You forgot the part where people and their expression is involved. You need to know they are emphasising something. That's listening to how people say things. Sounds like a Fe thing to me.Also, I don't really think this is that Fe related. I'm more using Ti+Se. Classifying sensory information. I don't know how you would do it as FiNe.
Irrelevant to whenever Fe is linked to using the language to describe it you're using or not.@Indigo Rodent
I didn't classify speech like this prior to attempting to voice type. I had a suspicion for a while that it could be done, but only when I attempted it did I start using words to describe it.
Nevermind. I guess it was something else.I don't know what you mean about loud and obnoxious Si. Forward emphasis is the way that a word is emphasised. They all do it. I don't know how to explain it other than saying that it's emphasis? Just check Si primary videos and listen for how they talk. The emphasis is clear.
So, going further it would be "enter me in songwriting competition", "and I had to play it", "I really liked it", "that's great song", "funny little competition", "I'm not winning the competition", "write more music"?@Indigo Rodent
"Start", "therapy session", "unrealistic", "proper job", "relationships" etc. are emphatic.
Interesting. I didn't know emphasis sounds like this. Always thought it's something more exaggerated.
I think the main reason he's making so many type mistakes is because he has some learning disability that makes him specifically bad at typing people. From what he talking about, IIRC he tends to get overwhelmed by cues.@Indigo Rodent
Do you have a way to describe it other than "emphasis"? Chenault came across the same phenomenon, and called it "accentuated" (he called N "syncopated", which I don't understand. I prefer "flowing".). I don't think Chenault is hearing the "forward" component though, or he wouldn't be making so many type mistakes.
You see it wrong. As you have noticed with Pod'Lair descriptions basic guides don't work well. It's necessary to point at phenomena itself due to descriptions coming from subjective associations. Do you want it to become a thing a thing or do you want to be forgotten? If everyone has to reinvent the wheel, you'll end up either with no practitioners or with a bunch of original discoverers.The way I see it with learning audio reading, and it applies to visual reading too - if I can come up with these signals from scratch, then I expect other people to be able to figure it out too if they're told the basic guide of how to do it and provided with a list of typed individuals. It's just that you need to be very intelligent to do so. I'm not sure how much one's type plays into it.
There's a massive taboo against typing by physiological cues in the typology community. Cognitive Type is much better at pedagogics, PR and presentation than you and yet their youtube channel has only 2,94k subscribers. Meanwhile Personality Hacker has 46,5k subscribers - over 10 times more.Why is no one paying attention to this? This is a method of typing people in under a minute. It's extremely accurate. It proves things about the functions, like the pairing of opposite functions in the mind (Ni with Se and so on) as well as that the directive functions go together (Ni with Fe and so on) and so do the adaptive (Ti with Se and so on). So, it disputes OPS' animal theory, because that's just not what the voice shows.
I'm hear providing both a decently sized list of celebrities, as well as a fairly clear explanation of how to type. This is far superior to methods like Cognitive Type's vultology, and yet no one is giving it any mind. It's just so simple.
I mean using me as a willing Guinea Pig, and typing me by voice@Doctor Cringelord yeah of course! And what do you mean by "testing my theory"?