Four Perception Functions

[@myrtila]

I've been interested in personality types for SO long (5 years now) and I finally found a system that matches what I observe about people rather than trying to impose certain stereotypes on them. And now I am pretty sure I'm an infp in Model 1. I even typed my friends and family based on this and it's crazy how much it helps me make sense of all these different personalities.

[@qwerthp9572]

"GREAT" One word that can describe you and the work you do

[@あぜると]

Great explanation! However, the examples that you gave for Pi were all from elderly men. I think, it would’ve been better if you had more variation in age and gender.

[@CognitiveTypology]

thanks! and right, that's a good point. in the coming videos of Ni-leads and Si-leads, i'll introduce some female samples and some young samples, to paint a fuller picture. :)

[@あぜると]

Sounds cool! I can't wait for more videos! 😁

[@Universal_Cymbol]

@@CognitiveTypology I would like to see more varied videos as well. Thank you for considering. And thanks for your continued research.

[@phishcatt]

@@CognitiveTypology I'd not chose politians/cult leaders as samples either, as those have been schooled about their body language.

[@matgay]

I recognized Ni in my 21 year old female best friend, so the examples are fitting eitherways.

[@RetroXRicardo]

Love to see the types that contrasts my personality. Learning SO much from your videos 👍

[@kellymachado3154]

I like your explanations and they have helped me a lot, but one think you should take into consideration is to have someone with smaller eyes like people from east asia for example. I have a hard time identifying my type of eyes.

[@igormendonca4026]

Gigi Hadid: Se(Ji?) Kristen Schaal: NeFi I--- Seelie Paul Rodriguez: SeTi I-I- Adaptive Eric Cornell: NeFi I-I- Seelie Kendji Girac: SeTi I--- Adaptive Phil Lester: NeFi I--- Unseelie Nelson Mandela: SiFe II-- Adaptive Acharya Rajneesh: NiFe I--- Directive George W Bush: SiTe I--- Seelie Rupert Sheldrake: NiFe I--- Directive Thomas Moore: SiFe II-- Adaptive Thomas W Campbell: NiFe I--- Directive

[@philliplockhart5853]

Man I was just getting ready to ask you for this - the final one.

[@AmyMarie1992]

That's such an interesting point about different types in different systems. In a way, they really can seem to compliment each other and possibly both be "right" depending on which aspect of a person they measure! In other words, it's sort of like being a certain type by birth and another by development!

[@CognitiveTypology]

right! each set of definitions someone can come up with to divide humans through, offers different perspectives on humanity, and can add some value in terms of describing you. There are an infinite number of these you can make, and people are making new models every year. I'm not at all against this activity, and I think it's valuable to complement them, so long as we don't confuse them for each other. I've written a bit more about having a Complementary viewpoint in this article: cognitivetypology.com/index.php?title=Complementarity

[@maryannmicillo8107]

Great work, as usual😊

[@christineschreiber5073]

great! good work. the process is making sense, its plausible and convincing. I got 20 of 20… good teacher👍😝

[@kindauncool]

36:45 entp needing ni/se's grounding.

[@matgay]

I have got Ne energy, when talking to friends, Si, when talking to strangers. ESFP here.

[@fishiesgaming]

Due to my wandering gaze i often concerned that people think i don't listen to them properly or i don't want to meet their gaze. So sometimes i tend to exaggerate my listening/thinking movement and it kind of became a habit lol

[@timefortee]

You'd look so cool if you added longer hair to the pirate beard. This man means business!!

[@sierrarose6211]

Great job in breaking these signals down! 👍

[@farzanarimi2763]

I have a question: Are all the certified persons in your typing team well-rounded enough in the whole concept of differentiating? Because, as far I know, you are striving to develop an 'objective' typing system; but if someone doesn't have their concept well-rounded, there is every possibility (in my opinion), to make conclusions due to 'subjective' perceptions. For example: "His eyes don't look like looking 'through' like 'Ni'. So, he seems to be 'Si'." Also, for example, a person needs to have enough intelligence and strong idea to properly differentiate between literal and associative focus. I hope, I will get an answer form you.

[@CognitiveTypology]

Great question. The entire effort of certification is designed precisely to give that well-roundedness, and to quantify visual differences in non-ambiguous language. We move away from vibe-typing and 'feel' based (subjective) assertions, and go towards quantitative statements. We need to be able to objectively point to every feature we're talking about, rather than rely on qualia. It's only by doing so that we could properly achieve 90%+ independent consensus on samples. Otherwise a reliance on such vague/subjective terms could not achieve independent agreement. Granted, this level of visual nuance isn't as apparent in the videos released so far here, since they don't actually represent the rigor we employ in the private classes, and how deeply we actually go into things. These are just introductory materials, but we get into the nitty-gritty in the course. :)

[@aryam86467]

Can identical twins with identical eyes have the same personality?

[@igormendonca4026]

from what i understand, it seems that identical twins generally have the same vultology

[@chadnash7837]

I actually don't see your definitions of sensing and intuition as being very different from Jung's understanding. While he did sometimes refer to sensing as just the sense organs he also completely does a 180 and describes it in much the same manner as you did here. For an example he says this about sensation: "But in a psychological sense it has nothing to do with sensation. The psychological function of sensation is the perception of reality, and the standpoint of the sensation type is simply the standpoint of facts. When a person practices recognition of facts, he is doing something for his sensation; but taking a hot bath or painting himself with iodine has nothing to do with it. That is an intuitive misconstruction, he is mixing up the sensations of the body with the principle of sensation, which is really the principle of facts. Among the Latin peoples the recognition of sensation, of reality, expresses itself in their language, and sentiment and sensation can never be mixed up. But they are badly mixed up in the German language". I honestly think his college lectures gives a better idea of what he thought of sensation and intuition than psychological types for whatever reason. But anyway great system. I look at this as a true continuation of Jung's work on the subject. Another interesting quote is the following: "To sum up, we have considered four kinds of realities: (1) static reality that comes to us through sensation; (2) the dynamic reality revealed by intuition; (3) static images given us by thinking; (4) dynamic images sensed by feeling." From his college lecture on analytical psychology. Lecture 16 for the full chapter in (www.amazon.com/Analytical-Psychology-Notes-Seminar-Seminars/dp/0691098972) for the full context. I would say static reality and dynamic reality is very similar to your definition of sensation and intuition.

[@CognitiveTypology]

Fascinating! Yes, I did pick up that more "facts" based description of S in some passages, and I like those the most. But it's somewhat obscured by other things he says. I will have to get that book, thank you for the reference. It looks like Jung and I are even more closely aligned than I thought! :) It's all the more reason I really think CT is quantifying the same phenomenon that he actually saw.

[@anormalguy511]

I'm gonna be honest here you give me extreme INFJ "vibes" honestly. I guess mbti wise you would be typed as an INFJ by others but in reality you are an INTP. Really interesting.

[@timefortee]

You must not know actual INFJ irl if you say that. He does NoT give INFJ vibes at all. Online "INFJs" seem to be mostly mistypes, plus most popular "INFJ" KZbinrs aren't even INFJ. So much misleading information.