Publications: The Vultology of Identical Twins (pilot)
Jan 10, 2018 2:51:33 GMT -5 by Auburn
Alerith, mikesilb, and 5 more like this
Post by Auburn on Jan 10, 2018 2:51:33 GMT -5
PILOT STUDY FILE:
drive.google.com/file/d/1jvjbB_v1yt_qjh3U3pd1spTdZk9rBKn6/view?usp=sharing
EXCEL FILE:
drive.google.com/file/d/1P3bp80Yre6CtKPy0jFORyFuyHWVM7CiG/view?usp=sharing
About:
This pilot study was put together by commakaze and I, based on the original post here, which suggested identical twins may actually have the same type. We expanded the survey out to 40 samples total, and the rate of similarity still remains at 100%. This isn't to say it wouldn't drop from 100% in the future (i'm sure it would, given enough samples) but it confirms at last 2 important matters:
1. Nature > Nurture
In the case of vultological type, it appears that what we are measuring belongs to nature - not nurture. Many aspects of who we are, are nurture-based. However, type (and if we are to assume that vultological type indicates cognitive processing) seems thus far to be an intrinsic quality of us.
2. Type is very likely Unchanging
There have been some speculations about whether we might be born, say, a general Delta type - and depending on how we're raised, we may come out FiNe or SiTe or some other type. There's also been hypotheses put forward that type may change over one's life. This also appears to not be true, from the viewpoint of CT. We've already accumulated some evidence of this by looking at celebrities from their youth to old age (with only a few questionable but not inexplainable cases like Hilary Clinton, etc). But the five twins separated at birth all appear to be the same type (and subtype!) upon reuniting.
This is... wow. I don't know if I can stress the implications of this enough. o.o
Firstly, it's not a given that mannerisms would be identical between separated twins. One could expect that identical twins might look identical but not gesticulate or express identically. Yet the inverse is true. They not only look alike, they also gesticulate identically even without exposure to any specific type of gesticulation style. And the vultological similarities span down to even the same kind of laugh and energy.
3. Psychometric Tests are Changing, Type is Constant
If there was still any doubt as to whether it's more reliable to use a vultological evaluation versus a psychometric instrument, a study of this sort verifies that vultology is more constant. One's mannerisms don't appear to change, beyond subtype, over one's life. In other words, they stay within a perimeter and may vary only within that limited space/type. And thus, so too our psychology.
I'm looking forward to doing a wider-scale follow up study on this.
If nothing else then from sheer curiosity. Once again like the last pilot study, this isn't intended to be a 'formal' study by any means -- but a general look/canvass at what the terrain looks like.
Very interesting!
drive.google.com/file/d/1jvjbB_v1yt_qjh3U3pd1spTdZk9rBKn6/view?usp=sharing
EXCEL FILE:
drive.google.com/file/d/1P3bp80Yre6CtKPy0jFORyFuyHWVM7CiG/view?usp=sharing
About:
This pilot study was put together by commakaze and I, based on the original post here, which suggested identical twins may actually have the same type. We expanded the survey out to 40 samples total, and the rate of similarity still remains at 100%. This isn't to say it wouldn't drop from 100% in the future (i'm sure it would, given enough samples) but it confirms at last 2 important matters:
1. Nature > Nurture
In the case of vultological type, it appears that what we are measuring belongs to nature - not nurture. Many aspects of who we are, are nurture-based. However, type (and if we are to assume that vultological type indicates cognitive processing) seems thus far to be an intrinsic quality of us.
2. Type is very likely Unchanging
There have been some speculations about whether we might be born, say, a general Delta type - and depending on how we're raised, we may come out FiNe or SiTe or some other type. There's also been hypotheses put forward that type may change over one's life. This also appears to not be true, from the viewpoint of CT. We've already accumulated some evidence of this by looking at celebrities from their youth to old age (with only a few questionable but not inexplainable cases like Hilary Clinton, etc). But the five twins separated at birth all appear to be the same type (and subtype!) upon reuniting.
This is... wow. I don't know if I can stress the implications of this enough. o.o
Firstly, it's not a given that mannerisms would be identical between separated twins. One could expect that identical twins might look identical but not gesticulate or express identically. Yet the inverse is true. They not only look alike, they also gesticulate identically even without exposure to any specific type of gesticulation style. And the vultological similarities span down to even the same kind of laugh and energy.
3. Psychometric Tests are Changing, Type is Constant
If there was still any doubt as to whether it's more reliable to use a vultological evaluation versus a psychometric instrument, a study of this sort verifies that vultology is more constant. One's mannerisms don't appear to change, beyond subtype, over one's life. In other words, they stay within a perimeter and may vary only within that limited space/type. And thus, so too our psychology.
I'm looking forward to doing a wider-scale follow up study on this.
If nothing else then from sheer curiosity. Once again like the last pilot study, this isn't intended to be a 'formal' study by any means -- but a general look/canvass at what the terrain looks like.
Very interesting!