to get at something real, not dreamy looks, or sparkling eyes based on function. Circumspection please.

For Tom Cruise the writer says that he looks to the "upper or lower left just like Ni" but again, looking to the upper left is associated with remembering images, and lower left is associated with inner mental voice and dialogue. It is more likely this is whats happening here. 

Now for the poor sap Catherine Keener, I'll save you yet Catherine Keener don't you worry.

The writer says "Here is a video of Catherine Keener (INFP): Okay look at that "awwww" movenment Cathrine Keener has at 0:15. That quick little shrug and what she did with her face was her checking her Fi with how she feels about working with Sean Penn."

Not another generalist facial expression. Someone save me.

While NLP may not an exact science, nevertheless this is a good example of NLP eye pattern recognition, I encourage the reader to watch the Catherine Keener video:





click the cog wheel and click speed and go to 0.25 speed, set the video at 14 seconds in and hit play. Right after she opens her eyes she is looking more to the top right (Her left) than anywhere else for a split moment. After that if you play the video in real time you will see that they began talking about her friend looking to the top left is associated with remembering images presumably of her friend.

If you want to keep going, from 19 to 21 seconds in the video she is asked a question about the script, she looks to the right (Her left - Remembering sounds) what exactly we cannot say, was she remembering the sound of her friends voice? Or reading the script aloud? Or did she merely see something of screen? Exploring the last option is important as well which the writer did not do. Some circumspection is do.

The writer corroborates this information himself with memory and eye direction correlation by saying and I quote "As an ISTJ, I catch myself doing an Si eye movement all the time. Si is usually an emotionless "fact check" where you look to the side when you need to remember some specific information." This "ISTJ" indirectly proves my point.

I'll conclude at Tyra Banks since the ISTJ had nothing to say about her eye direction but kinesics and micro expression, which is equally important as the study of oculesics but is not my focus for this post

He went on expressing his impotence "I don't particularly find there to be really telling gestures for Ti vs Te and Fi / Fe." Because there probably aren't any, facial expression and eye patterns most likely are not directly related to type and cognitive function, although I might suggest that certain types remember images/sounds/mental dialogue etc more often than others, but that needs to be tested.


----------

