- A TRANSCRIPT TO THE PILOT VIDEO -

Script Narration
A = Renee Bayard
Contents
E = Juan Sandoval

Slide: 03 - History of Typology

Slide: 06 - Identifying Type
Slide: 09 - On Identifying Judgment
Slide: 10 - On Identifying Perception
Slide: 11 - On Introversion & Extroversion
Slide: 12 - On Identifying Introverted Judgment
Slide: 13 - On Identifying Extroverted Judgment
Slide: 14 - On Identifying Extroverted Perception
Slide: 15 - On Identifying Introverted Perception
Slide: 16 - On Identifying Te & Fi
Slide: 18 - On Identifying Fe & Ti
Slide: 20 - On Identifying Ni & Se
Slide: 22 - On Identifying Ne & Si
 HISTORY OF TYPOLOGY

A: About 90 years ago psychiatrist Carl Jung

struggled to write about a psychic
phenomenon he saw which is complex & interwoven.
It was a phenomenon of eight psychic
processes which he viewed as fundamental
to the human brain's workings.
E: ….Jung wrote extensively about each of these eight processes,
and their relationship to one another, and examples of their prevalence
in ages of history in his extensive 900 page book titled Psychological Types.

But even then, his theory remained difficult to interpret and he provided
no standard or empirical way of distinguishing the eight processes in individuals.
Only text explanations - which are subject to interpretation.

Jung had a very "right" understanding of the psyche, but since he didn't provide
a tangible way to measure these functions -- then what resulted was debate
and division among practitioners.

And in much the same way that the early Protestants divided into various doctrines
that each interpreted the gospel differently, so did Jungians divide into various
systems which tried to make sense of his work. You have Socionics, Keirsey, Beebes,
MBTI. Which all stemmed from the desire to make sense of an abstract that was
never brought into the tangible realm.
A: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator was developed during World-War II
in part as a response to getting people into the right career-fields
It was meant to place people in a position most suited to their personality.

But in order to do so, and because of the pressure of the war,

it had to be condensed. They couldn't afford each person to go to a psychiatrist
for half a dozen sessions in order to identify their type. So it was useful in one sense,
but from another, using such a blunt tool to define something as complex as the psyche
is bound to create enormous inaccuracies.

The thing about the four MBTI dichotomies is that they are only symptomatic.
They don't explain a person's psychic processes (the way they're thinking) but instead
what they're doing. Their habits, their routines. Things like whether they are organized,
or if they're sociable. When, the reality is, that one's level of organization can be due to
a plethora of different reasons. And all cognitive combinations are capable of being orderly
or structured. It's the intent behind the action that is important. And that is much more
challenging to assess.
 ON IDENTIFYING TYPE

E: Jung’s work was closer to reality than MBTI. It’s important to note this because
CognitiveType theory isn’t based on MBTI, or Keirsey or Socionic’s work. But instead it’s
based on Jung’s work directly. And so that’s why you’ll see that the four letter
behavioral code which MBTI uses, and which MBTI came up with, is not present in this theory.
Rather, types are named after the psychic functions they use directly. But Identifying a
person’s psychic functions definitely takes training.

A: You don’t diagnose yourself with Lymphoma, the doctor does it. It takes training to see
the dynamics of people’s psyches, and people don’t automatically have a sense of their
own mind’s dynamics. Largely because they think in it, so they can’t see themselves
outside of it. Similar to how we can’t really see our own faces: we have to use a mirror.

Jung knew people couldn’t accurately assess themselves, that’s why he was a psychiatrist.
That was his job. And that’s why Jung never made a questionnaire to type his patients. He
did so himself because he understood what that meant.
E: Learning to read people’s types isn’t enormously difficult once you know what you’re
looking for, and once you’ve isolated traits specific to each psychic process. CognitiveType
theory operates on one basic premise, which goes against centuries of modern psychology,
and that is that the mind is not separate from the rest of the body. The whole nervous
system is connected, the central with the peripheral, and therefore what happens
in the brain as a result of thinking also expresses itself in the rest of the body.

When a person mentally accesses a certain function, at that very moment, as a byproduct
the face elicits nuanced signals which can be interpreted and back-traced to identify
what psychic process they were using at that moment. And that is also why we can
tell apart a person’s cognitive processes through visual observation. And that is a key
point that was missing in Jungian typology.
A: Establishing a visual correlation between the psychic processes is what has finally
taken Jungian psychology out of pseudo-science and into a more concrete realm where
things can be quantified and verified.

So we can now observe a person and say, “yes, you are definitely this type” rather
than estimating using tests or taking guesses based on our subjective impressions,
which vary dramatically from person to person. And it’s this type of clarity that is starting
to dispel the confusion originally caused by the lack of a concrete premise. Which caused
so much division among Jungian practitioners in previous years.
 ON IDENTIFYING JUDGMENT

E: Judgment is a process that determines where we stand on a matter of belief. It is the

realm of conviction; the realm of conviction and decision-making – and execution of
those conviction. And because of this, when the body actively making or executing a
judgment, the body becomes rigid and defensive of those convictions.

Let me explain what I mean. There is a sense of “standing behind your words” when
a person is using judgment in real-time, and that manifests in the body being stiffer and
the movements of our hand and our head being more straight and linear – direct and
more sharp. The muscles get a bit tight. The head in particular remains still and when
it moves it usually shakes its head vertically or horizontally.

If you look at politicians they almost all move in this way and this is because politics is
the very branch of humanity that deals with convictions and execution of those
convictions. And so if you look at a politician they usually have very linear hand motions.
Very accentuated speech. There’s an accentuation in their head nods and their head
shakes. Every movement had a level of coordination and intention. There’s
“punctuation”
in the language of the body.
 ON IDENTIFYING PERCEPTION

A: Now Perception. There’s little choice in perception. Perception is impulsive - it’s

automatic. It’s the way information holistically populates into our mind from our
eyes and other senses.

When we’re exposed to external stimuli, the brain brings to mind connections we’ve
made in the past, and there’s little deliberation over this. This is how it’s different from
judgment. Judgment is deliberate decision-making. Perception is visceral auto-population
of incoming information.

Perception is not a process that is defending a conviction and so it will not manifest
rigidity in the body but rather a fluidity and “ongoing-ness”. But what’s most important
about the perception functions is that they can be identified through the eyes. The optic
nerve is directly connected to the brain. And is considered by many scientist to be part
of the brain. It’s the only sensory organ that is so intimately tied to it. So when we
visualize something in our mind, the eyes initiate the usual behavior of seeing, but as if
seeing into our own head.
A: For example if you’re looking for something in your room, your eyes open and dart
around until they find it. But equally so, if you’re looking for something inside your
head, such as a specific word or thought, the eyes will dart around in much the same way.

When a person engages a perception process, the eyes become the most prevailing
aspect of the face. They become the center of focus and the steering wheel of the rest
of the body. In contrast judgment causes the body to operate as a whole unit, that’s
grounded and more solid. While perception is viscerally directed by the eyes and more
fluid.

ON INTROVERSION & EXTROVERSION

E: Introversion is reactive. It doesn’t initiate, nor does it externalize itself in the world.
Whenever an action is taken, it is always done through the extroverted processes which
are the active ones. And both Judgment and Perception have introverted and extroverted
forms.
 ON IDENTIFYING INTROVERTED JUDGMENT

E: Introverted Judgment is reactive analysis. It begins with an internal values system,

whether those values are logic or ethics based, and then it processes a situation
through that frame of values. And then it formulates a conclusion - but it does nothing
past that. From then the conclusion is taken to an extroverted process which does
something with it.

Now as an individual does this, their energy recedes back into their center and they
begin to deflate their animation. The body will seem to freeze, sometimes almost
entirely, as they disconnect from the environment and focus solely on processing that
decision. And along with the body disconnecting from the environment, the eyes will
go flaccid. They’ll generally look downward and start blinking. And the reason for this
is because introverted Judgment is not a perception process, and thus the eyes are
irrelevant to the process. In fact keeping them open is more of a distraction than a help.

And so part of disconnecting from the environment is disengaging the eyes from the
environment.
 ON IDENTIFYING EXTROVERTED JUDGMENT

E: Now its inverse, extroverted judgment is proactive conviction. The individual

holds a position on a topic, and desires to impact the outer world with that position
and sort-of “win it over”.

Visually what this translates to is gesticulation. Almost all gesticulation motions are
related to extroverted judgment. And the reason being that the motivation behind
placing emphasis on words is to impact the audience. It is to win over the other party
or at least to externalize one’s beliefs and make them known to the other party. So
unlike other signals which occur more accidentally, gesticulation is quite deliberate.
 ON IDENTIFYING EXTROVERTED PERCEPTION

A: Extroverted perception is proactive observation. The eyes are actively seeking

data and this causes the eyes to become more alert and animated. They look around
in all directions trying to take in information, so there’s a lot of darting and eye-toggling.

Psychologically what’s happening when extroverted perception is engaged is the brain

is generating views in real-time. It’s filling in the unknowns and forming a concept on
something they hadn’t thought or seen before. That’s why if you ask someone a question
they have never thought of before, and they don’t have an immediate answer, their eyes
will begin to toggle.

This is because the brain is cross-contextualizing on the spot. Looking inside itself for the
bits of data that do exist and piecing together a new view from it.
 ON IDENTIFYING INTROVERTED PERCEPTION

A: Introverted perception is reactive observation. It’s not data absorption as much

as it is date-recall trigged by looking at the environment. Our introverted
perception is where we hold our worldview. It’s where all the data we’ve absorbed
about our world is synthesized and stored as a template for how reality works.

So because it already has a concept of things, it’s not proactively exploring. So the
eyes are not toggling back and forth. The eyes remain generally still. And like all
introverted processes, when it’s used the person’s energy recedes back into their
core. The body loses momentum and becomes less active.

However, unlike introverted judgment, the eyes remain open. The reason they
remain open is because although it’s an introverted process, it’s still a perception
process and so it’s still perceiving. It’s visually looking through the worldview in
one’s head, to find the relevant pre-existing data. And so what will often happen is
the eyes will drift off to the sides – as if trying to find something it’s lost. And as the
eyes drift, the body drifts with them. And when it’s found the relevant data the
eyes and the head will come back.
 ON IDENTIFYING TE & FI

E: The eight individual functions are never seen in isolation, they're always paired with their
opposite function. And this crosses over into the visual reading as well.

Te has a very “matter-of-fact” form of articulation. It’s very deadpan and very monotone,
but also very fast and very brief. Te is a process that focuses on efficiency, and so it wastes
no time with irrelevant words. Every word it has has a point and it gets that point across
pretty well.

Words articulated through Te will generally be very direct and very cutting. Being a logic
function it completely lacks the empathic element and it emits no warmth in its gesticulations
despite providing so much emphasis on them. And so all those gesticulation motions like –
head shakes, head nods, shoulder-shrugs and eyebrow raises – will have a very cold, distant,
and blunt quality to them. And they’ll be very fast and very “snippy”.

The hands of Te will be more choppy and move more as one whole unit. And the fingers will
generally stay united and swing with more density to them.
E: Now its inverse, Fi, is the warming and empathic side of the two. But it is also an inactive
process. Which means that the warmth of Fi will not be radiating outwardly. Instead it will
swell within the person and sometimes leak through their body accidentally.

When Fi is in use, the individual will go into themselves, to assess how they feel about an
ethical issue and as they do so the body will begin to warm up with that moral concern. And
often this will express itself in a very sorrowful and sullen aura accidentally radiating out of
them.

And this sorrow from Fi is a very distinct signal which can be seen on the face. Particularly on
the cheeks. The cheek muscles will be stretches more from the cheekbone down to the
“depressor anguli oris” which are the muscles on the sides of the lips. The emotions expresses
through Fi are always accidental. Unlike Fe users who have conscious emotional impact,
Te/Fi users will impact via blunt, dispassionate Te but with a deep-running emotional undertone
to that bluntness.
 ON IDENTIFYING FE & TI

A: Fe has a very warming form of articulation. Fe seeks to connect on an emotional level

with its audience, and so when it articulates the voice will have a pulling and persuasive
quality to it.

The inflexion of the voice will have a swell in it, about midway, and then it will trickle down
gently. There is a level of emotional investment in each of its words – whether this investment
is caring or condescending. Unlike Te, Fe gesticulations like head shakes and nods are generally
more elongated. And this is in order to increase the emotional impact of the words.

Ti is an inactive process. And so when it’s engaged it will “halt” the articulation of Fe and also
neutralize Fe’s warmth. Unlike Fi, when Ti is processing it doesn’t accidentally radiate an
emotional aura. Instead it just feels neutral and dispassionate. And so someone who has Fe & Ti
will constantly be oscillating between outwardly emoting very expressively and then receding
back into themselves dispassionately.
A: There’s also a “meticulous” quality that Ti adds to Fe that expresses itself in a very delicate and
perfectionistic form. Te’s speech is more direct and generally says what’s on its mind immediately.
But with Fe, because of Ti’s perfectionism, it will be more “technical” and calculated,
paying more attention to semantics. The hands of an Fe/Ti user will also have that
meticulous quality. The fingers will separate and seem like they’re puppeteer hands pulling
on invisible strings.
 ON IDENTIFYING NI & SE

E: The Ni/Se pairing is a perception pairing, and so they can be identified through the eyes.
The eyes of Ni will be steady, consistent and unblinking. Unlike the Ne/Si eyes which are
much more prone to blink. If an Ni/Se user needs to look somewhere else, generally they
will not move just the eyes in their sockets but they’ll move their whole head in the other
direction.

When Ni is the dominant process in the psyche the eyes will have a cunning and hypnotic
quality to them. And this is because the top eyelid will generally fall a little over the eyes
and give the eyes a look of being very “unimpressed” and “bored”.

When Ni goes into itself to reference its worldview, it will cause the eyes along with the rest
of the head to drift off to the sides and “zone-out”. Pierce through objects with it’s stare
and
appear to be looking through them.

But when Se is the dominant of the two the eyes will be very wide and alert, although still
steady. Though, less steady than Ni dominant eyes and that is because Se is an…
E: …exploration and data gathering function. And that causes the eyes to dart around more.
But the eyes will be very present and real. And they’ll “lock-on” to some aspect of the
environment. And likewise they’ll still generally move their whole head with their eyes
instead of just the eyes.

And so people with Ni/Se eyes will oscillate between locking-on directly on the environment
and piercing through it with the Ni zoning-out.
 ON IDENTIFYING NE & SI

A: The eyes of the Ne will have a very scattered quality to them cause by a lot of darting,
toggling and blinking. Unlike Se which is a bit more steady. Ne eyes will also look very
“naïve” and almost permanently amused.

Even when they’re not confused, they may appear so. But there’s also a softer quality to
them as opposed to the Se/Ni’s more “piercing” stare. The eyes of the Ne/Si sit more
casually in their sockets and have a childlike innocence to them.

When Si is being engaged the mind will go into itself and begin to recall tactile information.
As it does this the eyes will drift off to the sides and will often begin to “scowl” with a sort of
“intense concentration”. But unlike Ni eyes they won’t zone-out and look past objects. The
eyes will be concentrating strongly on some object in the room but not looking through it
like Ni.

And so altogether the eyes of Ne/Si users will be transitioning between a childlike naiveté
and a concerned concentration. www.cognitivetype.com