Typing by Face (or appearance)

[Mal12345]

I'd actually put forth that deep vs practical would be more along the lines of Fi vs Te and Ni vs Se rather than the entire function attitude of N or S.

How individuals might view themselves based on certain functions:

Practical: Te and Se
Deep: Fi and Ni
Structured (or Rational): Ti and Si
Open-minded: Ne and Fe (it's a stretch for the last one, though emotionally they would be rather open-minded)

This of course assumes that there would be perfect symmetry in these categories.

You edited your original post, so I need to expand on my response. Jung would not agree with your idea that Si and Ti are structured or rational, especially in contradistinction to Fe (or Fi). Jung characterized F and T as Rational types, S and N as Irrational types. And Jung was huge on symmetry.

My theory on VI and symmetry is that the J types (Fe, Te, Ni, and Si) are symmetrical in appearance, the P types (Fi, Ti, Ne, and Se) are a-symmetrical. For a good movie example:

David Dunn in Unbreakable -

Elijah Price in the same movie -

 

[Mal12345]

Well, staying strictly with VI, it would be safe to analyze the individual's eyes (from some source I don't remember, perception functions show themselves in the way the eyes act, who would have guessed?).

Penetrating, glazed eyes -> Ni
Child-like, twinkling eyes -> Ne
Intense eyes, wider open -> Se
Soft, calm eyes -> Si

I guess the individual would be more Se due to the way his eyes seem to be more intense than child-like (which is really based on the fact that his eyes don't look like the "naive" eyes of the Ne types at all, I really don't see any intensity).

I'm not a VI expert, let alone good at it, so it is merely an amateur analysis.

I hadn't read that much on the theory of eyes in VI. I'm interested in it and have tried to use it on occasion. I see Harrison Ford as Ti-dom based on his rather soft and sad eyes.

I know a guy who has soft, calm eyes that I have thought for years to be Si-dom, although I hadn't used the VI method.

 

[Mal12345]

Well, staying strictly with VI, it would be safe to analyze the individual's eyes (from some source I don't remember, perception functions show themselves in the way the eyes act, who would have guessed?).

Penetrating, glazed eyes -> Ni
Child-like, twinkling eyes -> Ne
Intense eyes, wider open -> Se
Soft, calm eyes -> Si

I guess the individual would be more Se due to the way his eyes seem to be more intense than child-like (which is really based on the fact that his eyes don't look like the "naive" eyes of the Ne types at all, I really don't see any intensity).

I'm not a VI expert, let alone good at it, so it is merely an amateur analysis.

I have a question about this guy. What distinguishes Se-dom from Fi-dom in VI, regarding sad-looking face versus intense, wide-open eyes?

 

[Eugene Watson VIII]

Well, staying strictly with VI, it would be safe to analyze the individual's eyes (from some source I don't remember, perception functions show themselves in the way the eyes act, who would have guessed?).

Penetrating, glazed eyes -> Ni
Child-like, twinkling eyes -> Ne
Intense eyes, wider open -> Se
Soft, calm eyes -> Si

I guess the individual would be more Se due to the way his eyes seem to be more intense than child-like (which is really based on the fact that his eyes don't look like the "naive" eyes of the Ne types at all, I really don't see any intensity).

I'm not a VI expert, let alone good at it, so it is merely an amateur analysis.

Ti has a similar penetrating look that NI has. But it's more focused and intense I'd say. As for Fi there's a sort of deep pained look as someone described earlier. As for Fe and Te, I'm not so sure. Te would probably be like Ti but not as intense? Something like that.

 

[Mal12345]

Well, staying strictly with VI, it would be safe to analyze the individual's eyes (from some source I don't remember, perception functions show themselves in the way the eyes act, who would have guessed?).

Penetrating, glazed eyes -> Ni
Child-like, twinkling eyes -> Ne
Intense eyes, wider open -> Se
Soft, calm eyes -> Si

I guess the individual would be more Se due to the way his eyes seem to be more intense than child-like (which is really based on the fact that his eyes don't look like the "naive" eyes of the Ne types at all, I really don't see any intensity).

I'm not a VI expert, let alone good at it, so it is merely an amateur analysis.

Do you have examples of various kinds of eyes?

 

[Mal12345]

Te eyes

http://sciencelakes.com/data_images/out/13/8808239-eagle-eyes-background.jpg

 

[Stansmith]

First person seems Fi-valuing with the telling "in-pain" face (called such because it looks like they are in pain, not because they are actually in pain).

If I were to take a guess, ISFj. (Let's isolate VI to its origination)

I have no idea for the second person. (EDIT: though my base instinct tells me ISTj, or at least Ni-valuing in some fashion)

He looks more like an ISFp, stereotypically speaking.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

You edited your original post, so I need to expand on my response. Jung would not agree with your idea that Si and Ti are structured or rational, especially in contradistinction to Fe (or Fi). Jung characterized F and T as Rational types, S and N as Irrational types. And Jung was huge on symmetry.

My theory on VI and symmetry is that the J types (Fe, Te, Ni, and Si) are symmetrical in appearance, the P types (Fi, Ti, Ne, and Se) are a-symmetrical. For a good movie example:

David Dunn in Unbreakable -

Elijah Price in the same movie -

Interesting, my categories there was merely an attempt at finding something to due with types' perception of themselves based on certain functions.

I have also heard that the way to tell the j/p dichotomy with VI is to see if the individual's eyes match what the rest of their face is doing. Apparently irrational types's eyes don't always match what the rest of their face is doing, while rational types' eyes match their face's movements.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I have a question about this guy. What distinguishes Se-dom from Fi-dom in VI, regarding sad-looking face versus intense, wide-open eyes?

I guess the only way with VI would be the j/p face alignment, but that requires a video of the person in action.

 

[Mal12345]

Interesting, my categories there was merely an attempt at finding something to due with types' perception of themselves based on certain functions.

I have also heard that the way to tell the j/p dichotomy with VI is to see if the individual's eyes match what the rest of their face is doing. Apparently irrational types's eyes don't always match what the rest of their face is doing, while rational types' eyes match their face's movements.

For any lurkers out there, I'm not using the movie as proof, only as example. The movie was purposely designed to be stereotyped and even comic-bookish. The hero falls under stereotypically heroic characteristics, the villain has villainish characteristics, just as you see in comic books. Consider Batman (J) vs. the Joker (P). They represent order vs. chaos (or any other archetypal opposites you can think of). Stereotypes are great at providing examples, but in terms of reality they stand as mere archetypal images to which actual people only more-or-less stand in conformity. There are also those people who can kind of go either way in life. But if it wasn't for stereotypes, which inhabit the extremes, we wouldn't be aware that there was an "either/or" dichotomy involved.

I didn't know that about Rationals vs. Irrationals. I wouldn't even know how to test that theory.

 

[Mal12345]

I guess the only way with VI would be the j/p face alignment, but that requires a video of the person in action.

I can provide videos that shows him and other individuals of different types. The one in the picture is the 'oddball,' being the only Perceptive with a group of three Judgers. The differences are easier to make out. This video has two very opposite personalities in it.

"I'm a genius in disguise."

 

[Mal12345]

Random Person ~ TYPE ME ~

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

[MENTION=13589]Mal12345[/MENTION]

Seems Ni dominant or at least valuing to me, could be Fi dominant or valuing as well. That's all I can draw from this. Probably extremely wrong.

 

[Mal12345]

[MENTION=13589]Mal12345[/MENTION]

Seems Ni dominant or at least valuing to me, could be Fi dominant or valuing as well. That's all I can draw from this. Probably extremely wrong.

INFJ?

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

INFJ?

It's feasible.

 

[Mal12345]

 

[Mal12345]

ESFJ

 

[Stansmith]

?

 

[Mal12345]

Those eyes - are - hallucinogenic. ISFJ.

 

[Mal12345]