I'm trying to understand some of the signals, and came back to a video of Chomsky while looking for TiNe examples, and I'm not seeing Ti at all. Am I missing something? Everything about his speech is on-beat to me, and his hands seem very Te. I can't find Ne eye movements either. Is my Vultologer broken?
Oh! you picked a tough sample to begin learning with.
He is a different shade than other TiNe's (being TiSi). And I think his type is debatable between SiFe and TiNe, as he's got a lot of Si/Pi. But not between NiTe.
i'll see if i can point out a few things:
^ Fe warm swelling + Fe on-beat emphasis
^ Ti stop-start + Fe on-beat emphasis
There's a delay between the initiation of his gestures and their delivery, where we builds up impact (Fe). But the build-up is also somewhat faint and exerted. And when he delivers the impact it's also quick to dissipate, tricking down to nothing (Ti).
His voice in general is "fatigued" as well as his posture. I'm not sure if that's being conflated with Te's deadpan? Ti's fatigued demeanor comes across like mumbling under your breath, and being very inanimate. Exerted pushes are like... little micro 'umphs' or 'poofs' that die down soon after. This is different from the snippiness of Te.
Interviews when he's younger + full body show the J-lead posture and Ti/Fe a bit more. Like this one:
What do you mean when you say "on-beat"? When we use that term, it's an indicator of Fe, not Te.
Oh, ok. I might just be making up my own terms. It's hard to explain what I mean, but what I'm seeing is that he doesn't have that sense of 'thinking through his thoughts' as he's speaking and carefully selecting his words ('struggling to find the perfect words'). His words are often delivered with sharp hand flicks or head nods, on beat, as if he's using his body to highlight his points. Is that Fe? I'll have to look for some good examples tomorrow to highlight what I think I'm seeing.
Oh! you picked a tough sample to begin learning with.
He is a different shade than other TiNe's (being TiSi). And I think his type is debatable between SiFe and TiNe, as he's got a lot of Si/Pi. But not between NiTe.
i'll see if i can point out a few things:
^ Fe warm swelling + Fe on-beat emphasis
^ Ti stop-start + Fe on-beat emphasis
There's a delay between the initiation of his gestures and their delivery, where we builds up impact (Fe). But the build-up is also somewhat faint and exerted. And when he delivers the impact it's also quick to dissipate, tricking down to nothing (Ti).
His voice in general is "fatigued" as well as his posture. I'm not sure if that's being conflated with Te's deadpan? Ti's fatigued demeanor comes across like mumbling under your breath, and being very inanimate. Exerted pushes are like... little micro 'umphs' or 'poofs' that die down soon after. This is different from the snippiness of Te.
Interviews when he's younger + full body show the J-lead posture and Ti/Fe a bit more. Like this one:
Ok, thanks for the response. I'll keep thinking about it...
What do you mean when you say "on-beat"? When we use that term, it's an indicator of Fe, not Te.
I've always wondered what you guys mean by that myself. Is Te not on-beat as well?
Actually, no! One of the gesture cues for Fe vs Te is that, though both tend to gesticulate a lot as they speak, Te-users' gestures will often get de-synced from the beat of their speech. If the speaker mentions three points, and they do three hand chops to go with them, oftentimes the chops will lag behind the speech points. Fe-users will more often wind up their gestures as they say each point in prep for the finish, to create emphasis. This can be learned, though, so a lot of Te-users trained in public speaking will put on this on-beat delivery for their performance.
On-Beat Emphasis is actually signal Fe-1, seen here.
I don't think the Te version has been gif'd officially yet. Auburn do you have one in your pocket?
Te accelerates into gesticulations right away (from 0 to 100), not waiting for the swelling 'impact' moment. that's why it comes off dismissive:
Versus, as Zwei said:
----
having said that, one signal is just one signal. needs to be supported by others. and this one's one of the weaker ones since there's potential for crossover if ppl learn a different gesticulation style. facial micro-expressions are a lot harder to control. but when you have compounding signals, that's when it's most robust.
AuburnZweilous thanks for your responses. I've been trying to get my thoughts together on this so I can explain what I think I'm seeing. Just trying to learn, and I'm really not sure about some of these signals and want to improve.
What do you mean when you say "on-beat"? When we use that term, it's an indicator of Fe, not Te.
Te/Ti
What I think I'm seeing is like Je Pointed Emphasis, with some Je Projecting Hands. Chomsky almost continuously synchronises the delivery of an articulation with hand and head emphasis. I've slowed the video speed down so that it's easier to notice, and I'm using my hand to help highlight the focus words/moments. See how his hands and head emphasise certain key words in every sentence:
It's actually quite similar to Hillary Clinton's rhythm:
It seems so different to Auburn's hands and head movements:
So, I don't really know what to call that, but it seemed like some kind of pointed emphasis. It feels to me like a Je thing (it's not 'searching' for an idea, it's 'executing' one), and it reminds me of Hillary's 'chops', and doesn't seem warm to me, but is far too continuous to be Ji lead isn't it? Is it something that certain types do while using certain functions? I'm pretty musical, and I actually find that Chomsky's synchronised executions distract me a bit because of how consistent and continuous they are, as if every term in focus needs a corresponding body gesticulation. It's not the rhythm I get when listening to Auburn or Alerith talk.
Fe/Fi
On the flip side, I've scoured the internet for Chomsky's smiles and laughs (no easy task!), and found some samples. I'm really not sure how to interpret his smile; I'm not used to seeing which muscles are being used. But some of the expressions seem a little asymmetrical, and some seem wider than Fi, is that Fe maybe?
Giddy giggle?
Marionette lines and pinched tension, or just age?
So, are those samples of warm Fe?
Ne/Ni
You mentioned that he's TiSi. Does that mean he doesn't really toggle his eyes much? I haven't seen him do any toggling, but I've seen him do fixed stares, and to me they look like Ni Faraway Drifting Zone-outs, but do you think they're Si stares?
This one's 10 seconds long, but the 6 minute video is full of them:
So anyway, I really appreciate your feedback. I'm still pretty new to this, and I'm getting a ton out of the book. I now kind of know what a Levator Labii Superioris Alaeque Nasi is . I'm just having a hard time interpreting Chomsky's signals as Ti or Si or Fe etc, whereas that Ni stare in other people seems fairly obvious.
oh man! so much cool stuff here, (and i very much relate to your learning process) im personally really caught up with developing new materials atm, otherwise i'd jump in
gimmy a bit and i'll come back to this (or maybe others can pitch in in the meantime)
oh man Kahawa - you're really good at pointing out inconsistencies.
But this is in reverse. It's not that Chomsky's displaying Te because his hands look like Hilary Clinton's. It's that Hilary Clinton is displaying Fe-like warm swelling. Both of them are.
As for why this is. There are 2 main reasons:
1) Signal Mixing: Despite my sincerest efforts, i have not been able to formulate a system 100% free of contradiction. As I mentioned in this thread, a formal tallying approach sometimes shows Te-leads with some 10% of Fe signals. Or like, an Fe-lead might have one or two odd asymmetrical mouth expressions. They key here is to look for the most strong constellation of signals rather than highlighting one or two points of exception to represent a whole pattern -- as that's a skewing of the data.
2) The Malleability of the Gesticulation Signal: As I mention in chapter 30 of the book (pg 277 in ebook, part "b"), as far as signal reliability goes, hand gestures are the lowest. This is because they are the most open to manipulation via training. Somebody who's been in the public eye for as long as Hilary Clinton (few people have been longer), will have ample experiencing in delivering impact more gracefully and cordially.
But regarding the signal mixing, even if Clinton shows Fe style warm swelling consistently -- yet doesn't show any of the other Fe signals -- it doesn't make her Fe. In that same TeNi video, the vast majority of signals follow the Te pattern. Again, it's about regularity > particularity, as CT needs to move toward a percentage-based/statistical approach ^^. Rather than looking only at the exceptions, CT tries to look at the whole pattern (including the exceptions) and identify what is most consistent overall. I know this must sound like a cop-out. >.>
But also, you're comparing Chomsky (himself an advanced/difficult read) to another difficult read who is not the best example of an NiTe. If, at least in terms of CT, you wanted to see if someone is NiTe -- it'd be better to compare them against a collection of NiTe's:
Clinton is actually irregular, as far as NiTe's go, and TeNi has been suggested for her. But so, she would sooner be seen as not being NiTe, than her and Chomsky both being considered NiTe. Because neither of them match the rest of the NiTe's on file as strongly.
Chomsky doesn't have to match Clinton in order to be NiTe, Chomsky has to match the rest of the NiTe's - especially the more solid ones.
I could believe Chomsky being PiFe... (NiFe, not so much though). His eyes have gotten saggier with age but this is what they look like under all that sag:
^ as far as his fixed-ness of gaze, that is pretty typical of Pi in general not just Si. Actually, you'll see a similar sort of fixed Si gaze in the recent SiFe video that was finally finished:
^ I think Chomsky looks more similar to these than to the NiTe's or Hilary Clinton. What do you think? 0: