this is at the root of so many aspects of typology. it is one of the first and most basic instincts used to type others. it is finding similarity, commonality, likeness, recognizability, intelligibility, transparency, understanding, etc.

when misused it muddies the waters, creates false understandings, conceptual noise, and an overdrawn checkbook.

i go thru phases where i see something, explore the pattern as much as possible, and then have to error-check and let feedback show me where i jumped the gun, saw something small that was obscuring a larger and more obvious truth.

worse is when starting from cultural products and having very little information to begin with. it makes it easy to say, oh look at this, it must have come from this. at my best, i often avoid psychology altogether and just rely on Ni to recognize invisible and essential relationships, but it's hazy and gravity sometimes is a bit sluggish and difficult to pull out of bed, it makes focusing the lens of my perceptions difficult and the light that shines down from above can be so scattershot.

recognizing specific ways you identify with other types helps. i identified with michel gondry bc i thought the science of sleep felt exactly like me, but that doesn't make it me. and a physical resemblance might offset me and convince me it is me. the obvious entpness makes sense. and my relationship as 5w4 with 7w6 and 4w3 being so strong, i still cannot locate which one, but those two are the most feasible for him that i can discern (lately i lean more towards 7w6). it just helps narrow the aspect until i can zoom into it and see it more closely (think the scene in i heart huckabees). ah, pure perception feels so good!

feelers probably do this way more than nts, but i notice that nts often have similar problems typing bc they assume that their T stories = truth.