type me! give it your best attempt

Hi eitheror I think you may be FeSi or SiFe, not sure which one. I'll get back to it later. Si signals: concentrated stare, frequent blinking and scowlings, some Ne dartings, "confused" Ne/Si eyes.
Fe/Ti: Fe swell in your voice, Fe pathos (more hostile than warm here lol), exacting hands, Ti neutralizations, Fe "anger" expression overall.

The J vs P lead is tough here so I won't pronounce myself yet.

Edit: I tentatively go with SiFe actually. There's lot going on with your eyes, they attract more attention than your J functions and your head seems lead by your eyes. You explore quite a lot, almost like a NeTi, but your ease of articulation and heavy conviction in your tone points toward Fe > Ti.

my interest is in analyzing the contention between traditional methods of typing and the visual typing method.

eitheror, Nicely done video.  More than anything else Si comes through strong in your video.  Lots of Si blinking, scowling, and your eyes almost constantly drift to the sides of your visual field as you think in Pi fashion.  What I found striking is how strong your Fi comes through.  Jerky Fi gesticulations, Fi pained expression and tension in the face, Fi smile and chuckles.  Te was also present in your monotonous communication. Some blunt delivery at times, and a few blunt Te brow raises.  Because SiFi isn't a type, my best guess for you is SiTe.

Another video. This one was done spontaneously as a response to a brooding state I was in at the time. I think this brooding potentially biases things but it's still relevant.



The thing is that both of these videos showcase my introverted, introspective, serious side but after reading about Ne visual cues I'd say it's pretty accurate to how I am when I feel in touch with that realm of experience. My demeanor is very much contingent upon my mood and context. In other situations, I can be fast-talking, highly verbose (I'm verbose in general), gregarious, and whimsical. Especially when having a dialectical dialogue, intellectually stimulating conversation. It becomes a ping pong of ideas, and I often notice my eyes darting wildly. The childlike naivety and wonder conveyed in Ne users' eyes also applies to me in those moods. Robomwm can attest to this, as we attended high school together.

eitheror

When I type (heavy __), I don't necessarily mean to indicate the development of a non-preferred (non-lead and non-support) function out of the ordinary for the type given, but rather to serve as something of a caveat to the read, an acknowledgement of the presence of some cue(s) which serve(s) to obscure the underlying type. That isn't to say that the individual doesn't possess some sort of function maturation, but, quite frankly, there does not currently exist a pure enough (sufficiently abstracted) conception of what the functions actually are and do to begin to make such a claim. And that isn't a deficiency I lay at the feet of CT, but of the entire field of typology, all the way back to Jung, all the way back to the humors, all the way back to the zodiac and elements. Is typology on to something? Of course I think so, yes; I wouldn't be engaged in this community if that wasn't the case. I won't be satisfied with typology, however, until the subjective event horizon has been successfully traversed! What is the contribution of any given function to one's state of consciousness?? How does the nature of consciousness differ between individuals of other types?? Until these questions have been addressed, the question of the "development" of a given function within an individual is premature, or maybe even (when viewed from the vantage of that greater knowledge) completely beside the point. Bigshrug. We just haven't gotten there yet.

As to whether other forumers mean to indicate a greater degree of development of a function when indicating (heavy __), I've never inquired and should suspect it differs from individual to individual.