Gerhard Schröder (former German Chancellor) and Jaques Chirac (former French President): C-ESE
Fuckin Rumsfeld (a war criminal) called them Old Europe
Rumsfeld is known as Idiot America in Germany and France since then.
Gerhard Schröder (former German Chancellor) and Jaques Chirac (former French President): C-ESE
Fuckin Rumsfeld (a war criminal) called them Old Europe
Rumsfeld is known as Idiot America in Germany and France since then.
Last edited by JohnDo; 01-02-2010 at 07:50 PM.
Lenin and Putin: H-LII (most people will diagree but this is my opinion)
@Krig: Don't dismiss my idea too early. While we only seem to have a type correlation of about 20% it should be emphasized that our dichotomy correlation is about 75%. That is quite good I think...
With a dichotomy correltaion of 75% the type correlation is:
0.75*0.75*0.75*0.75 = 0.32
So if two good socionists meet they should have a type correlation of about 30%. No joke, just mathematics.
Last edited by JohnDo; 01-13-2010 at 03:00 PM.
Rectangular.Originally Posted by JohnDo
No man. It isn't that simple. Why are people always mistaking low-quality correlations for a high-quality ones? Is it due to laziness? It's what gave birth to astrology and similar crap. A lot of the problem can be attributed to generalizing when there's not the time, nor the place i.e. generalizing where the sample size simply forbids one to do so..sometimes sample being N=1.(I guess it's just the way how brain works) It's what gave birth to astrology, hateful nationalism and to similar crap.Why is Visual Identification so difficult?
In my opinion the reasons are:
1.) People try V.I. without having enough experience.
2.) People try V.I. without using subtypes.
3.) People try V.I. with only two subtypes in mind.
The first problem is obvious: you can only use V.I. successfully if you have already typed a lot of people so that you can compare them to the person you want to type.
The second problem occurs because people of the same type can look very different. On the one hand the appearence of a person not only depends on type but also on the appearence of his parents and his race. On the other hand it depends on subtypes. Distinguishing between different main types is not like distinguishing between cats and dogs! It is rather like distinguishing between different cars!
A Toyota, a Honda and a Hyundai may look very similar - like an LII, an ILI and an ILE. There are some Toyotas that look like Hondas. There are some Hondas that look like Hyundais. There are some LIIs that look like ILIs. We have to use subtypes, there is no other choice...
There is the system of accepting and producing subtypes which is used by many people on this forum. The problem is that people of one and the same subtype still may look very different so V.I. is difficult. Another problem is that Gulenko and Meged/Ovcharov seem to describe different persons! The descriptions are self-contradictory in a way...
Some people on this forum had the idea that the descriptions could be used to get an idea how DCNH subtypes look like. Here is the thread. This makes sense, indeed.
Now where is the solution of the V.I. problem?
During the last months I thought a lot about DCNH subtypes and how to distinguish between them by V.I.. I found a really interesting fact that should solve many or most problems - under the condition that people are familiar with the DCNH system.
1.) All subtypes with a strengthened base function have round faces.
2.) All subtypes with a strengthened creative function have square faces.
3.) All subtypes with a strengthened ignoring function have rectangular faces.
4.) All subtypes with a strengthened demonstrative function have oval faces.
Examples:
I am Ni-LII. Ni is LII's demonstrative function so I have a rather oval face (compared to other LIIs).
Victor Gulenko is Ne-LII. Ne is LII's creative function so he has a rather square face (compared to other LIIs).
Dick Cheney is Te-LSE. Te is LSE's base function so he has a rather round face (compared to other LSEs).
George W. Bush is Se-LSE. Se is LSE's demonstrative function so he has a rather oval face (compared to other LSEs).
Michael Schumacher is Ti-SLI. Ti is SLI's demonstrative function so he has a rather oval face (compared to other SLIs).
Barack Obama is Fi-IEE. Fi is IEE's creative function so he has a rather square face (compared to other IEEs.
I really hope there are some people on this forum who can confirm my observations.
And no, I don't want to talk about the types of the above mentionend celebrities.
Last edited by Trevor; 01-10-2010 at 05:20 PM.
You can easily prove that! Just tell me the DCNH type of 10 celebrities where it doesn't fit...
It is due to confirmation bias. But in this case I'm sure of the correlation I described...
True.
Last edited by JohnDo; 01-10-2010 at 06:36 PM.
I cannot do that because, in my opinion, in most of people, DCNH subtype is changeable. Therefore making absolute DCNH categorization of all people quite futile. Of course, you can categorize them once and for all in an absolute way, by spliting DCNH continuum into two, perhaps 50-50, categories. However, given that people are (so it seems) normaly distributed on DCNH dichotomy continuums it often makes the task futile(EDIT: 02/06/2010 - or not). DCNH relativity level is just repulsing. Only place where it's proper is the place where all relativity is proper => regarding relations between objects.You can easily prove that! Just tell me the DCNH type of 10 celebrities where it doesn't fit...
Last edited by Trevor; 02-06-2010 at 08:29 PM.
Why can't you tell us the DCNH types of 10 celebrities then? You could even prove that DCNH type can change by giving an example of a change.
My opinion:
1.) You can't give an example where the pattern doesn't fit because such examples do not exist.
2.) You can't give an example of a type change because type changes do not occur.
Whatever man. My opinions are still the same. Of course I'll be watching what's going on in these threads. Never say never. In the meantime, I rest my case.
...btw, according to you, what's my DCNH VI subtype? (I have an opinion but I wanna hear what you have to say) ...
Last edited by Trevor; 07-11-2010 at 09:43 PM.
I don't even know your main type but you look like N-LIIs I know...
Strengthened base function: face looks like a basketball
Strengthened creative function: face looks like a square
Strengthened ignoring function: face looks like a brick
Strengthened demonstrative function: face looks like a balloon
People who are slightly towards the obese end will have rounder faces...does that mean there's a link between eating habits/metabolism and Dominance??
don't tend to see a lot of skinny people with round faces...
If Cheney weren't bald and fat, he'd have a square face...
hmmm, and the creative subtype LII is described as being slimmer than the logical subtype...
Normalization - rounder face, tendency to store energy (and carry weight)?
Creativity - squarer face, tendency to expend energy (and be slim)?
Unrelated point...
Dave Coulthard and Helmut Kohl have a really similar face shape. They both have those two points of flesh that stick out at level with the mouth. so shouldn't they be the same sub-type? (i.e. brick shaped face subtype)
actually, ignore that post
"A time line? Time does not go in lines, time goes in circles, that's why clocks are round" - Private Michael J. Caboose.
Arctures: delta just produces boring people
Arctures: but that's how we like it
vero: who needs a real person
vero: That's why I date an SLI
dolphin: someone tell gulanzon adjusting shower water to the right temperature is not si
Kraezz: you just have to do the ****** thing sometimes
if we're thinking abstractly time would have to be a line before it could be a circle
I tend to score 50-50 on P-J scale. Does that make me C/H subtype? Assuming I'm a Rational.
At least it indicates a judger with a perceiving subtype or a perceiver with a judging subtype...
Nevertheless, from V.I. my guess is N-LII.
guy on the left is a T type; guy on the right is an T type too. Rational types have a J neck/head and irrationals have a PGerhard Schröder (former German Chancellor) and Jaques Chirac (former French President): C-ESE
Fuckin Rumsfeld (a war criminal) called them Old Europe
Rumsfeld is known as Idiot America in Germany and France since then.
-
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
You live in Canada and immigrated from Armenia, right?
You probably never heard of them - but you can type them by one picture, yes?
I'm not quite sure that Chirac is really ESE - you can never be sure when typing celebrities. Schröder a T type? Definitely not...
I am from Armenia, never been to Canada. Schroder is 100%T 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
Oh, I thought CA meant Canada... :redface:
Let's look it up:
Canada - CDN
California -CA
So you live in California, yes? Probably never hard of European politicians then...
Schröder is obviously the same type (and same subtype) as Bill Cosby. What do you think about Cosby's type?
My face is diamond-shaped: Te-ENTp
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
--> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
ENTp and INTp are more square and diamond...why don't you VI?
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
Because my religion does not allow me to do so
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
What religion is that?
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
As Te-ENTp you should have an oval face because Te is ENTp's demonstrative function...
ok, I meant "oval". (Isn't oval=diamond?)
I can be sharp, unceremonious..............................
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Oval forehead, or round forehead is F types.
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
x
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Reply With Quote
