SF or NT?

[Turi]

**this thread is a basically a copy-paste from PersonalityCafe**



'sup.

In this thread, I'd like you to type the following two people, one is an NT, the other is an SF.
Ignore 'functions' completely and rely entirely on the following.

The criteria is as follows:
NT - reasons (T) in the abstract world (N).
SF - values (F) in the physical world (S).

The SF will be:
Using intuition, abstractions, connections, 'why' or explanations to support S.
Using any reasons or logic to support the 'punchline' that is F values.

The NT will be:
Using tangible, physical reality to support N.
Using values, likes and dislikes to support the 'punchline' that is T reasons.

When doing it, make sure you actually scratch the opposing preferences off as a possibility - so if you're seeing one and think SF, have a look at what the NT is according to the information in this thread, and make sure they're not that, same deal with the NT.

Who is talking about reasons in the abstract world and how it works (NT) - and who is talking about things in the physical world and whether they like it or not (SF)?

-

For the sake of completeness, here's the other two temperaments that are not found in either of those video clips:
ST - reasons (T) in the physical world (S).
NF - values (F) in the abstract world (N).

In addition - 'here's some stereotypes' for the temperaments - these are sketchy, 'cartoon character' versions of them - don't rely on this:

• SF - popularity - values/likes/dislikes in the real world, popular to others, popular to self, whatever - this isn't to say they're all about being 'popular' but it's more the idea of them valuing something in the real world.
• ST - reporter - reasons in the real world, reports facts/data/evidence from real world (not so much the 'why' or what is 'valuable' more of your stereotypical reporting of the facts and the reasons).
• NF - hippy - values/likes/dislikes in the abstract world and concepts - person living life saying 'I value these abstract values/connections' etc.
• NT - nerdy - reasons in the abstract world and concepts - reasons for how these things work etc - not related to tangible world, uses reality as analogies etc to communicate and explain reasons re: abstract concepts.

So with those dodgy 'stereotypes' in mind, you can kinda look at someone and think, well, I think they're an NF - they're not an SF as they're talking about abstract concepts too much, they're not an NT because they're focus is on values and not reasons, they're not an ST because they're not really talking about real-world facts and reasons.. so you can kind narrow things down in this fashion.

Again those dodgy stereotypes are stressed as being sketchy and basically just a way to divide everybody into four simple groups - and those stereotypes are basically just possible alternatives to keep in mind re: the above mini-descriptors - so the idea is that, if you want, you could look for say, "values/likes/dislikes in the real world" for SF as the idea of 'popularity' talk, i.e what the value of something real is to the person.

-

In addition to that test, I'll include this screenshot from the class - I do have permission to share this, fwiw:

Basic type checklist:

The legend is pretty obvious, but I'll type it out anyway:
O - observer function - (P).
D - decider function (D).

Oi - introverted observer (Pi).
Oe - extroverted observer (Pe).
Di - introverted decider (Ji).
De - extroverted decider (Je).

DD - Double deciders (both J functions in aux-tert positions, I believe - hasn't been explicitly stated yet).
OO - Double observer (both P functions in aux-tert positions, I believe - hasn't been explicitly stated yet).

I realise some of the screenshot is cut out, I edited out the camera - there is no full-shot of the whole thing, but my guesstimate re: what those cut-off sections say are:
OO - chaos. I think only the 's' is cut out.
De - self.
Oe - to do with?


I'd like to note, that the 'test' in this first class pertains to one single binary choice from that basic checklist, and it's a restricted one at that - of the whole thing, it's literally NT v SF.
No functions are touched. No needs are touched. No other letters are touched. No temperaments are touched.



Disclaimer: This is derived from the first ObjectivePersonality class, to the point I've used literally the same video clips as in the class.

I have permission to share what I learn, as long as I don't just straight up download the classes etc and upload them i.e disrespecting other paid members.

The 'test' is intentionally simple and is supposed to demonstrate the difference between somebody who has saviour NT at the top, and somebody who has saviour SF at the top.

I intend to basically relay the message every week, and share this stuff among the community in an effort to fight the cancerous way in which we're currently typing (stereotypes, subjective bias, projections, etc).

 

[Luigi]

I relate to a desire to be popular in general. It's a lot easier for me to love myself than to be loved by others.

For some reason, the people that I respect, usually ignore me.

 

[Population: 1]

Michio Kaku is always enjoyable to watch. He takes very complicated theories and makes them relatable for just about everyone.

It was a real letdown to go from thinking about the missing pieces of a unified theory being hidden in other dimensions and gravity leaking into other dimensions and dark matter possibly being the shadow of another reality to whatever she was going on about.

Yes I realize my comment is completely useless. I’m so intrigued by what was discussed in the first video that I’ve become completely distracted. F-ing ditzy NFs! Sorry.

 

[Turi]

Michio Kaku is always enjoyable to watch. He takes very complicated theories and makes them relatable for just about everyone.

It was a real letdown to go from thinking about the missing pieces of a unified theory being hidden in other dimensions and gravity leaking into other dimensions and dark matter possibly being the shadow of another reality to whatever she was going on about.

Yes I realize my comment is completely useless. I’m so intrigued but what was discussed in the first video that I’ve become completely distracted. F-ing ditzy NFs! Sorry.

I understand what you're saying - in all fairness, to some people what Michio is talking about is viewed the same way you view what Classroom Diva is talking about.

 

[Population: 1]

I understand what you're saying - in all fairness, to some people what Michio is talking about is viewed the same way you view what Classroom Diva is talking about.

Certainly. Different interests. I’m not trying to be insulting, it’s just that cosmology is such an engrossing subject for me. So engrossing I just couldn’t listen to her because my mind was very much still listening to what Michio Kaku had said.

 

[Turi]

Certainly. Different interests. I’m not trying to be insulting, it’s just that cosmology is such an engrossing subject for me. So engrossing I just couldn’t listen to her because my mind was very much still listening to what Michio Kaku had said.

Oh, I know you weren't trying to be insulting but some people out there just don't get that kind of thing, lol.

 

[Jaguar]

I couldn't take the torture of that voice and shut her off.

 

[chickpea]

i think the examples you’ve chosen are too different in content to be helpful comparisons between types.

 

[Turi]

i think the examples you’ve chosen are too different in content to be helpful comparisons between types.

It's intentional...

 

[Jaguar]

Disclaimer: This is derived from the first <snipped link to a site that makes money for nutcases who charge 399.00 an hour to spout bullshit> class, to the point I've used literally the same video clips as in the class.

Hopefully no TypoC member is stupid enough to pay money at that site.

 

[Turi]

Hopefully no TypoC member is stupid enough to pay money at that site.

Be productive or don't post at all, I'm not advertising the site, I've subscribed for the weekly classes and am reporting what I'm learning - with permission, as well.

Won't tolerate any bs that's not relevant.
What people do with their money is up to them.

 

[Jaguar]

I'm not advertising the site

Then take out the link.

 

[Turi]

Then take out the link.

Denied, until formally requested by a moderator or administrator.

 

[miss fortune]

Denied, until formally requested by a moderator or administrator.

please remove the link or I shall remove it for you... advertising is against the rules

 

[Turi]

please remove the link or I shall remove it for you... advertising is against the rules

Link removed - I've kept the name in place though - is that okay?
If I don't 'cite my source', it looks like I'm just stealing information and claiming it as my own, which isn't the case.

I want to share this information and acknowledge the source.
Let me know what the rules are with regards to this because the information is brilliant and will be useful to the community.

 

[miss fortune]

Link removed - I've kept the name in place though - is that okay?
If I don't 'cite my source', it looks like I'm just stealing information and claiming it as my own, which isn't the case.

I want to share this information and acknowledge the source.
Let me know what the rules are with regards to this because the information is brilliant and will be useful to the community.

you can cite your sources, but the link you posted went straight to a page asking for money... I hope you can understand from my perspective how that can come across as advertising

 

[Turi]

you can cite your sources, but the link you posted went straight to a page asking for money... I hope you can understand from my perspective how that can come across as advertising

The link was just to their home page, they do have the prices listed right there, I get that.

It wasn't a link straight to like, credit card details or anything.

 

[miss fortune]

The link was just to their home page, they do have the prices listed right there, I get that.

It wasn't a link straight to like, credit card details or anything.

walks like a duck...

 

[Turi]

walks like a duck...

I'm just trying to share some good information with people - next time I won't link here, I'll just 'name-drop' and people can look for themselves if they want - or not - doesn't bother me, I'm not trying to hawk a product.

I'm legitimately trying to share some solid information with people, because the state the typology community is in at the moment is absolutely cancerous and is in dire need of change - people try to type via 'vibes', too much subjectivity, everybody is bias AF, too much semantics and wankfest regarding specifics, nobody is on the same page, people argue the same point from completely different contexts (i.e MBTI v Socionics definitions etc), ugh, it's terrible.

This isn't a dig at Typology Central - I barely ever come here, general swing at the typology community overall.


To that end, I'll lead the way and put my money where my mouth is, and be productive - here's two posts copy-pasted from PersonalityCafe, apologies if they appear sort of out of context:

--

I have since gained permission to share what I learn as well as permission to share screenshots.
I have updated the OP with a screenshot of the basic checklist that is shown in the class, this is what we will be working with and fleshing out, I believe, in future classes.

There is a more advanced checklist as well, however it includes things we don't know much about yet.
I'll post that here, as it's pretty much irrelevant at the moment:

The legend for this, I believe is as follows however we haven't been taught this, and I am putting information together I have gathered from the website, and basically just hoping it's accurate and not misleading in the future, if it's wrong I'll just come back and say "yo I fucked up".

Animals - I don't know the meanings of these:
S - Sleep
C - Consume
P - Play
B - Blast
Combinations of the above letters = combinations of the above words/terms. Meaningless at the moment, I know.

I'm even more in the dark on these and am basically making it up:
FF - Feminine Feminine?
FM - Feminine Masculine?
MF - Masculine Feminine?
MM - Masculine Masculine?
They're something to do with energy, I think - from the website under masculine and feminine - "Solid and shovey, open and moveable".

These are simple, and also in the basic checklist in the OP:
Di - introverted decider (Ji).
De - extroverted decider (Je).
Oi - introverted observer (Pi).
Oe - extroverted observer (Pe).
OO - double observers (both P functions in middle of stack, I believe).
DD - double deciders (both J functions in middle of stack, I believe).

These are guesstimates but I believe this is regarding Demon and Saviour functions:
De-F - feminine Demon.
De-M - masculine Demon.
S-F - feminine Saviour
S-M - masculine Saviour.
Demon functions, I believe, are not-favoured functions, weak spots i.e inferior function and either aux/tert depending on subtype - don't quote me on this, it hasn't been mentioned and I am fleshing this shit out myself here.
Saviour functions, I believe are favoured functions, strengths i.e dominant function and either aux/tert depending on subtype, again, don't quote me on this, also not mentioned.

Modalities:
T - Tester
V - Visual
A - Audio
K - Kinesthetic
Not mentioned yet.

I honestly don't know what Ct, Dg, S/T and W/T mean - not mentioned yet.

The bottom section of the checklist, I believe, would be unfilled - I think it's got a 'demo' ENTJ setup laid out.
I don't know what 'Actv' means though I'd assume 'active' or 'activated' but don't quote me on this.
'Anim' means 'Animal', I think - and they're mentioned above (S, C, B, P).


It's a totally incomplete rundown of the advanced checklist, honestly it's not a focus at the moment, literally mentioned for about two seconds, I just wanted to share it for y'all, and in sharing it I am basically forced into laying down the legend.
A legend which I'd like to note has not been covered at all so far, and like I said, is pieced together by myself using information from the ObjectivePersonality website.

--


Something else I'll throw in here - I want to stress this is completely coincidental, it's actually derived from the 'introduction' video and not the first class, but I don't know where else to put it and some people might find it interesting.

So far, they've 'objectively' typed almost 2000 people, I believe - people are considered as being objectively typed when one person types them in accordance with the advanced checklist above, and another person does the same in a separate room, no communication - unsure how many times this occurs and between how many sets of partners before somebody gets 'logged' as a type - there are 512 types, so to get it 'right' and 'log' someone, both typists need to actually pinpoint the precise subtype, 1 in 512 chance, then.
So for multiple people to get the same results considering that, well, something's being tracked.


Anyway, not the point - just setting the stage so to speak - the way people look, hair colour, eye colour yada yada - isn't tested for, at all, not one single bit - you can see the checklist above, nothing about physical appearance.

What they've noticed is some weird 'clumpings', the following is two snips from a screenshot:

They look kinda similar.


That shit isn't being tracked, tested for, it's not even a consideration, they're just finding that people are tending to clump in certain areas, specific subtypes - and this clumping really starts to shine when the possible number of types is 512* - before that, I believe it's not 'specific enough' to really suggest any patterns.

Of course, they need more numbers to really state there is a pattern - they stress this, it's just kind of weird.


There's also something else, one 'dock' (name for subtypes, I think), has atm, an over 50% LGBT ratio - the numbers are small, there's 8 people there - but 5 of those 8, are gay or bisexual - it's stressed they need at least 50 people objectively typed and logged into that very specific dock/subtype section to really suggest a pattern - it's just kinda weird.

There's another one whereby all three people they have objectively typed that have Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome are found in the exact same dock.
Again, the numbers are small - but of almost 2000 people, the only 3 that have EDS, are all in the exact same subtype.


I'd like to note and make it clear they are absolutely not pushing these patterns forward as 'truths' or a means of typing, they don't type via appearances or anything related to the above in the slightest - it's just some weird 'clumping' that seems to be occurring, that's kinda interesting.



*there's 16 types, but they found things that split this into 32, then another split to 64, then 128, 256 - 512 seemed to be the magic number where they could accurately objectively type people (re: their criteria) in double-blind situations and get it exact.

 

[chickpea]

It's intentional...

what was the reason behind it then? i think it’s just perpetuating the NTs are deep, philosophical geniuses/SFs are simple, shallow materialists stereotype. you could easily find an NT doing an unboxing video, or an SF talking about something of substance