Visual Identification in Typing

[Kill4Me]

Check it out:

https://www.pinterest.com/socionics/

Each section contains a workable, easy to master VI template that you can use to type yourself and others with. Each section has its own notable physiological markers and micro-expressions like i spoke of in the previous post. More than that, the groupings work in terms of the cognition.

One objection is that ‘well, if you are saying to supplement VI with common sense, doesn’t that mean VI is not sound?” No, not true. Common sense tells you this person is not a LSE even if you can't make a strong VI connection between them and that type. That doesn’t mean to give up on the VI. It just means your eye isn't yet trained enough to pick up on the VI connection. That the connection is more subtle than you are giving it credit for and that you have to be more cogent in looking at it. I have already done all that. That’s why I will say it now, and will likely say again, Socionics doesn’t work unless you break the types down in the way that I have. Of course, if you don’t believe me, go ahead and browse around other socionic schools of thought. Be my guest. See what else is out there.

A second objection is that it can’t be this clearcut. It’s not. There are plenty of look-a-likes such that it’s not always clear-cut. I run into many ambiguous examples. The VI also changes ever so slightly with stacking that you really do need a trained eye. So there are a number of variations even within the same socionics type. Knowing what to look for to resolve those ambiguities is the difference between an expert socionics typer and one that is not. Again, I have already put the time in the trenches working these ambiguities out.

A third objection is that people that VI the same type are not always a hundred percent alike. Of course, they are not always going to be a hundred percent alike. But that's where enneagram and stacking come into play, and where the list is particularly flexible. For example, Robert Redford and Bill Clinton are both IEE-Fi. But Clinton is a 3w2 and redford is a 6. Clinton is more ambitious, competitive and confident by nature/temperament than Redford is. If you don't have a firm grasp on enneagram, though, you may be duped into thinking they have a different socionics type. nevertheless, both Redford and Clinton have a similar cognition when it comes to using their NeFi to mirror, to adapt themselves to different roles, to change masks in order to suit the occasion, to engage in fluffy, pop pseudo-psycho analysis of others, etc. Redford channels that into acting and Clinton channels his cognition into politics.

I stand by the pinterest list 100 percent as the best diagnostic typing tool out there. If you like typing celebrities, or other members, this makes typing time manageable. Why should you waste time out of your life researching celebrities before you can type them or confirm your typing of them. VI provides the ultimate shortcut and the pinterest list lays out the blue print. In the real world, when you meet somebody and you have the VI down pat, you can very quickly size up the person’s type. You won’t need to know their life story, you won’t need to ask them eighty to a hundred questions, and you don’t a year to chart down their cognition so that you can come here, start a ’type this person’ thread and lay out a 1000 details about the person only to get ten different answers.

If you are not signed up for pinterest, an easy way to get around that is just to add on the socionics type to the link....as such:

https://www.pinterest.com/socionics/ese-fi/