These two statements below from the "advanced cues" basically say: anyone can use any muscles in their face in certain situations... soooooooooooooooooooooooooo yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh WTF??
Fi users can have wide smiles, depending on their bone structure and other factors. And Fe users can have thin faces which make their smiles appear to rise closer to the nose.
A brief word of caution would be to note that Fe users can in rare times raise the levator anguli oris, sometimes for effect/impact. They might be talking negatively about a subject and raise the muscle in emotional defensiveness, but it still remains true that it is being used as a means of impact Β rather than an unconscious expression.
IluvHSJ may have hit it on the nose though.... The main differences is whether the smile is rising up and clashing (regardless of the width of the smile) or if it is rising up to fill an otherwise flat cheek area. The clashing/bulging is quite distinct, still making this a highΒ fidelity cue.
In order to talk about this in an intelligent way that people can agree or disagree on we need to do 2 things
1. Have a clear indication of WHAT muscle contractions ARE clear indicators of Fe and Fi with pictures & examples of EACH TYPE with muscle contraction/force diagrams (and "type of type" if necessary... i know there is often discussion about types manifesting differently) Its likely its manifests differently in every quadrant.
2. Typing should take into account both the context of the muscle contraction patterns and the prevalence of occurrence in video observation where the videoee is unaware they are being watched for these cues...
this is how I would run an experiment.. and in my mind a fairly close to fool proof method for determining Fe and Fi...
However... none of us have enough time to do that... and I am just not confident enough in my own familiarity (and frankly anyone elses) with any of this to trust that they have a wide enough sample size and a good enough "eye" to pick this up at full speed on the fly...
the breaking point for me the last few days is that the things I thought were obvious... are apparently completely wrong... if i cant distinguish Ne Fe Ti and Si... forget it... I have no idea what I'm doing here...
Its been real folks, and I think this thing has merit... but its just not bringing the value for me that I hoped it would! And there are more important things in life.
heres a sample of what i meant tho if anybody is wondering... half of it may be wrong... for all i know at this point
I'll try to drop back in from time to time and see if anybody has figured this stuff out, but for my own part I just cant make a time commitment of this magnitude on a consistent basis.
BTW Somebody please tag me if they figure out whether im an FeSi or an NeTi!! I'm no longer sure of even that... lata!!
Nooooooo. Don't leeeeave! You are the only newbie who is taking time to learn the signals like me. Haha. I understand your frustrations, though... I agree how crazy it gets @emingtonw...
Fi/Ti can both disengage their eyes down...so i learned you need to look at Ti hands vs Fi hands (erifrail posted a vid, cuz even these can look similar). And other signals in addition to it.
Fe/Fi voices can have emotionality and even Te users with lots of Fi sound soft like Fe/Fi users. So I have to look for other signals sometimes in addition to it.
Fe/Fi smiles can both sometimes disappear quickly and their cheek can go flat after.But i think the distinction is that the same Fi user will also show times where their cheek tension still lingers over...while all of the Fe smiles will neutralize quickly after? This is just my observation, but sometimes I choose to not use it so heavily. And that sucks.
Fe/Te hands can both look stiff. But I think Te hands are stiff even when in casual conversation, while Fe hands get stiff when they are trying to solely persuade or back up their points and there will be kind of a karate chop look (Fe exacting hands)...but not always. So yeah, this signal gets tricky so i look for others to back it up.
Ne/Ni eyes can trick me into thinking they are both soft and naive. Even Se users can have soft eyes. Especially asian descent. So i try hard to look at how their pupils move. I think I am finding that Ne eyes move in a glitchy way. The movements can be small, but they move around...oh,,,almost like the flight of a hummingbird who hasn't found its flower yet. While Se can be a hummingbird but slows down at times at some flowers. It sooo tough though to distinguish...so I try to rely on the Si scowls too.
Si/Ni scowls- some people don't do either in the vid. That is when I get frustrated. Haha. And I learned some Si users dont scowl much or some Se have Si scowls. I guess i pay attention to their eye and brow structure. If they have genetically deep set eyes and their brow-bone is low and protruding, I can then imagine an Se user having an Si like scowl. So even this signal, is not always reliable.
Si and Ni both tend to look or drift to the sides when looking into their worldview. Some Si users say they dont blink as they do this, nor do their eyes focus on anything...they lose focus, like a Ni user...so that's been a signal that gets tricky too and I have frustrations with it. But when you get a real Ni-lead, u see a glazed over quality in their eyes and it gets more clear they are Ni...
"I will never assert that an individual must be the type I think they are. I am human, I still have subjectivity. I also think it's possible that an individual can be aware if they have been mistyped. Therefore, when it comes down to it, the ultimate decision to accept/reject a typing should come from that person themself. For better or worse, it is ultimately up to them...or some kind of perfect brain scan. haha"
-IluvHSJ
So those are all the contradictions/exceptions I have personally noticed now. It gets frustrating for sure. But as long as you can spot a lot of signals, not relying on any one signal solely, while taking into account contradictory signals and considering them too. Then you can form your own analysis.
I really think reading a person gets subjective in this way. It is at your discretion to say...nah, that isn't a real Fi signal or nah...that can't be a Te hand. That is where arguments start, right? I think like a doctor reading a patient xray, all doctors can disagree and interpret it in different ways, but there will be only 1 best fitting interpretation. And maybe that can only objectively be verified with lab tests/other tools. So maybe we can only claim we are right about someone by talking to that person and getting their brain scan at the same time. We can say this is their most likely type...but it occurs to me now that we cannot definitively say it is for sure without their permission/scans. We cannot say she must be this. She must be that. We should say she is likely this or that. But yeah, this is more of an art-form really, a skill, we can get better at mastering the craft, but we can't be 100 percent positive because we don't know that person. We can get closer and closer to the truth, but without that person's input or a brain scan, we might never really know....and I accept that now.
I realize that potential for error, but I think I would like to continue trying to get better at it. As in finding the most signals and considering contradictory signals and making my own analysis based on everything I found. From now on, i will never claim that I am right. I will need that person's 1st hand account and permission and again maybe brain scans are better tests. I can say that this is my best interpretation and will try to defend it if needed or adjust if needed and even go far to say as this is what she "most likely" is...But personally, I think this kind of reading is an interpretation when it comes down to it. Only 1 interpretation leads...and I mean...LEADS to the right answer, but we won't know it is correct until it is truly verified.
Some interpretations will fit better and better and this is why everyone critiques each other. Like artists drawing a live model. Some artists will critique you for how you draw the model's eyes, their nose. They will try to make you change they way you drew it to make it look more spot-on. Their drawings might look remarkably accurate, like the real person. But is it? Not really...what is better is a good photograph. That is closer to their true self, their true appearance. Visual reading is not a camera which produces a photograph, it is an artist with a pencil and paper.
So I have come to the conclusion now thatthe readers are like artists, drawing up as accurate an interpretation as they can about a person's psyche. However, it is still just a drawing in the way that it is filtered/created by our own eyes, thoughts, experiences (with typing), and gut-instincts/impressions. Some people on the forum will become really great artists, really mastering the craft, as their drawings really seem to capture all the signals and look really accurate in other people's eyes and to the typed person themselves...but it will never be as realistic as the photograph.
(and even photographs can have their flaws too...)
Or if we keep it sciency..then the visual readers are like doctors reading a complicated abdominal x-ray. Every doctor will form their own interpretations. Each one is using their eyes, thinking back on their education/experiences, and then coming up with their hypothesis. But only 1 interpretation (not necessarily one doctor) is going to LEAD to the right diagnosis. I think everyone on the forum is trying to arrive at that 1 best interpretation. But to say conclusively that they are right might be too soon. They need the patient to confirm it...like going back to the patient themselves and pushing on certain parts of their abdomen, getting more labs done, asking patients more about symptoms...all of this will help doctors confirm that they have the right diagnosis. Likewise in CT, I would say that a reader should go back to the typed person and ask them about their thoughts, their experiences, and get more input. And still then...we might need another tool, a brain scan or some other test (that may have not been created yet) to help confirm our reading.
I think visual reading is a great tool, better than MBTI tests, but it is still touched by human interpretation, the way an artist draws from a human model and tries to draw them as realistically as possible (but never being quite as accurate as a photograph) or the way a doctor reads a complicated x-ray with his own eyes and uses his experiences/studies to back it up. It helps to lead us to the truth, but it isn't the only way nor exactly the most unbiased way either. For instance, I could be sleepy and that could even affect my reading of someone.
It is a craft, it really is like lip-reading! We might visually lip-read a person saying "I love you" when they are really saying "Olive juice". lol. We would be out of line to tell that person "NO! You told me you loved me!"...because that wouldn't be the truth. haha. We are trying to arrive at the truth, but due to the nature of visual reading we can make mistakes along the way.
And until their book comes out, we on the forum might be missing out on other possible, important signals and ways to refine our craft. So this is all just practice for the storm that will come when their book is released. haha.
(And by writing all this out, I think I have actually been able to come to terms with how I personally see where "visual reading" lies in the grand scheme of psychological typing and consequently I now don't feel so bad if my typing of someone is rejected by others. I can refine my interpretations (which is usually what I do since I am new) or sometimes I am allowed to reject their interpretations and keep mine because that is my discretion. It is one interpretation out of many. And everyone might pull a consensus, but it will only go as far as saying the most likely type...but not necessarily the "actual" type. The truth will come out eventually on who is right and wrong and I strongly believe this confirmation must come from another source, other than visual reading like the typed person himself or another new test that is more removed from human interpretations. So, this is actually the most important post I have written on the forum thus far...for me personally...Thanks to anyone who reads all of it. It was a lot. haha)
"I will never assert that an individual must be the type I think they are. I am human, I still have subjectivity. I also think it's possible that an individual can be aware if they have been mistyped. Therefore, when it comes down to it, the ultimate decision to accept/reject a typing should come from that person themself. For better or worse, it is ultimately up to them...or some kind of perfect brain scan. haha"
-IluvHSJ
@emingtonw i have not much time now to go deep enough inside the thread, because i'm going to bed, i was giving a quick glance to some things and i think i didn't understood everything, i just wanted to warn you about one thing that i think regards me (in)directly. I see that you're using Laura Bush and Hillary Clinton as examples of Fe user, but i must admit that i posted them in the SiFe board basing myself in a consensus that was not so "convinced". As i said in many older posts, Si lead women are really difficult to type, since most of the times they either show only Fi, or mixed signals, and that makes things confusing. That to warn you that these women are not the best example of Fe users, since it is still not totally clear in one case (Laura Bush), and in the other, Clinton, is possibly wrong. She is in the official list as an SiTe, but after a discussion with some people in the forum we "realized" that her Fe signals were not totally convincing, but lately i started to doubt again, and more signals say that she's actually an Fi user. In fact, just today i posted her again in the SiTe board, and in the end she seems to fit more this type. In general, SiFe women are never the best examples of Fe users (somehow things are completely different with Si lead males). I just wanted to say that because i feel responsible for your confusion.
But anyway, for the moment i can't say anything about Sarah Silverman, since i didn't see her videos, only superficially. I just wanted to post a picture i made in the past for another forumer, hoping that it will enlight you somehow. It is not extremely explanatory, it is actually too simplistic, but it gives a good picture of the overall differences.
I agree Sarah Silverman is Fe lead but where I differ is that I think her scowls are pretty clear Ni/Se. I've noticed one way to differentiate Se vs Si scowls is that Se scowls flash across the forehead where as Si scowls tend to have a much longer presence. Also they seem to arise at different times. The Se scowls present during a burst of emotional Se energy where they are accompanied by some light toggling. Si on the other hand usually present during intense inner focus or attention to some particular external details. I dont know how well i've explained that differentiation, i'm still building on the theory myself.
"It is the theory that decides what we can observe" -Einstein
I think I see Fi/Te. When I focus my gaze on her nose area, it is like there is Fi tension and the smile clashes with her cheeks. Despite that she has a wide smile, that tension around the nose area makes me go with Fi.
"I will never assert that an individual must be the type I think they are. I am human, I still have subjectivity. I also think it's possible that an individual can be aware if they have been mistyped. Therefore, when it comes down to it, the ultimate decision to accept/reject a typing should come from that person themself. For better or worse, it is ultimately up to them...or some kind of perfect brain scan. haha"
-IluvHSJ
Revisiting this, I now think that she is most likely an NeTi. She has the excited energy of a Pe-lead, which regularly overtakes her articulation. Her smile appears to be sub-polar Fe. It rises mostly to the sides, with some warmth reaching high up on her cheeks and some muscle contraction beneath her eyes. I've realized that a large percentage of Pe-leads are very Je-ish. The difference is in their energy level, their coordination, and the quality and manner of their articulation. There are many Pe-leads who have much stronger Je signals than Sarah Silverman.