A lot of people dismiss my DCNH-VI theory described in this thread. Please vote...
Yes, this correlation between DCNH subtype and facial structure seems to exist.
There is certainly a correlation but I can't confirm the correlation JohnDo describes.
No, I don't see a correlation though I'm familiar with DCNH and experienced in V.I.
I'm not really interested in DCNH subtypes.
I'm not really intersted in V.I.
I'm neither interested in DCNH subtypes nor in V.I.
Facial Structure
A lot of people dismiss my DCNH-VI theory described in this thread. Please vote...
No. There's some correlation between facial structure and type. DCNH isn't even that much accepted.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Don't forget to take notice of the curvature of the forhead.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
@Maritsa: Why don't you vote then? "Not interested in DCNH" probably...
I voted.Originally Posted by JohnDo
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I think 50% of the people on this forum are interested in V.I.
I think 20% of the people on this forum are interested in physiognomical V.I.
I think 10% of the people on this forum are interested in physiognomical V.I. and DCNH.
That's the problem: My method works but only 10% are interested...
Your theory matches to my facial features.
I am sceptical but I will take your theory into consideration. It's novel but seems plausible.
My opinion hasn't changed.I think there are some interesting loose correlations between facial structure and base type which bear further investigation, but I haven't yet seen enough evidence to convince me of a link between facial structure and DCNH subtype, and certainly not any sort of 1:1 correlation.
Quaero Veritas.
Round forehead=round brain on the other side=round frontal cortex=highly adaptive emotion to logic center=Feeler type.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I will post top view pictures monday.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
You don't even use our hypothetical DCNH descriptions, do you? I've been using them for 3 months and it really makes sense.My opinion hasn't changed.
Let's undertake an interesting experiment:
1.1) Assume that the hypothetical DCNH descriptions are absolutely accurate.
1.2) Use them to determine the DCNH subtypes of all people whose main types you know for sure.
2.1) Assume that the V.I. pattern I discovered is absolutely accurate.
2.2) Use it to determine the DCNH subtypes of all people whose main types you know for sure.
3.1) Compare the results of step 1 with the results of step 2.
3.2) Tell me the correlation in %.
No, it is also based on the fact that men and women do not only behave differently but also look different. The same should be true for types and subtypes, of course.
The pattern I discovered is also convincing because of the following example:
Ni-INTj and Ti-INTp can easily be mixed up if you observe their behaviour. The base function (Ni or Ti) is hard to determine because of the subtype. The interesting point is: Ni-INTj and Ti-INTp not only behave similar but also look similar! Same goes for all other types!
Te-INTj ~ Ti-ENTj --- rectangular
Ne-INTj ~ Ti-ENTp --- square
Ti-INTj ~ Ti-ISTj --- round
Ni-INTj ~ Ti-INTp --- oval
Why don't you post top-less pictures of yourself?
Now (thanks to Krig) there is another interesting article about DCNH available which should make typing easier.
The experiment I described above could now be conducted as follows.
1.) Type all the persons you know well by using these general descriptions which are certainly more or less accurate even though I don't know Vera Borisova and the translator doesn't speak Russian.
2.) Type all the persons you know well by using these specific descriptions which are at least a good approximation even though they were not written with DCNH in mind.
3.) Type all the persons you know well by using this method of face detection which is not acknowledged but I guarantee it works.
Most people here should be able to do that. Don't be lazy...
ESFj twins...
http://www.elle.com/var/ezflow_site/...Zeta-Jones.jpg
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
That's nothing new, only an update. One can even say that the team of those experts is great at doing nothing.
Well, socionics works in "mysterious" ways, so does criminology and I'm quite fed up with being called a criminal, bank robber, MMA fighter, etc.
I'm having Maritsa call the FBI right away, that's just unbearable.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
