# A video about celeb doppelgangers



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

11 Celebrity Doppelgängers That Will Make Your Mind Melt [VIDEO]

If you disregard the whole sensation-factor they try to make with that video (trying to speak to inferior intuition, much?) what I find more interesting is how this can be seen from a socionics VI perspective. Would there for instance be some kind of evidence to support that the celebs presented in this video and presented as doppelgangers are actually the same type? If there is, that would strongly point towards there being something to VI. 

And I want to point out that yes, there is a random component to how human end up looking genetically, but there is also some organization in that chaos clearly. VI could be one way to understand that, though I have no degree in physical anthropology that would probably help in this regard.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> 11 Celebrity Doppelgängers That Will Make Your Mind Melt [VIDEO]
> 
> If you disregard the whole sensation-factor they try to make with that video (trying to speak to inferior intuition, much?) what I find more interesting is how this can be seen from a socionics VI perspective. Would there for instance be some kind of evidence to support that the celebs presented in this video and presented as doppelgangers are actually the same type? If there is, that would strongly point towards there being something to VI.
> 
> And I want to point out that yes, there is a random component to how human end up looking genetically, but there is also some organization in that chaos clearly. VI could be one way to understand that, though I have no degree in physical anthropology that would probably help in this regard.


And why do you think physical characteristics are correlated with personality? There is no previously discovered information that shows they are correlated, unless you count male vs female physical characteristic + personality. Physical characteristics are determined by genes. Personality is mostly (and by mostly I mean probably >99% if it were to be somehow calculated) determined by environment. This is well known and empirical.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> And why do you think physical characteristics are correlated with personality? There is no previously discovered information that shows they are correlated, unless you count male vs female physical characteristic + personality. Physical characteristics are determined by genes. Personality is mostly (and by mostly I mean probably >99% if it were to be somehow calculated) determined by environment. This is well known and empirical.


And why wouldn't personality part be determined by genes? Introversion-extroversion is nowadays usually interpreted as having strong genetic factors, and that is definitely one dimension most personality theories today find important when it comes to understanding personality and it's definitely not 99%. Even human psychology, especially regarding what Dario Nardi is doing, is clearly not just generated by the environment but has genetic factors involved. Also, how do you define personality and personality? I am of the belief that socionics first of all deals with a psychological dimension since it attempts to understand and categorize psychological type that I find to be overlapping but not necessarily equal to personality. 

By the way, I am not making any claims that physical characteristics _are_ correlated with personality. I however, am open to the idea because I find that people who are good at VI-typing tend to be somewhat accurate with their typing even when I do my more traditional cognitive typing. If our typings overlap, then there is clearly a pattern that I personally find interesting. The idea that I was posing here, so if the people presented in the video are actually the same type, what do we do with this information? Considering the amount of people involved, I wouldn't consider them chance only though of course, it can be extended to a greater study to rule that out.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> And why do you think physical characteristics are correlated with personality? There is no previously discovered information that shows they are correlated, unless you count male vs female physical characteristic + personality. Physical characteristics are determined by genes. Personality is mostly (and by mostly I mean probably >99% if it were to be somehow calculated) determined by environment. This is well known and empirical.


Personality shows strong genetic influence, actually.


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

@_Teybo_ , @_ephemereality_

If they're all twins, then they most likely grew up in the same household and were inseparable from birth, especially if female. There was a pair of black twins a year ahead of me in high school. You couldn't tell them apart if it weren't for their hair styles because the acted the same. Plus, epigenetics falls under the category of environmental. 

"Psychological dimension" and personality overlap a lot, in my view. To the point where I view sociotypes of being a rough outline of one's personality.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

ThatOneWeirdGuy said:


> @_Teybo_ , @_ephemereality_
> 
> If they're all twins, then they most likely grew up in the same household and were inseparable from birth, especially if female. There was a pair of black twins a year ahead of me in high school. You couldn't tell them apart if it weren't for their hair styles because the acted the same. Plus, epigenetics falls under the category of environmental.
> 
> "Psychological dimension" and personality overlap a lot, in my view. To the point where I view sociotypes of being a rough outline of one's personality.


"Genetic and environmental influences on the continuous scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: an analysis based on twins *reared apart*"


----------



## ThatOneWeirdGuy (Nov 22, 2012)

Teybo said:


> "Genetic and environmental influences on the continuous scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: an analysis based on twins *reared apart*"


I stand corrected due to my tendency to skim.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

For the record, twin studies are a good methodology for teasing apart genetic and environmental influences, but they would be a very poor methodology for examining correlations between physical morphology and personality. Two people can have very similar morphologies but have no strong genetic relation, as is evidenced by the "doppelgangers" in the OP.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> For the record, twin studies are a good methodology for teasing apart genetic and environmental influences, but they would be a very poor methodology for examining correlations between physical morphology and personality. Two people can have very similar morphologies but have no strong genetic relation, as is evidenced by the "doppelgangers" in the OP.


Correlation doesn't mean causation. These twins will look close to identical, but it is not implied that it is their genetics for their physical appearance that also gives rise to their personality.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Inguz said:


> Correlation doesn't mean causation. These twins will look close to identical, but it is not implied that it is their genetics for their physical appearance that also gives rise to their personality.


:laughing: Is there an echo in here?


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> :laughing: Is there an echo in here?


Uh? So you admitted to your first post in this thread to being utterly pointless in the post that I quoted? That confused me.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Inguz said:


> Uh? So you admitted to your first post in this thread to being utterly pointless in the post that I quoted? That confused me.


Let's break this down. First, we agree on this principle:



Inguz said:


> twins will look close to identical, but it is not implied that it is their genetics for their physical appearance that also gives rise to their personality.


Which is what I was getting at in the post that you quoted, the one in which I said that twin studies would be an improper methodology for investigating correlations between facial morphology and personality, precisely because we know that twins are correlated on other genetic factors that are more likely to directly influence personality.

The phrase "correlation does not imply causation" is a bit cliche, and the real thing to remember is that correlation is just a measure of "things sharing a pattern". The important bit about twin studies is that researchers specifically targeted which factors (environment vs. genetics) to include in the correlation, and thus can have a better idea of which things share patterns.

It's a question of methodology and careful research design.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> Let's break this down. First, we agree on this principle:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The only thing that you have brought up evidence for and have concluded is that nature seems to play a bigger role than nurture in shaping of personality. You have not yet made any claims on how appearance relates to personality. When I said that correlation doesn't imply causation, it was directed at the suggestion that the close to identical appearance of the twins would have a sort of connection to personality. This is not valuable in the slightest. The genes that codes personality may not code appearance. As identical twins share almost all DNA, making any assumptions other than what effect nurture has on upbringing or when your personality is shaped is pointless.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Inguz said:


> The only thing that you have brought up evidence for and have concluded is that nature seems to play a bigger role than nurture in shaping of personality.


Correct.



> You have not yet made any claims on how appearance relates to personality.


Correct.



> When I said that correlation doesn't imply causation, it was directed at the suggestion that the close to identical appearance of the twins would have a sort of connection to personality. This is not valuable in the slightest. The genes that codes personality may not code appearance. As identical twins share almost all DNA, making any assumptions other than what effect nurture has on upbringing or when your personality is shaped is pointless.


We are agreeing on every point. I don't know what your issue is here??


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> We are agreeing on every point. I don't know what your issue is here??


Why are you even writing in this thread if we agree?!? What was the point of your post besides saying that I made a cliché statement?


----------



## aniso (Aug 14, 2013)

Interesting idea. I don't know if it's anyhow related to genetics or anything - i'm not a biologist -, but I HAVE noticed that some people of the same type remind me of each other. Sometimes I can't even put my finger on what is the similarity in their faces, but it definitely is there.

Though sometimes the similarity is quite conspicuous. Like - I watched the news one evening and suddenly realized that the newscaster reminds me of an acquaintance of mine. Funny thing is that they really are of the same type and I didn't come up with it right in that moment.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

osina said:


> Interesting idea. I don't know if it's anyhow related to genetics or anything - i'm not a biologist -, but I HAVE noticed that some people of the same type remind me of each other. Sometimes I can't even put my finger on what is the similarity in their faces, but it definitely is there.
> 
> Though sometimes the similarity is quite conspicuous. Like - I watched the news one evening and suddenly realized that the newscaster reminds me of an acquaintance of mine. Funny thing is that they really are of the same type and I didn't come up with it right in that moment.


Mannerisms? I have found similarities there too.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Inguz said:


> Why are you even writing in this thread if we agree?!? What was the point of your post besides saying that I made a cliché statement?


Why don't you ask yourself that question, eh?

I can't answer for what you think you are accomplishing. As for me, I was responding to ThatOneWeirdGuy's claim that personality had little genetic basis.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

osina said:


> Interesting idea. I don't know if it's anyhow related to genetics or anything - i'm not a biologist -, but I HAVE noticed that some people of the same type remind me of each other. Sometimes I can't even put my finger on what is the similarity in their faces, but it definitely is there.
> 
> Though sometimes the similarity is quite conspicuous. Like - I watched the news one evening and suddenly realized that the newscaster reminds me of an acquaintance of mine. Funny thing is that they really are of the same type and I didn't come up with it right in that moment.


I have to admit that my ESE grandmother does look very similar to Filatova's ESE portrait and my LII dad does look like the LII one, though I wonder how similar I look like the ILI one. The one I see the most similarity in is the EIE though, as I had an EIE coworker at work and she looks exactly like the EIE portrait, heh. Even the same haircut. As for myself, I can see some similarities perhaps, but I think ethnicity and age makes it difficult to draw any strict comparisons.


----------



## aniso (Aug 14, 2013)

Hmm, haven't tried comparing people I know to Filatova's portraits. Took a quick glance at the sketches and...I think some people I know may look like the pictured ones  ESE, for example. Though I know two ESE's that could be a mix of the pictured ESE's and ILE's faces.  Also, I think I recognize one person in the EIE portrait. Delta (my) quadra portraits...don't know if I share some similarities with the IEE pictured there. I know a LSE who looks a bit like the pictured one. EII's...maybe some of the ones i know look similar...haha, attending an art school, I think I have met quite a number of them 

*TL;DR*...some people I know remind me of the Filatova's pictured ones, some - don't. 

I guess that yeah, ethnicity and age makes a difference. Though I have heard that you can type an ethnical group or the native people of some country...like the average (stereotypical?) one...though that wouldn't be precise anyhow...so maybe it's better not to try it?


----------

