By Skyler T —

CT typing

My CT typing by Varlawend

Your lead energetic was super clear so it really should be Pe-lead for sure. The quadra signals, especially TiFe vs TeFi, were trickier to determine, so that's the main area I'd expect it to be wrong if it was, but NeTi seems to make the most sense overall.

Thank you, this is very interesting! What made the typing unexpected to you?

Two things made the typing unexpected to me:

I believe you said that people were considering SeFi and Ni dominant with polarized Se development, so NeTi is a bit far from that. I can honestly understand why those things would be speculated for you. In the case of SeFi, you have some FiTe (Candid) signals with your mouth and an eye tensioning that is Grounded > Suspended, so it could look more like Gamma at a superficial level. In the case of Ni dominant, you are interested in philosophy, consciousness, etc. which stereotypically fit Ni best. Combined with your clear Pe signals, that also makes sense as an initial speculation. However, Ne also can be interested in things like that (myself, Leo Gura, etc.), so it’s not a very strong argument at the end of the day. Ne is also very “ideational”, as you put it in your video. You actually remind me a little bit of one of Carl Jung’s students, Marie Louise Von Franz, in terms of how you talk and look and act a bit. And she might even be Ni dominant in CT. But I don’t think you are, because you just don’t have many Pi signals (and I checked a lot for them, but Pe clearly predominates). It might just be because both of you are likely ILI in SHS, that you have some similarity.

Secondly, most people into Socionics seem to be Candid (TeFi). This is not rigidly the case though, and I have seen other SHS typed ILI’s typed as Measured (TiFe), for example two of them got NiFe in CT. So overall, there is a lot of diversity, and also might make sense with how you aren’t especially interested in formal systems, mathematics, etc. (which especially relates to Te in CT, but not rigidly). Though you are quite interested in philosophy, basic axioms and principles, like the principles that underlie consciousness, etc. which seems quite common for Measured types (Giulio Tononi, FeSi, created Integrated Information Theory, for example). Ne+Ti used to be called “The Armchair Philosopher” in older but perhaps less accurate materials. (https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Function_Quadrants). Also you have an interest in social systems IIRC which also relates to CT Fe (though maybe Je in general to an extent)

The only example of a NeTi I know is Nacho, who was very contentious in the CT community. I understand that the NeTi stereotype is the 'troll' too. From this perspective, it is surprising that I am an NeTi!

Yeah, that whole troll thing is mostly Nacho IMO. NeTi can be clownish but it’s perhaps more often the case when they have more Fe. Although Pe is associated to humor in CT, in practice comedians are more often Je leads, or at least more often have Je integrated. Pe leads with more Ji, like me and perhaps you, can be more serious, or at least have a more serious side to them (since Ji is a bit more melancholic). Some of the NeTi on that server are more scholarly, study philosophy, etc., like Rua, David Foster Wallace, etc.

Ultimately any type or energetic can troll, and I’ve even seen it with Pi leads for example (who sometimes like to use their “Senex” energy to trick people and their Conductor nature can make them pretty contentious if they also have a Guarded emotional attitude). Probably Ji is the least inclined to it.

For the more basic level stereotypes about NeTi, I’d look more to recently released Wiki pages:

These are the kinds of things that you might see from NeTi or another Αlpha type, emphasized to different degrees depending upon their particular development or focus.

Right now, I know very little about CT. At face value, there isn't a clear link between vultology and psychology. So I'm still trying to understand what a CT typing means

At face value maybe not, but on the other hand CT has a fair amount of evidence at this point connecting Vultology to psychology. For example, there is this paper connecting Vultology to occupation: https://nemvus.com/article/127/

And they are also a developing a psychological tool that they can use to mark passages in the written works of people in order to predict their Cognitive type. It is still in the experimental phase, but so far they’ve found it to have a high degree of accuracy (though not 100%, and it has to be used in a cautious way to make sure the person isn’t influenced too much by conditioning, passed down beliefs, etc.). We could eventually use it to look at your written works as well, to see with what degree they match what we are seeing in your Vultology.

The tool: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fo81kvR034V3nONHY4dhB57XgD8EpCz43CHoG5_xaPc/htmlview

None of this is to say that CT necessarily has the greatest and deepest grasp of type or cognition of any typological system, since they have still mainly investigated just their own theories. They have just been more diligent and systematic in gathering evidence than most other approaches to typology.

For example, in SHS, I'm a normaliser. In the CT server, types with Ji and Pi development appear conscientious and detailed, like normalisers. Yet, I lack both these developments

Development in CT is often something that is misrepresented, in my view. Often, people treat development as if it only comes from Vultology, or the number of ticks in the Vultology code, but this is false and contrary to what Auburn describes. In this article he describes function integration as having 4 aspects: https://ctwiki.co/index.php?title=Integration

In order for a function to be marked in your Vultology code (like, for example, Ji is in mine), you generally have all 4 aspects of it and it becomes so prominent that it rivals your lead function in terms of manifested signals. At this point, the main way to figure out the true lead function of the person is via energetic toll signals. This is relatively rare, which is why I—- is the most common development. And when it happens that you have more functions developed, it is a little bit like having a tense subtype (such as NC/CN) in SHS, since the conscious personality becomes more divided among different priorities, in spite of being more “practical” in different areas of life.

None of that is necessary to develop the successful use of any of your 4 functions, and none of it measures how “good” you are at using a function. So you might have some aspects of Ji and Pi integrated (after all, you have some signals for both, especially Ji), and you may have developed practical abilities in these functions which make you best in the role of a Normalizer (albeit more distracted than the average case due to your Distracted Ne Vultology and your Ni in SHS, which also have a strong correlation due to their associative, imaginative thinking). Auburn even points out that people are often most interested in their undeveloped functions (or at least some of them) since they form an unconscious muse, whereas once a function is consciously developed it becomes more humbly realistic and demythologized: https://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/ct-psychoanalysis/

For example, in my case, I relate a ton to Te+Si in Delta, even though my conscious development may be the opposite. My largest interests are in systems, organization, math, etc. and I’m pretty good at it too, to the point that people are surprised I don’t have this development, I can do research in this area, etc. Some people even think I do it too much, oversystematizing people and plans, for example. Furthermore, two of the top mathematicians in the world are FiNe who also only have I—- and II— development (Andrew Wiles and Terrence Tao respectively), even though this career involves a huge amount of Te as per CT theory (though maybe they use their Fi to some degree, it’s not enough for all of the causal, systematic reasoning involved). The point is that having interest, abilities, and lots of effort spent on one’s unconscious functions is very possible and not uncommon at all.

So in your case, assuming I’m correct that you are an Alpha, you have Ti+Si which is a very rationally diligent combination of functions, and you have plenty of skill and time spent on these functions. They just don’t show up as such a conscious personality in your ongoing second-to-second behavior and Vultology. Your Ne (which relates more to SHS T) seems to play a larger role there.

In fact, you've typed me as Pe. This seems like a very switchable, adaptable, and even humorous type. These are characteristic of the creative subtype

Pe also has some Creative aspects, that’s true, though Ne in particular also relates a lot to SHS T/Ni. It’s also interesting that you seem to want to be more Creative in SHS, as per some of your other discussions in the server, so perhaps you are leveraging some natural talents you possess in other aspects of your psyche (such as from Pe in CT).

So I guess my question is, what are the psychological implications of a CT typing? How far does it correlate with other systems like SHS? What does it mean, if anything, outside of the number of physical signals that are counted in a person?

I guess I mentioned a few by now (Occupational differences, the Psychological tool, the wiki pages I cited which describe the fundamental principles of CT, which some other Wikis also go into more). The Vultology is moreso a tool to understand underlying aspects of the cognition.

The correlation to SHS is something we are working on, here is one sheet we have filled out on the topic which has a tab for SHS (we’re going to do more cross system comparisons going forward): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1umJzU1Nkf8478uOdp5cbWVbNmGflosAWhx-6Wh27Zlo/htmlview

So there is a marginal correlation between the theories and some significant overlap, but overall they seem to consider pretty different aspects of the psyche, independent of the question of how robust each of them are on their own.