Visual Reading: The Eight Cognitive Functions

quite interesting; although it has its potential pitfalls, like many other methods, MBTI included...
 
Brilliant effort, I hope your project grows and comes through with tangible results. If verifiable, this would have awesome effects on the mental health counseling industry and in planning more comprehensive, organic curricula for students.

A few questions, @Auburn .

1. Do functional cues change between types with the same functions? (An ENFJ's compared to an INFJ's or INTP's Fe, for example.)
a) if so, used for different purposes?
b) if not, how do you verify a particular type?

2. Could abnormal functional growth/repression simulate mental disorders?
a) if so, would direct neural stimulation of associated brain regions help?
(like the brain's area 25 being zapped to relieve depression)

3. How would one read someone who is sensory deprived? (i.e blindness)
a) Could these limitations actually limit functional development,
or would one such simply develop functions in a different manner (probably more abstractly) than usual?
 
Last edited:
The "Spritely Voice" of Fi is an interesting and useful observation. "lack of emphasis on words".

Also interesting is the Ti/Fe combination: "Ti users will alternate between appearing lifeless one moment, then charming and passionate the next". I find myself doing this emphasis/non-emphasis cycle a lot.
 
1. Do functional cues change between types with the same functions? (An ENFJ's compared to an INFJ's or INTP's Fe, for example.)
a) if so, used for different purposes?
b) if not, how do you verify a particular type?
Click to expand...
Yes. The functions emit somewhat different variations of themselves depending on their ordering. Most notably, the first and fourth function emit the greatest percent of cues.

2. Could abnormal functional growth/repression simulate mental disorders?
a) if so, would direct neural stimulation of associated brain regions help?
(like the brain's area 25 being zapped to relieve depression)
Click to expand...
It's actually quite interesting that you mentioned this.
We have found that each of these different configurations (types) manifests a different form of distress/illness. In other words, some disorders are the specific ways certain types go crazy. But we have not yet tapped too deep into neuroscience so we can't say more than that. We do, however, plan to release several articles on the DSM-IV and Personality Disorders, to raise awareness of the fact that many so-called disorders are actually just a person's functions reacting in a different way to the environment, and medication can be counterproductive.

3. How would one read someone who is sensory deprived? (i.e blindness)
a) Could these limitations actually limit functional development,
or would one such simply develop functions in a different manner (probably more abstractly) than usual?
Click to expand...
Even being blind, we could still narrow a person's type to two or four easily. But yes, it would take a psychoanalysis to fully confirm such a person. All of our reads are done in two parts: physiognomical analysis and psychoanalysis.
 
Interesting.. I read all descriptions..
For me, the Fi bit is pretty spot on..I'm definitely not very graceful and make some of the most godawful awkward facial expressions (or so I'm teased) in certain circumstances.. easily readable.
So pretty much except for the "Spritely voice."
I think I have a pretty low and even voice.

I also identified with bits of Fe..
Definitely with "Smile with me" and the "Empathetic Pull."

I have to consider this more. I'm not familiar with typing by expressions and gestures.
I'm going to see if I can discern those I know just for fun.
 
Last edited:
Radiant Shadow said:
b) if not, how do you verify a particular type?
Click to expand...


About Physiognomy methodology; currently, it's still in its experimental stages and there's no way of verifying anything with 100 % accuracy. What is currently being done is creating a repository of observation focused on contrasting two kinds of information and attempting to find a consistent pattern. We are using our abstract knowledge of cognitive functions, what we can infer about an individual using this knowledge, and what can be observed through the senses in the individual's body (face, voice, posture) to look for this consistency.

The main thing Physiognomy postulates is that cognitive functionality arises from the body (brain), and that it's most likely genetic, at least in part.


The possibility of the mis-atribution withstanding; we're looking into creating a system for checking whether the pattern is attributed to the right cause. We'll probably going to create questionnaires in the future, but the most interesting and fundamental part of the research will be going into the field of neuroscience. The ultimate goal is to conduct testing using modern non invasive techniques for studying brain responses, activity and anatomy, similarly to what Dario Nardi is doing.


---


If anyone else has questions you can direct them at me, although I can't guarantee to be able to answer everything. I'm more of a general logistics/research/miscellanous stuff person of the team, and am not up to date on actual visual reading techniques as much as the other members are, but I can probably cover general questions about the theory.
 
Last edited:
The link is dead.
Error - 404

Sorry, this page has been removed or does not exist any longer.
Click to expand...

-Jah
 
I've tested this with friends and it doesn't work very well. Looks impressive but fails in application.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top