VI for Dummies

[Raver]

In the past this forum used to have a handful of really good VI experts and people followed their VI skills as a standard to adhere to and use it as a reference point.

Nowadays, most of the VI experts have left the forum. We mostly have beginners that know they're not good at VI like myself, overconfident newbies that VI people without any knowledge of VI and perhaps a few experts that don't VI much anymore for whatever reason.

Here is a good beginner's guide to VI for those that know nothing about VI:

http://www.socionics.com/advan/vi/vi.htm
http://www.socionics.com/articles/notes.html

Trust me, I belong in the beginner's group too, which is why I rarely VI despite knowing about Socionics for so long, but perhaps those that have the desire to VI others can actually learn how to do it.

Even though some people can be naturally better at VI than others because of better spatial and facial recognition, anyone can learn it if they actually put in the effort and time to learn about how it works.

I found a pretty neat tool for VI. It turns out I underestimated my VI skills and I got some right on my first try just by intuitive impressions I got. I highly recommend this tool for those who want to learn VI and want to see how good their skills actually are:

http://www.socionics.com/vi/vi.htm

You certainly won't master VI like this, but it will hopefully lead to an actual understanding of VI and not just doing the newbie mistake of VIing people by non-Socionics genetic features rather than the overall impression from their facial expressions and the like.

Finally, if you have the discipline and time, you can wade through a significant amount of images from VI experts on their conclusions of celebrity's types:

http://www.socionics.com/advan/famous.htm

As for those who don't believe VI works or exists. I would not rule out that possibility and you may be right. I tend to lean towards the idea that VI's validity rests upon specific facial expressions and facial features. Expanding that notion to include irrelevant facial expressions and genetic facial features is bunk VI of course.

So if you're in the "you look exactly like X person I know" VI group then perhaps it wouldn't hurt to expand your knowledge of VI and improve your skills enough to type people correctly.

[Sol]

Ganin's VI is bs as he uses not only the behavior but also physical traits - physiognomy - what has no relation to the psyche.

Classical VI uses intuitive impressions from nonverbal behavior - you feel by Ne to which side a human is closer. For example, to a description of T or F types.

[Chae]

Kinda gave up by now simply because it's too dubious and arbitrary. The patterns are too random. Cosmic Teapot demonstrated this once [EDIT: by equating 16 pictures of her to each type]. At some point my said it has no potential and even I, professional socionics dummy, have to acknowledge that Instead I learned: listening closely to the person to see what elements come up This is what we need to face instead of having new tools: taking the time to get into their character.

[wacey]

I did that test and a few I got right away and some others took me every 16 combinations.

[Raver]

I did that test and a few I got right away and some others took me every 16 combinations.

Yeah, it's odd how we can intuitively grasp some and others take several more tries. Perhaps it shows there is something to VI or perhaps not.

[lavos]

Ganin is not a good VI'er in the first place, so any of his methods shouldn't be used for reference.

[Raver]

Ganin is not a good VI'er in the first place, so any of his methods shouldn't be used for reference.

Who do you recommend as a good VIer?

[lavos]

Who do you recommend as a good VIer?

Me, of course.

Lol, jk

Dunno, nobody that is still active. Perhaps silke. But she stubbornly believes that lorde is ESI-Se, when she is IEI-Ni,
So im not sure

[lavos]

Ftr; I taught myself(even though I have some innate ability) using eunice's thread. But if you need to follow someone in regards to VI typings, @silke is the one.

[Hays]

I have found this link which @Raver posted above to be a useful tool at times for VI though of course it’s about reading an entire person not just a one off photograph.

http://www.socionics.com/vi/vi.htm

Since others have begun mentioning Lorde here, under these VI pictures her look would most likely be represented by an INFj image.
Attachment 11862

[lavos]

She is certainly not INFj. I have given it more thought/analysis and she might be indeed ESI-Se, but if that's the case her dual type is IEI-Ni. Sometimes I notice the latter before the former. (/excuse)

No, really, I can see dual types sometimes.

[Slade]

The problem with Vi is different types can VI similarly, especially quasi-identicals. It's also more about consistent facial expressions and body language over time which is unlikely that a photo or two would show you, you would need several. Its a decent method but it's only as good as the information you have. I find the pitfall of this to be that people are not usually scrutinous enough for accuracy.