This is derived from week two of those ObjectivePersonality classes I've been taking and we already have the criteria that's used in this class from the last thread.

I'll post up two clips, and explain why each individual is either ST, or NF.

Then, at the end - I'll post up another two clips - and y'all can decide who's the NF, and who's the ST, using the information laid out in this thread.

Without further ado..


BarePantryTalk is an ST type.
The entire time, she switches between facts, to reasons, back to facts, to reasons etc etc - skip to 0.30s and you will see what I mean, fact fact fact fact reason reason fact fact etc - is she talking about something in the physical world (S), or is this all metaphorical and being used as some analogy for something abstract (N)?

Is she talking about something in the physical world and reasons (ST) explaining it, or is she talking about something abstract and how much she values it (NF)?

Clearly ST.

If you will go to 1.00s you will hear her say that she decided it would be beneficial for her to research exactly what GERD is - not what causes it, but what it is.
This here, is ST.
She is not interested in the what is causing the GERD, not interested in the 'why' (N) - she wants to know what it exactly what it is (S) - she wants the facts.

At about 1.30s she outlines the four tracts - are these tracts being used metaphorically, as an abstract analogy (N) and why we should value them (F) or is she talking about real world stuff (S) and the reasons for the four tracts (T)?

Further into the clip 3.40~ or so - she literally starts demonstrating how this works with tangible, real-world props i.e the food she pulls out.
Is she being abstract? Is she being vague about anything? She is being very sensually clear - she is making sure none of this is unclear, making sure none of this is vague, she is showing us, literally showing us, using her S, how this works.

At the end of the video, she even pulls out a jar of honey and starts reading the label.
Facts, reasons - BarePantryTalk is an ST type.

Infinite Waters

Infinite Waters is an NF type.
Right off the bat - he drops an some N - 'it's so quiet - you can hear a pin drop' - compare this to the above ST type - what would she do right now?
She'd literally drop a pin to prove her point. Waters isn't being literal, abstract analogy - N.

At about 0.25s Infinite says he gets loads of questions about 'how can I like meditate like a boss' - what's 'like a boss'? What is the social structure of a 'boss' - low value or high value?
Does he mean a literal boss?
This is an NF abstract value.

Compare what he is talking about, with the above ST - Waters is talking about 'mindful meditation' - can you buy a 6 pack of mindful meditation? Can you run down the shop and get you summadat?
BarePantryTalk is talking about GERD - a literal, medical issue - real world, tangible.
Why is he talking about 'mindful meditation'? Because he values it.
Valuing something in the abstract world - NF.

At around about 0.55 or so you will see his lead Fe - 'can I get a hellooo?' - this kind of thing is extroverting F - he's trying to convey that he has this great feeling, high value state - and if he makes all this noise and emotions etc, then we should be able to pick up on this - this works for other Fe types (I see what you're valuing, I also want to value that), Fi types might be a little more 'dafuq' and perhaps turned off by this kind of behaviour.

Are his 10 ways to be mindful literal, physical, sensory reasons (ST) or a abstract, valuable stuff that he found (NF)?

When Walters talks about being in the 'here and now' he's referring to his abstract state of mind, he's not referring to the literal world - so this is somebody who I presume a lot of people would see, hear talking about 'present' and 'here and now' and think, dominant Se - which would be incorrect - he's saying when he gets into his own abstract world (N), he gets out of a low-value state and into a high-value state - and he wants all of us to do the same thing (Fe).

At 1.50s or so, he says our minds are 'full' - does he give us any reasons to support this claim (T)?
No, instead, he does some thing with his face that is intended to convey how we should feel about it - this is adding value (F) to something, rather than reasons.

At around 5.40s or so, Walters starts to talk about chewing food, and how he learnt the science of it - here he is shifting into the S, real, tangible world - and you can see his face change slightly to reflect a more serious demeanor when he goes there - this isn't a preferred state for him - he also rattles off various reasons and facts within a short span of time - why?
To hit you with his N punchline - 'to be more mindful' - then he goes on with that story about a master and a disciple - he gets more excited when talking about this abstract value (NF) story.

Values in the abstract world - Infinite Waters is an NF type.

Here are two for y'all to do:

Owen Cook

Dan Burns

I put two for Dan Burns, as the first one is short and both were used in the class.. feel free to skip around on the Owen Cook one because it's like 3 hours long.

So, what we're looking for is which ones are:
ST - reasons in the real world, reports facts/data/evidence from real world.
NF - values/likes/dislikes in the abstract world and concepts - talking about something in the abstract world, and the importance of it.

Look at what their saviours are - where they're obviously placing the most value and emphasis - is it in the physical world and reasons (ST), or is in in the abstract world and values (NF)?

Ignoring cognitive functions and basically anything else you know - which one is the ST, and which is the NF?

Disclaimer: This is a continuation of this thread whereby I am essentially relaying the message so to speak from these ObjectivePersonality classes I've been taking.

This is basically a copy-paste of a thread I created on PersonalityCafe.