Give a Little Personality
A Gift Guide by Type

Merry Christmas everyone!  Or whatever you celebrate  Better late than never and as requested, we have a handy little guide for giving gifts according to personality!

Rather than a specific list of individual items, we thought it would be of more value to share with you the principles of what motivates each type and the trends we’ve noticed about what each personality enjoys!  So then this will be useful all year round and not just two days before Christmas

This is our first hybrid post (woo-hoo!) with both a video and written portion (mid-term flashback *shiver*).  Watch the video for our full in-depth versions of what we think each type would like and why (with the option to skip forward It’s a pretty long video), and check out the summaries and full-sized pics below for each type at-a-glance!

ISFJ

Practical Upgrade

Knights often want better versions of the things they already use to do the things they’re already doing.  They want to be more able to protect, serve, and be dependable, fulfilling their personal role in life.  They want an upgrade!  It may seem utilitarian, it may not seem flashy, but it’s what tickles them!

 

ESFJ

Own it, Love It

Charging ahead as a symbol of their group and of the interests and joys they share, the Cavalry loves things that help them celebrate those shared interests.  To that end, they often like clothes (guy Cavalries like to look stylish and put together), and they especially love music as a way to celebrate the style that they and their friends enjoy.

 

ISFP

Meticulous Collection

Explorers love to gather collectibles from the world, whether it be model cars, board games, or foreign food, and then bring them together into their own, personal world that they can treasure.  They want each thing in their protective sphere to be special and important, which can cause their collections to be very specialized; get them something that fits their particular collection, and they’ll feel known and treasured by you.

ESFP

Quirky Camaraderie

Morale Officers want gifts that help them enjoy spending time with the people they love!  These don’t have to be loud or complicated; the point is to hang out and have fun, like with a board game or a great movie.  They may even ask for things that are mainly for others, so they can have fun together!  And they’re usually a little quirky in their interests too, because that makes it all more fun!

ISTJ

Pragmatically Curated

Sentinels tend to be quite practical in their interests, yet they also want their possessions to be of the highest quality.  They don’t want gifts for their own sake; they’d prefer to get a few high-quality, practical items rather than a whole bunch of gifts.  Often if they wouldn’t splurge and get something fancy for themselves, like a great meal, expensive clothes, or a really spiffy appliance, they’ll really appreciate getting it as a gift.

 

ESTJ

Specifically Personalized

The Cannon tends to get excited by gifts that help them better shoot forward and help their group run more efficiently and happily, so they usually know exactly what they want, down to the brand.  Surprises aren’t nearly as important to them as getting the gifts that they’ve determined will best help them pursue the needs and interests of their group, even though those interests might vary wildly between different Cannons.

 

ISTP

More is More

Weapon Specialists love getting gifts that help them specialize better in the things they already specialize in!  Whether it be yet another book on their current subject of interest, or yet another skateboard, or yet another weapon, they get excited by tools that help them do even better at the things they specialize in.

 

ESTP

Check This Out!

Spartans love gifts that help them enjoy their individuality!  So they often like cheeky stuff, and anything that helps them stand out while doing what they’re already doing.  They love things that are casually useful, like a cool-looking phone case or a neat water bottle, yet that also make people take notice, as their way of saying, “That’s right, this is me!”

INFJ

Read the World

Paladins take joy in finding the day-to-day usefulness of sweeping, universal principles that others might think don’t apply in real life.  So they love gifts that help them explore meaningful archetypes and principles in their particular areas of interest, whether that be history or math, horror or fantasy or politics or whatever.  Paladin girls especially tend to like fairy tales and Disney, as a way to explore and apply the principles of what makes people and world matter.

ENFJ

Timelessly Personable

Veterans particularly love knowing that they’re known and appreciated by those close to them, so they often like being surprised by getting exactly what they wanted without having to ask for it.  And with their timeless love of people, Veterans tend to enjoy vintage items and classic pieces that help them stand out while fitting in with their group.

 

INFP

Capture the Flame

Rangers love things that help them treasure and experience the things that already inspire them, whether by creating or by enjoying someone else’s creations.  So they may like sketchbooks or nice art, books or writing supplies, or a bit of each!  They love gifts that help them create the perfect conceptual moment, like a cozy window seat with a mug and a good book, or tickets to their favorite show or a museum.  (Want to get a Ranger a book by an INFP?  Try J.K. Rowling, Suzanne Collins, or H.P. Lovecraft!)

 

ENFP

Let’s Make This Personal

Standard Bearers love gifts that help them express their individuality, as if to say, “Look at me, this is who I am, this is why I’m special!”  They want things that help them express the person that is them, like clothes or other items that declare their interests and loyalties.  Inside jokes are especially important to Standard Bearers, since they let them know that your time and experience together meant as much to you as it did to them.

INTJ

Inner Exploration

Dragons like books!  All types can like books in their own ways, but Dragons love using them as tools to explore the wide world and to benefit from the thoughts and explorations of others, so they can make use of it all.  They’ll often love nonfiction, but sprawling or inspiring fictional worlds can excite them as well, as long as they have enough complexity and realism.  Any gift that helps a Dragon learn how to use the world, and which allows them to curl up with their private, soft, cute side, will probably be greatly appreciated.

 

ENTJ

New and Improved!

Crusaders tend to want better, faster, stronger, shinier ways to help them do and enjoy what their group already does best.  Whether it be camping or video games, photography or mountain biking, Crusaders love to shine out as the paragon of whatever they love to bond over with their friends.  So they usually enjoy gifts that equip them to charge at the head of the pack and show everyone how to do it with flair!

 

INTP

Possibilities to Try

Alchemists get excited by gifts that represent interesting ideas, like nifty tools or cool inventions, or books or magazines with concepts that intrigue them.  They love to try *new* things, always seeking another *new* idea of how to make things work, like a cool new tool or book or toy with new uses and ideas they can try out.  While interests may vary between Alchemists, they’ll all tend to love exploring possible ideas and theories about whatever they’re interested in.

 

ENTP

Freestyle Utility

Swashbucklers love tools that help them enjoy and show off themselves!  They tend to prefer open-ended tools that they can use over and over with unlimited possible uses, like a building set, a digital camera, an open-ended video game, or a dress that can be mixed-and-matched with anything.  They also like statement pieces, like a really cool tie or a geeky t-shirt, all as reusable ways of strutting their stuff.

We hope your holidays are just as special and unique as you are (because that’s not cheesy or anything!) and that you are able to celebrate the people you love as you celebrate this special time of year!

Much love!
<3 Calise and Justin

The post Give a Little Personality: A Gift Guide by Type appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

What if, like colors, genders or flavors, Personality Types create a beautiful cornucopia of complexity and balance, where each member contributes to the whole, an equal and necessary component, without which there would be a gaping hole?  And what if becoming special is simply a matter of owning who you are and choosing to pursue the very thing *you* love most?

These are Type Specializations.

This topic is one of my very favorite things about personality typing because it’s so wrapped up in what every type *is* and not only what every type specializes in, but what *drives* every type.  It’s easy to focus on cursory traits that may or may not come with a certain type – yes, ISTJs are usually fond of rules and yes, ENTPs often like taking risks; yes, INFPs spend a lot of time exploring inside their own heads and yes, ESFJs can often be found being great hosts and hostesses – but why?  What is that common thread that laces itself through a personality type?  What means the world to *your* personality?

Type Specializations are made up of two components, Scope and Objective.

Scope

Scope is a type’s field of view, to which they unconsciously and primarily apply all information.  Where does your mind go when you don’t have to be thinking about something else?  What do you love most and therefore apply all other information back to?

 

Theoretical vs. Particular (I vs. E)

As Optimism, Pessimism and What We Do About It explained (though perhaps not my best explanation ever), Introverts focus on people in theory, whereas Extraverts focus on particular people.

Since Introverts spend the most time working with information inside their heads, where people are fairly theoretical, they think first about how information applies to people in general — i.e. “someone like this.”

Extraverts spend the most time getting information from the people right in front of them, so they think first about how a particular individual would interact with the information they have — i.e “Larry.”

For example, if I were to discuss ninjas vs. samurai with My INFJ, he would apply our discussion first to theoretical people inside his head, and would say things like, “Well, ninjas are cool because of the whole silent but deadly thing, but I can appreciate how samurai make honor and chivalry look bad-a.”

My ENFJ mom, on the other hand, would apply our discussion first to particular people she’s interacted with, and would say something like, “I knew a samurai once and he was one of the nicest guys.  You know, just a great family man and he told really funny jokes about katanas.  There was a ninja who worked in my office and he was… nice enough.  He didn’t kill anyone *I* knew, so I can’t really complain.  I can’t say I’d invite him over for dinner, but I guess if he came I wouldn’t necessarily know…”

Though the other I/E types might differ in specifics from those examples of INFJ and ENFJ, it would still hold true that the Introverts would apply things to people Theoretically first, and the Extraverts would apply things first to Particular people they’ve interacted with.  That is, of course, not to say that Introverts can’t apply things to Particular people or that Extraverts can’t apply things to people Theoretically; like all things in personality typing, it’s about which one you focus on and prioritize.

Collective vs. Individual (J vs. P)

The second variable that Scope is based on is Collective vs. Individual.

Judgers, with their cognitive emphasis on decisions, plans and worldview, are focused on the Direction of Action (remember the Map?).  Their focus on planning and universal principles in their decision making means that they have to look at the collective actions of people to understand ahead of time how people and the world will act in order to make plans ahead of time.  As they watch the decisions of the collective, they care more and more about the destination of that collective.

Perceivers, with their cognitive emphasis on possibilities, observation and information gathering, are focused on the Exploration of Action (action like a Toolbox).  Their focus on exploring all the possible options makes it necessary to have trusted sources of information, and therefore need to understand the motivations of individuals.  As they come to understand the motivations of individuals, they grow to care more about exploring those individuals and fulfilling their needs.

These four combinations of two variables create the four Scopes.

The Four Scopes

IJs, who focus on Principles and the root causes behind the workings of the universe, care most about the direction of the World as a whole, cultures, etc.  They are the most zoomed out of all the types, focused on the big picture of where the world is going and why.

 

 

 EJs, who focus on Action and the Consequences and results of choices, care most about the direction of their particular Group, those united with them in common purpose and directive.  They are the second most zoomed out of the types, in terms of size of scope, focusing on the collective outcome of many specific individuals, though their emphasis on Specific Action tends to make them more zoomed in.

 

 

 EPs, who focus on Observation and the Motivations behind character, care most about the exploration of particular Individuals, starting with the exploration of themselves.  They are the second most zoomed in of the types, in terms of size of scope, focusing on single specific individuals, though their emphasis on Universal Action tends to make them more zoomed out.

 

 

 IPs, who focus on Data and Details and the conclusions they lead to, care most about the exploration of Situations and what theoretical individuals could choose in a given scenario based on those details.  They are the most zoomed in of all the types, focused on delving deep into specific, specialized information. 

As different as these four Scopes are, like the sixteen types within them, they are equal, so long as each recognizes the need and value of the other three.  We cannot fully understand the information in which we specialize unless we see it in context of everyone else’s specialization.

 

Objective

Objective is what a type tries to accomplish with and for their Scope.  It’s also what side or angle of that vast Scope they prioritize.  Where do you sink your precious effort?  What excites you about your Scope, more than anything?Objective is based on a person’s two middle letters.  It’s actually much easier to explain than Scope, with variables drawn pretty directly from the definitions of the letters they demonstrate.

 

Puzzle Pieces vs. Word-Nets (S vs. N)

I’ve explained in this post, as well as in LMA that Sensors think in Puzzle Pieces; they examine one piece of information at a time, and each piece of information has its own unique spot in the whole, where it snaps into place.  Meanwhile, I explained in those same posts that iNtuitives think in Word-Nets or Webs; each piece of information connects to every other through patterns and has to be viewed in context of all the other pieces of information.

The same principles apply to how each type focuses on Objective.

Sensors focus on the intrinsic value that their Scope already has to offer.  Their Objective centers on getting the most out of what their Scope already is, and prefer not to change their Scope.  But a truly healthy Sensor will realize that in order to appreciate and utilize everything they love about their Scope, the bad parts of it may have to be changed.

iNtuitives focus on how the value of their Scope is increased by connecting it with the value of other information.  Their Objective centers on getting the most out of what their Scope can be, often by seeing how to change it.  But a truly healthy iNtuitive will realize that in order to get the most out of their Scope, they need to appreciate what it already is, and not change the good parts.

Use vs. Meaning (T vs. F)

Going briefly into this pair since the definitions are the same as described in LMA.

Thinkers focus first on the Use of information and the Objective of their Scope is no exception.  Thinkers prioritize and find the most joy getting the most Use out of their Scope.

Feelers focus first on the Meaning of information, including the Objective of their Scope.  Feelers prioritize and find the most joy understanding fully the Meaning of their Scope.

It should go without saying at this point (but if it did, would I be mentioning it?) that both the use and meaning of all the Scopes is essential.  The End.

 The Four Objectives

STs focus on the Use of the Puzzle Piece they care about most, their Scope.  Their aim is to get the most Use out of their Scope as it already is, and to give their Scope a protected environment where it can flourish in the use it already has.  Their goal is to find the inherent Value and intrinsic worth their Scope has.

Since they focus on the Use of experiences, they tend to focus on the past of their Scope; that’s where they gather the most information, after all, as you can really only learn use from *past* experiences.  They are therefore very protective of the past of their Scope, desiring it to be as useful as possible.

They tend to think in terms of right and wrong.

NTs focus on how the Use of their Scope connects to the Use of everything else.  Their aim is to find ways to maximize the Use of their beloved Scope, and raise it to its full Potential, even if that requires their Scope to change.  They love to find new possible uses for their Scope.

Since they focus on the Use of concepts, they tend to focus on the future of their Scope and examining conceptually how to “new and improve” their Scope, adding to its usefulness by going forward into possibilities.  They use their iNtuition to see the context of how their Scope connects to everything else to see what it’s still missing and needs to be added.

They tend to think in terms of truth and error.

SFs focus on the Meaning of the Puzzle Piece they care about most, their Scope.  Their aim is to understand and enjoy the Meaning of their Scope as it already is, and to protect the Meaning in their Scope so that they and others may have the chance to Experience meaning as it is, before it’s lost.

Since they focus on the Meaning of experiences, they tend to focus on the present of their Scope.  The time to grasp the full Meaning of an experience is *while* experiencing it and SFs try to get as much out of that current experience as possible.  Though they focus on the current moment of their Scope, healthy SFs make experiences into something so much more meaningful than just one freeze frame of time.

They tend to think in terms of pleasure and pain.

NFs focus on how the Meaning of their Scope connects to the Meaning of everything else.  Their aim is to understand the full significance and Meaning of their Scope, and help it achieve even more Meaning, even if that means their Scope needs to change.

Since they focus on the Meaning of concepts, they tend to focus on their Scope within time as a whole.  Context is the big word for NF, looking at how their Scope fits into the Big Picture of everything and seeing the significance of their Scope within that context.

They tend to think in terms of justice and mercy.

When we combine the four Scopes with their four options of Objectives, we can see the sixteen Type Specializations.  And it is only with all sixteen combined that the entire spectrum of zoomed in and zoomed out, the collective and the individual, use and meaning, as things are and as they can be, are all fully realized and valued as they should be.

Each type’s *entire* cognitive process revolves around their unique combination of these variables.  It prompts every thought, motivates every action, counsels every judgment and inspires every worldview; it is the end goal to which each type aspires.

The Sixteen Type Specializations

This graph shows not only the sixteen unique Type Specializations, and most the info we’ve covered up to this point but, like all my graphs, it’s really two graphs for the price of one!  The first graph is arranged by Scope, according to the 4Toi (Four Types of Information), *but* the position of the each type inside its handy little box in the first graph, correlates with which big box it goes in in the second graph!  This way, each box is a microcosm of the whole graph!  The second graph is arranged by Objective, but the *tubular* part is that, even though Objective is by middle letters, it’s *also*arranged by the 4Toi, because the four function combos correlate with the 4Toi too!!!  Yay!!!

 

INTJ
The Dragon
World Potential Specialization
Possible Use of the Theoretical Collective 

 

ISFJ
The Knight
World Experience Specialization
Protective Meaning of the Theoretical Collective

The ISFJ Knight is the chivalrous protector of Meaning in the World as it stands, dedicated to the Principles that keep the World Experience safe.  Dependability their mantra, the ISFJ Knight is determined to uphold what it means to them to be a pillar of their collective, which to them is bigger than any of the individuals within it.  The Knight enjoys the World as it is and finds great joy in serving and nurturing that world in a rugged, on the ground sort of way.  As an IFJ though, they struggle with overly positive character judgments and therefore need to turn to the Principles they advocate to be sure the World they love and the people safeguarding it are still living up to everything they were meant to stand for.

 

INFJ
The Paladin
World Meaning Specialization
Possible Meaning of the Theoretical Collective

The INFJ Paladin is all about context and the application of Meaning.  With a fantastic understanding of universal principles and how they weave their way through the World at large, they are excellent at making principles *useful*, turning them into action and applying them to everyday situations, cutting right to the core of *why* things work.  They take the meaning throughout the world and use it to make real life decisions, as well as move the world closer to the meaningful ideal that those principles help them see.  Like the other IJs, they struggle with understanding the intentions of individuals and need to remember not to equate someone breaking or upholding a principle as a measure of that person’s character.  Also, their fear of standing out from the crowd and desire to be liked as who they really are, can make them doubt their own better judgment and keep them from recognizing the flaws in others.

ESTJ
The Cannon
Group Value Specialization
Protective Use of a Particular Collective

The ESTJ Cannon is the “Action Corner” of the graph, specializing in doing and doing well, protecting their Group of people with similar end goals, so that the rest of the group can do the same.  They’re excellent at understanding how to use actions and consequences to the pragmatic use of their Group’s intrinsic Value.  They focus on using the Group they already have in front of them, getting the most utility out of the people they have at their fingertips, and their aim is to protect and free up the members of their Group so that they can fulfill their own roles and help the Group shine and work like clockwork.  But while we love the “point and shoot” nature of our ETJs, the need for pointing *before* shooting cannot be overemphasized, and the Cannon needs to be sure not to leap into action before they’re sure their understanding of the intricacies of a situation (EJs’ last) is a complete picture.  Also, being the action-specialist, the Cannon needs to be careful not to judge others’ worth on their ability to act.

ENTJ
The Crusader
Group Potential Specialization
Possible Use of a Particular Collective

Focused on the Potential of their Group as it can be, the ENTJ Crusader is a passionate recruiter to their causes, able to see the future capacity of their like-minded team and make it happen.  They have a powerful ability to rally others to action and show them why causes and purposes matter so much, because they understand just what a Group can do to change the world for the better, given the chance.  One of the main ways the ENTJ Crusader seeks the future success of their own team, is to rush into battle against opposing teams, ready to defend their team’s ideals at a moment’s notice, unafraid or even spoiling for a fight.  But the Crusader needs to watch out for oversimplifications about the finer details of situations.  With their last step being data and details, ENTJs tend to build up strawmen arguments without considering the complexity of a situation and end up hurting or estranging people who may have been on their side if given a chance.  Passion is good and it’s one of ENTJ’s greatest assets, but without complexity it can end up being one of their greatest liabilities.

ESFJ
The Cavalry
Group Experience Specialization
Protective Meaning of a Particular Collective

The social leader, the ESFJ Cavalry loves to Experience the Group and improve the Group’s Experience.  They love to charge at the front of their party on a shining white steed as an example of what to do and how to act, encouraging those who follow in their wake.  Loving a oneness with the Group as it currently stands, they excel at understanding and leading the social consciousness and people love following their fun, charming lead.  But with their relationship with the Group being so important to them, the Cavalry needs to remember to be real and help steer social expectations in a meaningful direction, rather than getting pulled along with them.  If the ESFJ lets their desire to be popular or fit in with the Group exceed their love of the Group and the members in it, they can end up hurting the very people they intended to enjoy in the first place.

ENFJ
The Veteran
Group Meaning Specialization
Possible Meaning of a Particular Collective

With a focus on the Meaning of action and how their Group fits into the context of all of time, the ENFJ Veteran has a timeless quality that both looks to the past and the overarching Meaning of what people have done and what events have transpired, but lives and acts in the moment.  They live for their connections with their Group, which for them is anyone connected with them in common Meaning or understanding, and the victories and defeats of their friends are indistinguishable from their own joys and travails.  But even as their empathy is their greatest strength, it can also put them in danger of Faramir Dilemma, as choosing between Group members can be like ripping themselves in two.  If they ignore what details and situations say about their friends, they can end up pulling down the Meaning of the whole Group in order to protect the Meaning of one.

ESTP
The Spartan
Individual Value Specialization
Protective Use of Particular Individuals, starting with themselves

The ESTP Spartan is the champion of Individualism, loving to explore the Value of Individuals as they already are and have been, starting with the ESTP themselves.  The Spartan’s goal is to see just how much they can do with what they already have in their self-hood arsenal, just how spectacularly cool they can be without losing who they are at all.  They love to use the whole world as a sounding board to find out just what they are and enjoy that self, and love to enjoy others and teach them to do the same.  There is no problem at all with the ESTP Spartan enjoying themselves, but they need to be sure that their healthy stubbornness about maintaining the person they are doesn’t turn into stubbornness about their actions which, as EPs, they’re likely to suck at.  It is completely possible to keep the core of the person you are while being willing to change the bits of yourself that you didn’t like in the first place.

ENTP
The Swashbuckler
Individual Potential Specialization
Possible Use of Particular Individuals, starting with themselves

Ever unpredictable, the ENTP Swashbuckler does what works; they excel at applying and adapting the tools in their observed arsenal to whatever new and unusual situation they might come up against, disregarding the rules and following their gut.  Focusing on the Potential of Individuals, starting with themselves, the Swashbuckler is all about exploring and pushing the limits of what they as a person can do and be, and encouraging others to do the same. With their love of observing people and their motivations, the Swashbuckler is excellent at seeing, understanding, and changing their own character to become the larger-than-life person they *want* to be.  But the Swashbuckler, with their last cognition step being action, needs to be careful not to be flippant with the damage mistaken actions can cause.  An ENTP who no longer *cares* about the effect of their mistakes on others is no longer well-intentioned, which leaves them a hollow shell of the person they wanted to be in the first place.

ESFP
The Morale Officer
Individual Experience Specialization
Protective Meaning of Particular Individuals, starting with themselves

The ESFP Morale Officer puts themselves in charge of the Individual Experience, making sure that each person, including themselves, gets to enjoy and be enjoyed to the fullest extent of who they are.  Focused on loving and enjoying people as they already are, the Morale Officer makes people feel like they matter, and knows how people feel *right now* is important.  ESFP’s biggest fear is that they’ll never have a lasting impact on anyone, and so they may feel more desperate to please individuals in the moment, often at the expense of standing up to them.  But while the ESFP may be trying their best to choose action to make others happy, they need to realize that sometimes you need to make someone unhappy in the short run in order to make them *happier* in the long run.

ENFP
The Standard-Bearer
Individual Meaning Specialization
Possible Meaning of Particular Individuals, starting with themselves

The ENFP Standard-Bearer specializes in understanding the context of Individuals and what they *Mean,* starting with themselves.  They see the timeless intrinsic significance of what Individual people are and can be, and love to explore that people-Meaning and share it with others.  They also shine at helping Individuals rally around the Meaning that they personally could accomplish in the world.  But with their primary focus starting with the Meaning of themselves, the Standard-Bearer needs to be cautious not to defend their own Meaning (especially actions, which as EPs they’re likely to be self-conscious of), to the point that they end up making others feel of less worth, or like they have to compete with the ENFP in order to have their own Meaning and significance.

ISTP
The Weapons Specialist
Situational Value Specialization
Protective Use of Theoretical Individuals

The ISTP Weapons Specialist is the master of mastery; the specialist of specialism.  Their focus is centered on getting the most out of the Situation at hand, focusing on their hard-earned skills, achieved through jumping full-throttle into falling in love with something and immersing themselves totally and completely in it, using their bodies and minds together as a precision instrument at whatever speaks to them.  They love to push themselves to the limits of what’s possible in a Situation, just to explore what can be done in a given moment.  But with both their ST and IP focusing on getting the most use out of their past experiences, and because the way in which they used their past Situations is so important to them, the Weapons Specialist needs to beware claiming that they’ve experienced every possible type of experience.  With their final cognition step being principles, the ISTP may have trouble fully realizing how universal the universe really is.  But this is really good news for the Weapons Specialist, as it means there is always a new adventure waiting and new ways to use their very special specialism.

INTP
The Alchemist
Situational Potential Specialization
Possible Use of Theoretical Individuals

The INTP Alchemist is all about finding new ways to get the most Potential use out of every moment, finding joy in modes, methods and systems, ideas and possibilities, natural explorers in the realm of what could be.  They love to use their minds to explore the world by themselves, using abstract thought to find solutions to problems and to understand the nuances of data and specifics, innovating in order to use each Situation as effectively as possible.  But with a love of mental specializing and a fear that they need to be the smartest kid in the class or be rendered worthless, the Alchemist needs to remember that (as this post demonstrates) they don’t have to specialize in everything and aren’t lessened by needing others’ strengths as much as others need them.  They especially need to be aware that specific data does not unilaterally apply to every Situation and it’s tempting for an INTP to imply that being good at details means that their worldview is correct, when usually the two are entirely unrelated.

ISFP
The Explorer
Situational Experience Specialization
Protective Meaning of Theoretical Individuals

The ISFP Explorer explores the Experience of every moment, getting the most meaning out of every exploration, and every moment is a new adventure.  Treasuring the little things is the Explorer’s deep love and they have a beautiful understanding of details and their importance.  As IP question askers, they’re intent on finding why each moment matters in a wonderfully goofy, immersive way.  But since the things they explore are so desperately important to them, they may try and offset the fear of loss by either holding desperately to the things and Experiences they’ve accumulated, or by growing aloof and trying not to care about anything too much.  But the Explorer can remember that there will always be more moments and details to Experience and treasure, so they can both feel free to let go of the ones they have, and feel free to really immerse themselves in whatever Experiences may come their way.

INFP
The Ranger
Situational Meaning Specialization
Possible Meaning of Theoretical Individuals

The INFP Ranger is the Meaning explorer, a question asker whose aim is to understand the context of each Situation within the whole.  Where INFJs love to find how Meaning applies to action, the INFP instead loves to explore the philosophical what-ifs of Meaning, like INTPs do with use, finding new ways that the power of details and delving deep into theory can reflect on the Meaning of the whole.  The Ranger needs to remember though, that since they explore Meaning by themselves, focusing on details, and Principles are their last cognition step like the other IPs, they need to remember that meaningful details that apply to one Situation do not a universal principle make.  But as the INFP Ranger focuses on the potential Meaning of Situations and turning that into character judgments, both where they excel, they can contribute such a light of understanding to others.

 “You Shouldn’t Be Special”

One thing that isn’t unique to any of the types?  Feeling like it isn’t okay to specialize in the things that matter most to them.  No matter the specialty, no matter the type, we all feel guilt at times about who we are and what we choose to care about.  Be it from those who feel guilty themselves about their specialty, or those who are jealous of our strengths, the outside world is forever trying to knock us down and prevent our feeling special and of worth.

But one of the most crucial principles to understand about Type Specializations—whether we’re looking at someone else and wishing we had their strengths, or when someone else jealously looks at us and says, “Well, it’s not fair, you’ve always had it easy.  I’d be good at that too if I were your type.”— is that no type has it easy.  No type is born with their specialty being easy.

Is it easy for ISFJ Knights to always be there when they’re needed, noble and dedicated?  No.  Is it easy for the ENFJ Veteran to be so patient and understanding with the members of their group or for the ISTP Weapons Specialist to be so vigilant at the things they love?  No.  But they care that much.  They care about their Scope and Objective enough to overcome obstacles, even when it’s hard, even when it’s thankless and even when they get crap, because it matters that much to them.  And *every* type is like that about their specialty.

I’ve been told I come off very self-confident, in person especially, which is a traditionally ENTP trait.  That certainly wasn’t something I was born with and it never came easy for me (like laughably so), but, with my cognition and specialty revolving around the person I am and who I wanted to be, it was worth it to me to overcome my fears of coming off awkward or stupid.  It took a lot of trial and error and I still get weird looks when I wear stripey knee socks or dance like no one is looking, but I own it because my specialty of being who I want to be is more important to me than never looking stupid.

If you want another type’s specialty, in addition to your own, which you already work hard for, then you have to overcome their obstacles too, be willing to put up with the crap they put up with and have discipline in the areas they have, in order to gain those strengths.  If you don’t care enough to put yourself through that, then that’s fine, but don’t pretend that someone else had it made because they were willing to put the time and effort into an area that your heart wasn’t in.

Hopefully you now have a good idea of your own specialization.  (If not, we’d be happy to help )As we understand what we’re best at and what has always mattered the most to us, we can reflect back over our lives and why things mattered to us and understand how to make our lives reflect that passion in the future.  We can also see why sometimes things were hard to give up, and how we felt scared or angry when our specialty was in jeopardy.

So, let me fulfill my specialty as an ENTP; let me show you through aLBoP just how much your specialty is needed, just how heroically and greatly you can use it, and just how special you are.  The world needs your talents, your strength and your fervor.  We need you.  Let’s celebrate *you* and show you how to shine as the unique and special person you are.

On the aLBoP Guided Tour?  Up next is The Cognition Process in Stick Figures!

The post Type Specializations: What Makes *My* Type Special? appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

But, whether you were completely new to this personality stuff and wondering what the heck she was talking about, throwing letters around willy-nilly, or if you’re an absolute pro who has been studying this stuff since you and Jung were eating bratwurst together, you need to know what I mean when I throw out a four variable combination, whether it’s ENTP or Unicorn-Daisy-Tomato-Orange.  Personality Typing means squat if you have an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of what the variables mean in the first place.

And so here, boys and girls, is where I define my terms… in no uncertain terms

And because lately I spend *far* more time correcting type stereotypes that have *nothing* to do with the way a person cognates, I’m going to lay it out in gritty, intimate detail.  And none of this “too long; didn’t read” crap.  The human brain is complex and awesome and I’m not going to superficially oversimplify it because some people are uncomfortable with complexity and think that a Reader’s Digest version of psychology means they understand this stuff.  It has stick-people; how much more user-friendly can I make this?!

1)      A way to like who you are.
Personality Types are about loving all your favorite things about yourself, and understanding how to work with the stuff you’re not so fond of.  They are about loving the core of who you are, while becoming the best version of yourself you can possibly be!  The sixteen personality types are all both equal and unique; they are each lovable and special, and those of us who have glimpsed what they truly have to offer, understand that the world would be lost without any one of them.  Personality Typing can help you glimpse that lovable-ness within yourself and teach you that you are valid and can be loved for the way *you* think.

2)      A way to not feel alone.
Not only are there other people who understand and love the way you think, and understand where you’re coming from, there are other people who think just like you do!  Personality Typing can help you relate to others like you, both real and fictional, and help you learn from the choices people just like you have made.  Then, the next time you feel like no one wants or understands someone as O_o as you really are inside, remember there are other people just as lovably weird and wacky, with just as much complexity as you have.

3)      A way to understand your strengths and make the most of them.
Personality Types teach us that the world needs our unique strengths.  Every personality type is unique in what it brings to the table.  The things you’re naturally good at matter and you don’t have to have the same strengths as someone else to be important and valuable.  Personality Types give you permission to care about the things you love most, specialize in the things most important to you and be what you already want to be.  They show you that it’s good that you’re you; that the world desperately needs what you already have to offer.

4)      A way to understand your weaknesses and turn them into strengths.
One of the coolest things about the human brain is its ability to learn stuff, to say to itself, “Whelp.  That was stupid,” and to make course corrections based on observed mistakes.  But, of course, that means that things aren’t known until they’re learned.  These cool brains of ours have only so much energy, so of course we’re going to use them on the stuff we care about most… and some other areas may go by the wayside.  That’s natural and each personality type has its own associated weaknesses, but it also has built-in strengths specifically formulated to overcome those weaknesses.  Cool huh?!

5)      A way to understand where other people are coming from.
As you come to recognize personality types as you see them, whether in fiction or in real life, you’ll come to understand the reasons and motivations behind others’ choices.  Understanding *why* others do what they do can help you know how to work with their natural strengths and desires, and inspire them to overcome their weaknesses in a way that encourages rather than demeans them.  You never have to say, “Well, I just don’t get that guy.  What’s up with him anyway?” because you’ll understand where he’s coming from.

6)      A way to understand why the things you care about most not only matter, but are necessities that only someone like you can provide.
Each type has a unique specialization that it does better than any other type.  And, no, I’m not talking about “This type should be a mechanic,” “That type should be a lawyer,” that every single website seems to make it about.  I’m talking about what you already love, what already matters to you and where you spend your thoughts when you don’t have to be thinking about something else.  I’m talking about what excites *you* more than anything, and how the world needs someone like *you* to do that thing; so that nothing gets missed, no one gets forgotten, everyone works together and the world goes in a direction that matters.

7)      A way to become a hero.
Like I said, there are heroes and villains of every type.  The more you understand the way you think, and see who has come before you with the same exact mental tools you have, the more you will recognize that you can follow in the footsteps of the heroes, tread where the protagonists have trod, and stand as an exemplar for those who follow behind you.  You have as much potential for bravery, compassion, adventure and integrity as anyone before you.  The future of your story and the height of your potential are entirely up to you; who are you going to be?

What do the Letters Really Mean?

There are 16 personality types, each a unique combination of 4 variables.

Are you Introverted (I) or Extraverted (E)?
Are you iNtuitive (N) or Sensing (S)?
Are you Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)?
Are you Judging (J) or Perceiving (P)?

But language being what it is, the definitions of these titles may *not* be what your mind first jumps to.

As I said in The Cognition Process in Stick Figures, everyone thinks, but we don’t all do it in the same way or in the same order.  Personality Types are simply about the priority we place on different kinds of information and how those priorities affect our choices and the way we see the world at our fingertips.  Our entire personalities are the result of what we choose to care about.

The first and last letters (E/I, J/P) reflect your scope of focus and how you naturally act upon the world; they’re based on the order in which you process different types of information.

The middle letters (S/N, F/T) demonstrate how you take in and process the world and the purposes to which you put those different types of information; they’re based on the two functions you focus on the earliest and place the most importance on in your cognition process.

A “Function” is the tool by which our minds process information.  There are four functions; Sensing, iNtuition, Feeling and Thinking.

Everyone uses all four.  Let me say that again because it’s important and too often blatantly ignored:  *Everyone* uses all four.  We just use them in different orders and apply them to different types of information.

• Gather Data in the form of thoughts or feelings, and come to Conclusions about that data.

• Apply their Principles to understand Trends.

• Decide on a course of Action to take based on the results of past actions.

• Observe people to understand their own and others’ Motivations to understand if they can be trusted as sources of information.

But the interesting thing is, we don’t all do them in the same order or put the same emphasis on each one.

Since there are four types of information, we each cognate in four separate steps, one for each type of information.  On each step of the cognition process, our minds take one type of information and consider it using one function (Sensing, iNtuition, Thinking, or Feeling) and then take the resulting information on into the next step of the process.

Each of the four types of information gets its own function that gets used for that type of information alone, different for each personality type.  Each unique combination of steps and functions forms a personality type.

See?  1 Type of Information x 1 Function = 1 Cognition Step.  But all 16 types have different combinations of Cognition Steps.  That’s not too complicated, right?  The combination of a person’s Cognition Steps is called a “Cognition Pattern” and those cognition patterns are really what determines personality type.

You don’t have to memorize this or anything, but this shows how each unique combination of primary and secondary Types of Information and the functions used to process those types of information creates the 16 types  If you get this chart, great!  If not, it’s okay; it just a little flow-chart showing how special and spiffy each of the types are!  And I wanted to use my cute little pictures again ;D

Introversion and Extraversion

A common misconception about Introversion vs. Extraversion is that Extraverts are social, prefer parties and constant social interaction and love to be the center of attention, while Introverts are shy and prefer a good book to the company of others, preferring a quiet atmosphere.  While this may be the common definition of social Extraversion and Introversion in our culture, it is *not at all* the definition of a psychological Introvert or Extravert and *does not* match with Jung’s or Myers-Briggs’ definitions of I/E.

Introversion and Extraversion describe where you primarily turn for information and input. Do you, in Introversion, turn first inside yourself to understand the world, or do you, in Extraversion, turn first to the outside world and others to grasp the world and how it works?  Everyone does both, but your primary source of input, inside or outside, determines whether you are considered an Extravert (E) or an Introvert (I).

In truth, it’s as simple as that, though those differences affect all a person’s decisions and actions.  For example, Introverts being used to working inside their own heads, are naturally more confident making decisions without needing the input of others, while Extraverts naturally feel off-balance if they don’t get input from others–like running around with their eyes closed.  But since they are constantly interacting with the world for information, Extraverts are very aware of how people will affect and interact with their plans, while Introverts may not be as aware of the effects others will have.

Introversion and Extraversion are not functions, like the middle letters; they are instead directional tags that tell us which way a function is pointed, based on what type of information you are processing.  Data and Details, for example, are always introverted and Observing the Character and Motivations of others is always extraverted, but Principles and Actions’ directional tags depend, based on J/P.

Though everyone introverts half of their functions, a person is considered an Introvert (I) when they look inward in the First Step of the Cognition Process.

Though everyone extraverts half of their functions, a person is considered an Extravert (E) when they look outward in the First Step of the Cognition Process.

Both Sensing and iNtuition functions are used to understand how things and people work universally, but Sensing forms a physical picture, based on previous experiences, and iNtuition forms a mental picture, based on underlying patterns.  What defines an “iNtuitive” individual versus a “Sensor” individual is if they naturally think in concepts early in their cognitive process or experiences early in their cognitive process, respectively.  Those are the only requirements of being an N or an S.

iNtuition

iNtuition is based on things conceptualized through noticed patterns mentally.  iNtuitives will talk in ‘webs’ or ‘word-nets’—each piece of information connects to all the others and *has* to be viewed in context or things are missed.

Sensing

Sensing is based on patterns found in previous experiences.  Sensors think in puzzle pieces, where everything has a spot and snaps into place.  They don’t have to look at all the pieces at once because they can look at pieces in isolation, without them being attached to all the other pieces.  An S will pick up one ‘piece’ of information, and just evaluate that piece by itself to figure out where it goes.

Though everyone uses the Sensing function, a person of Sensor preference (S) focuses on thepatterns in experiences in either their First or Second Step of the Cognition Process.

Thinker vs. Feeler tends to be dangerous territory where one must tread with utmost care.  While “Thinker” and “Feeler” are accurate terms according to what Jung meant, in our modern culture (and maybe English has more of this connotation than German), these two terms do not come off as meaning equal things, while an essential point of Jung’s type theory was that the functions were equal.  These terms have come to imply that Feelers are illogical but nice, while Thinkers are logical and rational, but cold and unfeeling.  These implications are damaging, degrading and beyond that, simply untrue.

*We all use both* the Thinking function and the Feeling function, it’s just the order we prioritize them that makes us a Feeler or a Thinker.  Once again, differences in personality stem from those differences in cognition order.

This is an emotionally charged topic and I find one of the groups that gets the most emotional about it is Thinkers who are trying to declare that Feelers are illogical.  The irony astounds me.  While I do run into the occasional Feeler trying to claim moral superiority over us “heartless” Thinkers, they seem to be the minority of the problem.

It’s amazing to me how many Thinkers believe that their reasoning could never be influenced by emotion, because their emotions tend to demonstrate more through feelings like fear, anger, distaste, catastrophizing, and pessimism, which are moods and beliefs as much as giddiness, excitement, sensitivity, security and optimism.  *Every* human being is subject to emotion and while it may gall Thinkers to have them, we are often the most controlled by our emotions when we fail to realize their presence and strength.

Thinkers are defined by the way they focus early in their cognitive process on the use of things, whether it be information or people.  Thoughts teach us the usefulness of objects, situations, people and actions.  The Thinking function looks at information like the brushstrokes of a painting, as the dots necessary to make up the whole, the steps or information needed to systematically reach the end result.

Though everyone uses the Thinking function, a person of Thinking preference (T) focuses on the use and utility of information in either their First or Second Step of the Cognition Process.

Feeling

Feelers are defined by the way they focus early in their cognitive process on the meaning of things, whether it be information or people.  Feelings bring meaning to objects, situations, people and actions.  The Feeling function looks at information like an entire painting, as the meaning of the whole and the desired end result.  Feelings show us the whole of what is important to us, at once, like a snapshot of our psyches’ overall understanding of the information we have.

Though everyone uses the Feeling function, a person of Feeling preference (F) focuses on the meaning of information in either their First or Second Step of the Cognition Process.

Judgers and Perceivers

Judgers decide on a course of action in either their first cognition step (EJs) or second (IJs).  The Judging half of the Cognition Process includes both Specific Action and Universal Information—choosing Actions, understanding Consequences, understanding Principles and seeing Trends.  Judgers rely on their strengths of understanding Principles and Consequences in order to plan ahead and understand how the universe will respond to their specific action.  They tend to be more decisive and quicker to carry out their plans of action, but need to remember to slow down and explore all the options before going forward.

Perceivers take more time to explore possibilities before acting, with their Action step coming either third (IPs) or last (EPs).  The Perceiving half of the Cognition Process includes both Universal Action and Specific Information—understanding Motivations, making Character Judgments, making Conclusions about specific Situations based on Data and Details, and knowing when information is missing.  Perceivers rely on their strengths of understanding general categories of action which can be adapted to specific circumstances, in order to make decisions on-the-go and react to circumstances as they arise.  They tend to explore more of the options but need to recognize when to stop information-gathering in order to make a decision and act upon it.

Judging

“Judging” is the half of the Cognition Process that focuses on making decisions and choosing specific actions.  For Judgers, action is like a map, plotted points that lead to specific desired results.  If you take the right turns and understand where each path leads, you end up where you want to be.

Though everyone acts, a person is considered a Judger (J) when they focus on Action in either the First or Second Step of the Cognition Process.

Perceiving

“Perceiving” is the half of the Cognition Process that focuses on observing and exploring possibilities and adapting to circumstances.For Perceivers, action is like a toolbox, general know-how that can be applied to any circumstance as it comes up.  If you know how to use any materials or circumstances that may be at your disposal, then you’ll be ready to react to any situation you may find yourself in.

Though everyone observes possibilities, a person is considered a Perceiver (P) when they focus on Observation in either the First or Second Step of the Cognition Process.

Still not sure what personality type *you* are?  Well, stick around and read up; this barely scratches the surface of what personality types are and how they can help you understand yourself and everyone around you!  Where to start?  Check out Paradoxitypes for a look at the unexpected side of each personalty.  The Cognition Process in Stick Figures goes into detail into the unique way each type thinks… with more cute stick people, just like it says on the tin!  Type Heroes is an in-depth series that can show each type how to shine and be heroic in their own way, with plenty of fun fictional examples of each type!  I’ve just gotten started and there is plenty more content to come, so Like Us, subscribe, and check back often to see more!

On the aLBoP Guided Tour?  Your next stop is Type Specializations: What Makes *My* Type Special? 

The post What Do All These Letters Mean Anyway? appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

I hope you really wanted that reply you asked for, Match

Intro and Principles of Typing 

Okay, important things first: Match is a really cool name!  Can I just say that?

Also, I’m *so* happy you’re enjoying the blog!  The things you said about Hercules Syndrome and the stick figure post make me feel giddy  This is exactly why I write and it thrills me to know it’s working and that I’m touching individual people.  That’s really my purpose as an ENTP, helping people see their own individual potential and know how to reach for it; helping people be awesome in their own unique ways

You brought up really excellent points about those individual characters.  I also *loved* what you said about people making personality typing about cut-and-paste horoscopes!  I couldn’t agree more.  I think the one principle I’d like to bring up before going into specific character typings is that, while you’re obviously looking past the surface of types and I can tell you don’t type shallowly at all, it’s important to remember that personality types are a measure of the way a person *thinks* which ends up resulting in their actions, but *isn’t* their actions.  I know you know that principle, but it’s easy to forget that when other people are judging by the surface.  It’s easy to forget that two people may make the *exact same* decision for *entirely* different reasons.  Make sense?

So when I type a person, I look at the way a person talks *in conjunction* with the way they act, making sure to include the way they’re *trying* to come off.  Often the way a person talks is a better barometer of their personality type than their actions, in a way even they don’t usually realize.  One of the main ways in which people oversimplify characters and personality types is by only taking into account a person’s actions or the way they act on the surface, and not taking their reasoning behind it into account.

{Side-note: This is the way I type, as an ENTP, with my primary focus being Character Observation, but my INFJ is excellent at typing people too, he just uses his primary focus of Principles to see *in principle* what a person is.  Hard to explain, but it works.  It’s addressing the same problem from opposite angles, but it works.}

But it’s amazing as you listen to a person talk, the subtle things that come out about the way they think.  For example, a lot of people tell me they’re INFJs who I’m pretty sure are not, but with you, from your one comment (albeit a long comment ) I can tell you are.  You talk in principles leading to actions in the form of concepts (N) rather than experiences (S) according to their meaning (F) rather than their usefulness (T), though by the time you get to the details stage, you focus on use (T).  There are other indicators too, but anyway

With characters it can sometimes be easier than real people because you more often get to see them as a whole.

Captain America and Peter Burke — The Dependable Side of INFJ and What Makes Characters *POP*

Okay, let’s start with Captain America/Steve Rogers and Peter Burke of White Collar, because they’re similarly dutiful, generally rule-following and with an old-fashioned sense of right, wrong and justice.  So they look pretty ISJ, right?  We’d expect the characters in these types of roles—that of Patriotic Poster-Boy and successful FBI agent—to be very sensing oriented, focusing on the value of things already experienced rather than on the conceptual of what could be.

And yet it’s how *unexpected* these characters are, that makes us love them.  It’s the choices they make and the way they react to things in a way that other people might not that really makes them *POP*.  This is an archetype found all throughout fiction (and I think in the real world too); take a role, a position, etc. that you would usually expect to be filled by a certain type of character, and throw in just a little surprise in personality that totally makes the character stand out from what we’re used to and expect.  I mentioned this briefly in the Paradoxitype post (which I’m so glad you liked ), the idea of a person being consistent… until they surprise you and *that* is when they really shine.

In the movie of Captain America, the reason Steve Rogers is chosen for the experiment is because he’s different from the other soldiers.  From the beginning, when he’s a scrawny little guy that won’t give up, Dr. Erskine, the scientist, can see that Steve is special because he has different reasons for wanting to go fight in the same war.  Steve understands what the war *means* and the principles behind it.  He thinks and serves in a very IFJ way, constantly making decisions basing his Step Two of Actions on his auxiliary, Fe, cognition.  Now, thus far, that could totally be a dedicated “Keep Calm and Be There” ISFJ, but Steve keeps taking his reasons back to concepts and is always talking in a sweeping “Keep Calm and I’ll Show You How to Fly” INFJ type way.  His unexpected jokes, everything that makes Steve the lovable unexpected character he is, comes from how much we *don’t* expect an Ni dom to be in a role like that.  Because we’re expecting a dependable, linear ISJ in a role like that, Captain America *POPS*.

Peter Burke too, we’d expect to be the stereotypical hard-lining ISTJ, and we can tell that the FBI makes him feel like he *should* be an ST, but it’s the way he reacts to Neal that really makes his NF shine.  Over and over again, when we expect him to take the tried-and-true method with Neal… he just doesn’t.  He believes in Neal and trusts him for what Neal *means*, what he sees in principle that Neal can be, if he’ll only let himself.  For an ENTP suffering from severe Megamind Complex, the one thing Neal needs most of all is for someone to believe in him, to trust that he could be a good person and to see past his cavalier facade.  The only reason Peter agrees to Neal’s release-scheme in the first place was because Neal had impressed him as a good person and because he saw potential in Neal in a very NF way.  If Peter was instead the expected, rule abiding hard-liner, with the show consisting of Neal trying something against the rules repeatedly and Peter saying “No, no, no!” over and over again, that would get old fast.  It’s the way that Peter constantly adapts with Neal that gets Peter in trouble with other, more rigid agents, and yet makes he and Neal into such a great team.  With Neal, with Elizabeth, with Mozzi and in all his own plans, it’s Peter’s NF that makes him *POP*.

Now, I’m certainly *not* saying, for anyone wondering by this point, that INFJs are the only ones that *POP*.  On the contrary, the main reason beloved characters are beloved is because they’re at least in some way unexpected.  Match, you said you loved my ISFJ examples because people stereotype them as only being good at being housewives or butlers.    In that vein, one of my *favorite* ISFJ characters *ever* is Master Chief from the Halo video game series.  He has that unexpected *POP* because they treat him like he should be such a machine, either following an ISTJ protocol or being some kind of extreme-sports ESTP having fun bashing in alien heads (maybe like quite a bit of the player-base?) but he brings such down-to-earth worldwide *meaning* to everything he does, even if even Cortana can’t see it sometimes.  Any personality type can *POP*, it’s the way that they surprise you that makes you see what they truly are.

Harry Potter and Frodo Baggins — Hercules Syndrome and What Makes a Hero

With both Harry Potter and Frodo, you brought up the question of being Fi doms, and they are very similar characters.  The young, inexperienced pupil charged with the task of saving the world against impossible odds, chosen by darkness (either the dark lord or the dark ring) to be the figurehead of the side of good… kind of against their will.  While that description could cover a lot of protagonists, of several different personality types, to me it’s Harry and Frodo’s Hercules Syndrome that makes them so perfect for the tasks.

Hercules Syndrome is a funny thing.  INFJs are one of the only types where their main weakness is also one of their main strengths… and that’s why everyone hates them!  jk… but seriously… Not thinking they’re very special and feeling guilty for their strengths is one of the main reasons INFJs are so often resented.  They’re just so obviously good naturally (though obviously that’s still a choice), and yet they’re usually the only ones that don’t realize it.  People think of it like skinny girls who say they’re so fat  And yet, that’s not the way INFJs think.  They’re not *trying* to say “Oh look at me, I’m so good, you should acknowledge it!”  They’re just being themselves and where their brains naturally go makes them constantly go, “Oh, crap!  I was shining too much again, wasn’t I?”

In fact, if you come across a person whose attitude is “I’m so great because I’m a mighty and wise INFJ,” they *aren’t*.  INFJs never function that way, even the villains.  I get very sick of the all too common stereotypes that INFJs are either wimpy philosophizing daisies or *the* best type whom everyone claims to be.  INFJs have the most zoomed-out focus which is specialized in its own sweeping way.  Each type has their special, equal place and that is INFJs’.  It would be stupid if an ESTP for example (because it’s opposite) gave up their unique specialization of individuality because they thought it was better/more widely accepted/wiser/cleverer to be an INFJ and focus on how meaning applies to the world as a whole.  Be your own type, people, because you *suck!* at the others, and it’s not *YOU!*

Ahem.  That was a soapbox and not directed at you, Match, so excuse me.  I’ve seen a lot of people lately who are all too excited to claim INFJ because they think it makes them better.  They are therefore not INFJs, end of story.

While some days we facepalm and say “Oh Harry, don’t do that!” Harry Potter’s constant desire to just be normal like everybody else is just one of the special things about him that makes him perfect for the task of taking down He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named  He shrugs off the things that make him special, not wanting the attention and as Dumbledore says (more on him later), Harry just doesn’t realize how unique he is.  Harry has a conceptual principles focus (INJ) with a major weakness in character judgment, leading to trouble separating bad actions of people like Snape and even his ESTP father, from their much better intentions.  He focuses so much on the meaning and principles at stake that he has difficulty seeing how people could cause that much damage without being badly intentioned.  My INFJ facepalms over Harry’s treatment of Draco Malfoy because a more grown-up INFJ would be able to gain Draco’s respect rather than making an instant enemy.  But all Harry sees early on is that he’s standing up against what Draco stands for, and standing up for his friends in principle.

Harry is always standing up for somebody, always feeling the need to save somebody, even when people make fun of him for it.  He exemplifies the IJ, “If I don’t do it, no one else will,” whether it’s destroying Voldemort, saving people from the bottom of a lake or teaching everyone defense against the dark arts.  I’ve seen Harry typed several places as an ISFP, but I think this may come from a misunderstanding of S/N.  Harry talks very conceptually, abstractly and pays massive attention to overarching principles at work in the world.  I’m curious why they thought of him as an S?

[source]

I love this drawing by Tealin, parodying the last scene of Fellowship of the ring with Harry, Ron and Hermione.  It brings out a similarity between Harry and Frodo that to me is just so INFJ: that of INFJs’ learned understanding that they have to complete their quests alone, lest they bring their friends down with them and submit them to the pain and anguish that Hercules Syndrome tells the INFJ is their fault.  I mentioned this in The Personalities of Marble Hornets with Jay, and you find it all throughout fiction with INFJs.  INFJs embracing being the Paladin need a strong support-structure of other types, willing to stand up, give them a gentle slap on the face and say, “Heck no, I’m not letting you go to Mordor alone!  I’m choosing to come along so let me carry the lembas already.”

As far as Frodo goes, in both the books and the films (granted, this is coming from an obsession with the extended films, only reading half of Fellowship, playing LotRO, and being married to a big Tolkien nerd INFJ who likes to go off about the meaning in LoTR ) it seems to me that what sets him apart so often from the other hobbits, including Sam, Merry and Pippin whom I love, is that the other hobbits seem so much more in the moment in an either S (Sam and Pippin) or EJ (Merry) way.  But Frodo is always thinking of the bigger picture, the bigger task; focusing near the beginning on Gandalf and what the quest means to him, and gradually getting a greater understanding of the grave mission he’s been sent on.

I’m bothered by the way many people react to the difference in Frodo and Sam’s roles in LoTR.  I’ve often read people say straight out that Sam was the “real hero” of LoTR.  There’s a statement I think Tolkien would take issue with.  To look at Frodo, the ring-bearer, carrying a burden that ripped him apart from the inside and almost destroyed everything he was, who had the vision, bravery and resolve of character to get the ring all the way to Mordor and not let the carrying of Sauron’s horcrux take him over, and not recognize him as one of the noblest of heroes shows a great lack of understanding of the power of evil and forgets that though Frodo makes it look easy, it wasn’t.  Which isn’t to say that Sam was any less heroic or essential to the quest.  There are so many times that Frodo wouldn’t have made it if not for Sam.  But I think too many people forget that Sam *wouldn’t* have gotten there without Frodo.  I don’t understand the need to make it a competition, when Frodo and Sam obviously understood their need for each other.  They have a fantastically healthy masculine relationship and one that I think is found often with INFJs and ISFJs.  INFJs are focused on the meaning of the overall quest as a whole, functioning like admirals or generals behind the scenes, and ISFJs are focused on meaning applied on the ground and function like captains dedicated to the protection and welfare of their troops.  With Frodo and Sam it’s no different; Frodo’s job is to get the ring to Mordor; Sam’s job is to get him there.  Sam doesn’t resent that, why should anyone else?

Here is a quote from the end of The Return of the King (novel) that demonstrates how INFJ Frodo talks, in sweeping conceptual, focusing on the meaning that is the cause of events, and demonstrates his character:

“I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me. It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them…and you will read things out of the Red Book, and keep alive the memory of the age that is gone, so that people will remember the Great Danger, and so love their beloved land all the more. And that will keep you as busy and as happy as anyone can be, as long as your part in the Story goes on.”

Even before we really began studying personality typing in-depth, my INFJ would love to talk about how Frodo, Aragorn and Gandalf were all the same character at different stages of their development.  I think that’s brilliant.  Aragorn is obviously so much more developed as an INFJ than Frodo, and Gandalf so much more than he is, but they all have that same focus of world meaning.

Aragorn is much farther along in his internal development in the novels than in the movies; his internal struggle with overcoming his Hercules Syndrome and growing ready to take his place and return as the king has already taken place by the time of the books.  I understand Tolkien’s reasoning for this and I think he did it phenomenally, but I also understand and love the reasoning behind Peter Jackson (and Co)’s decision to make Aragorn a hero still in progress.  To quote my own novel with an INFJ protagonist, “’So often, as people we see princes and we see kings and we forget that there is anything in between.  We forget that princes become kings, boys become men, and that men can become even more than that…  They tell you that you could never [be great] because you’re not already there.’”  Too often we see Gandalf as this towering mentor and hero, out of the potential reach of mere mortals, and yet if we come to understand that he’s just a grown-up Aragorn, who in turn is just a grown-up Frodo, we can see that we too have the potential to become heroes, held back only by our own willingness to sacrifice and shine in our own unique ways.

Ra’s al Ghul and Palpatine, Bruce Wayne and Albus Dumbledore — INFJ Villains and INTJ Heroes…plus Luke Skywalker

You said that your Batman/Ra’s al Ghul argument for typing Bruce as an INFJ and Ra’s as an INTJ was your best, and it was a very well-written argument!  You made a lot of really great points, but I want to bring up several principles in relation to the misunderstanding most people have about how INFJs can be villains and how INTJs can be heroes.

In the Type Heroes series, I always have a section on what each type is like as a villain because I believe each person understanding what kind of villain they could be is an essential part of learning how they can be a hero.  Until you can realize how strong and scary your type can be as a villain, you *will not* realize how powerful you can be as a hero.  And even a villain still cognates the same as his non-dark type brothers and shares the same predominant focus and weaknesses of psyche.  Just like every type brings something special to the heroic table, each type of villain is just as unique and telling.

I think understanding true evil is absolutely necessary for an INFJ, both in trying to overcome their Hercules Syndrome by seeing how evil they could be if they chose to, and in order to truly understand the principles behind evil as they contrast it with the principles of why good *works*.

INFJs focus *above all* on Meaning as it is Applied to the World as a whole, with their conceptual Ni of Principles leading to Actions chosen according to Fe, which tells them the *meaning* of actions outside themselves, rather than the *use* of applied action, the way INTJs do.  Translation in practice?  INFJ villains will see that the world reflects their principles of meaning… no matter who gets in their way.  Where INTJ villains care about putting the world to *use*, desiring ultimate control the way Loki, Darth Vader or Sauron do, an INFJ villain would rather shape the world based on meaning, using the decisions and agency of others to their own gain, rather than trying to literally dominate them.

My INFJ is pretty obsessed with INFJ villains, absolutely loving how unexpected INFJs make villainy *POP* because no one anticipates a mild-mannered INFJ being able to smoothly and calmly rip apart nations… and yet with their understanding of the meaning behind all action, INFJs are perfectly situated to tug on a single thread to unravel the whole thing.  Where an INTJ villain would be happy to glass a community that refused to follow him, an INFJ villain would prefer to sew seeds of rebellion behind the scenes, letting the people and community rip themselves apart from the inside using their own discretion.  Subtle manipulation of a person’s own choices is much more satisfying to a villainous INFJ than simple mind or action control.  I think that sums up Ra’s al Ghul intentions pretty well; he’d rather rip apart either Gotham or Rome through principles like fear, economics and the worthiness or evil of what people mean than he would just take over the city or the world by brute force like, say, Loki wants to.

As a real life example, Adolf Hitler exemplified the traits and motivation of an INFJ villain.  He’s legendary for using the emotions of his people to stir them up and make them believe that his plans were necessary.  In this day and age, too many people imagine Hitler as some sort of dictatorial leader who just made Germany do what he wanted.  While he was able to be more and more obvious about his plans as the war went on, if you watch footage of him, he was incredibly well-spoken and inspirational, causing people who heard his speeches to weep at the picture of Germany and the world that he painted.  He understood how to use people’s sense of nationality and preexisting biases; he understood how to incite youth.  He wouldn’t have been the effective and moving blot on the history of our world if he hadn’t understood how to get others to rip the world apart for him.

Emperor Palpatine is the same, even in the abominable prequels and definitely in CGI The Clone Wars where he shines; he’d prefer to rise to power through the slow manipulation of the system and people’s emotions than to just begin an outright rebellion of the Republic… he has pawns to do that, ones he manipulates just as smoothly as the senate.  And in the originals, he takes a sick and twisted pleasure at using Luke’s emotion against him and triumphs when he’s pitted Luke and Vader against each other.  Just a messed-up way of enjoying the meaning and principles behind the world

On the other side of things, INFJs and INTJs (like all types) can both be heroes and choose good actions, but obviously they have different reasoning and motivations behind those decisions.  Like INFJ villains, what defines and exemplifies an INTJ hero?  Well, of course, because the cognition is the same, it’s similar to what defines an INTJ villain.  Like INFJ heroes and villains focus on the *meaning* behind people and actions and how to apply that meaning into action, INTJ heroes and villains share the trait of focusing on the *use* of people and actions and make plans based on their usefulness rather than their meaning.  This means that INTJs have a tendency to go around people rather than using them, if they aren’t willing to cooperate.  That can mean a villain killing someone in their way, rather than choosing to use that person, or it can mean a hero choosing to be a vigilante if the system isn’t working.

Which brings us to Bruce Wayne.  Yes, he relies on friends, though I don’t think there’s any type that can afford not to.  Yes he’s self-sacrificing, though I think that’s also a trait of any good human being and I make sad faces when anyone tries to imply that Ts can’t be just as willing to give of themselves for the greater good.  We all use all four functions, iNtuition, Sensing, Feeling and Thinking, just in different orders and with different emphases.

Yes, the picture has a typo. -_-

In fact INTJs’ Anakin Angst is their equivalent to Hercules Syndrome, Megamind Complex, Moriarty Fear, etc. because INTJs are *terrified* that everything that goes wrong is their fault.  Somehow, their beautiful and impressive strength of applying Ni principles to the use of Te action makes them feel like if something went wrong or something was out of their control, it was their fault.  If INTJs don’t get a hold of their Anakin Angst, by *letting go* of control, then they are sure to eventually become the very thing they’re trying to keep from hurting the world in the first place.  Though Ra’s al Ghul becomes the thing he at first fought, it’s out of a need to make the world reflect certain meaning rather than trying to make sure that no element of it is out of his control, the way an INTJ would be tempted to.  Anakin Angst is like Indiana Jones (also INTJ) having the hardest time letting the Holy Grail fall into oblivion in Last Crusade because he can *almost* reach it and he knows just what good could be done with it; he almost loses himself the way Elsa does because it’s just so hard to let go of control, knowing the cup will be gone and it’ll be his fault.

In that same way, Bruce being an INTJ puts into perspective how difficult it is for him not to misuse the cell network in Dark Knight and how hard it is for him not to let the Joker manipulate his fear that Gordon “dying” and Rachel being taken were his fault.  He gets all too close to breaking his “don’t kill” policy on Joker because he’s so desperate to have things back in control so he can fix things growing more and more wrong around him.

In some ways Bruce Wayne and Ra’s al Ghuls’ war represents the opposite of the typical INFJ hero/INTJ villain battles.  Usually stories focus on the meaning of people being more valuable than their use; Batman Begins instead focuses on a world that Ra’s wants to discard because it is no longer meaningful, trying to set it on a course toward destruction ripped apart by its own rife meaninglessness, but Bruce debates that it is still of use—though it isn’t yet meaningful, Gotham has the potential to be, if used correctly.

The Dark Knight makes a similar case from a different angle.  Nolan’s Joker, who functions slightly differently than his ENTP cartoon and comic predecessors, sets out to prove, regardless of the reactions he receives from others (which suggests introverted) to Gotham his worldview of how puny and pathetic they are, pretending to be so great and propping up their “stupid” J plans (while he’s so P adaptive) while the world is really entirely chaotic and its only meaning is in realizing how meaningless and pointless it all is.  Man, it’s like being on an internet forum or something  As an unhealthy conceptual, adaptive, self-deciding introvert who primarily focuses on the use of people and things (unhealthy N,P,I,T…INTP) his greatest weakness is the meaning of principles (principles via Fe), and he sets out to prove the area in which he feels the most angry and defensive—his worldview.

As an INTP/INTJ throwdown, the Joker decides to show the world and Batman that principles are all well and good in childrens’ games, but in the real world, the whole thing is pointless and all Bruce’s best efforts for control will never be enough to combat the Joker’s pessimistic, self-justifying worldview that in the end everyone is just a villain (ITs focus on people on the whole being bad).  Now Bruce (also IT, so same pessimistic focus) understands just how bad people can be too and at times fears the Joker is right about Gotham, but he is able to prove the Joker wrong by showing that even when the whole is rotten and festering, it is individuals like him who will take the hit and show that people can rise above a culture of enmity and self-preservation to show what humanity, in principle, can be.  Reminded me of Picard’s constant mantra of the nobility of mankind—INTJ too ;).  Though there are casualties of this humanity war, like Dent, there are still enough good people for humanity to save itself, and Batman is just a symbol of the use humanity still has left.

All-in-all, I think Bruce Wayne’s focus on use over meaning and the pessimism being an IT gives him naturally is what gives Batman its “dark and edgy” feel and makes him *POP* among superheroes in an unique way.

Albus Dumbledore is another interesting example because on the surface he seems so typical-mentor-ish, like an INFJ or an ENFJ.  He’s patient and caring and he likes conceptual principles a lot.  He’s also quirky and goofy in a way that most people would consider F.  However, as we come to learn more about his backstory, we see over and over again that he’s struggled desperately to overcome a need to control and a tendency to go around people rather than to change the way they think.  With all the characters in the story, he focuses on how to best put them to use rather than meaning.  Starting with himself and with everyone including Cornelius Fudge, Snape and even Harry, Dumbledore focuses on their use before their meaning, even as much as it kills him inside to do so with Harry.

Dumbledore is an insanely healthy version of an INTJ, and so therefore has overcome many of its weaknesses, but as we look at the way he was when he was younger, a lot of which we don’t get to see until Deathly Hallows, we can see that his relationship with Grindelwald and Aberforth was one of trying to shape the world into his vision, believing that people would just need to get out of the way to see that accomplished.  The death of his sister woke him up to the damage his excited version of Anakin Angst had caused, making him look at just what he was damaging, trying to shape the world to be of use.

Looking at younger versions of heroes is a good way to type them since they’re more likely to display more of the weaknesses of their type that they may have overcome as they developed.  If we watch Bruce Wayne in the flashbacks in Batman Begins, he doesn’t seem like an undeveloped INFJ with Hercules Syndrome, he’s a d-bag little T (we all have our days ;)) seeking revenge and talking about how Rachel’s system is no longer of use.  This is an amusing trend to me with some young, especially male, INTJs being arrogant little things that grow up to be noble heroes and great mentors.  The quote from my writing, in the Frodo/Harry section is actually by the protagonist’s father and mentor who I used to think was an INFJ too, but then I looked at his already written background which went totally in line with the character and he was an arrogant little d-bag who grew up to be one of my favorite characters and in retrospect is obviously T.

I feel bad throwing Luke Skywalker in at the end of this section, when he probably could have gone with Harry/Frodo or Cap’n/Peter Burke, but he applies to this principle too.  Luke Skywalker is a great example of an *undeveloped* INFJ.  He does focus on the meaning of the world and he’s usually Judging action-oriented to a fault, running ahead to go stand up for somebody, even when it would be better to slow down and consider other options.  If you are looking for what untrained, inexperienced INFJs are like, look no further than Luke Skywalker who can be even more immature than Harry about “But if I don’t save my friends, no one will!”

Superman—Same Character, Different Cognition

I don’t plan on this being a long section, because we’ve covered a lot of principles about INFJs and typing characters in general.  But the tricky thing about me typing Superman is, he’s not always written as the same type.  This happens with lots of characters, especially ones that have lots of different media based on them over the years.  I gave the example of the Joker earlier.  Sherlock Holmes is another great one, with BBC’s Benedict Cumberbatch rendition being INTJ and Robert Downy Jr.’s being ENTP (pretty much everything RDJ touches is ENTP) and their Watsons are ENFP and ISFJ respectively.  Like I said earlier, different cognition patterns may come to the exact same conclusion or action via entirely different cognitive routes.

As far as Superman specifically goes, there are a ton of different versions.  When I got your comment, my INFJ and I were discussing this and he said, “No INFJ would be caught dead saying ‘Truth, justice and the American way.'”  He also added that they wouldn’t limit themselves to something as simple as “the American way” but he’s not sure if he wants me to add that or not and started Hercules Syndroming about how I should add how he does love America so no one would get the wrong impression…  Anyway, that sounds like a more ISFJ thing to say, and we love them for their straightforward nobility… even if it is still a little bit silly as a motto. 

But then why did I put him under INFJ?  Well, I was working under the premise of what Superman means to us as an icon and which versions of him *POP* the most.  What makes Superman work as a character and not as a cardboard cut-out is his humanity in spite of his alienness.  His weaknesses are of an emotional nature, otherwise he’s just a building-leaping, laser vision, strength knows no bounds, flying dude with not a lot of dimension.  Many renditions of Superman are that boring, and it’s been hard for him to gain traction in recent years without having enough conflict to contrast his strength.  A relatable Superman, to me, is the literal personification of Hercules Syndrome, riddled with pain and insecurity about how different he is than the humanity he so desires to fit in with, consumed with guilt over his strength, saving the world even when he’s hated for it.  It’s when Superman hates himself for his powers and has to overcome that anguish that he really shines.

That being said, I can’t give you an example of that kind of Superman.  I don’t know that there isn’t one… I just haven’t seen or read many actual examples of Superman, and in the ones I’ve seen he didn’t seem to be.  Ironically enough, I still haven’t seen the Man of Steel which the picture in the collage was from because after it came out I heard it sucked, but I had written and posted The Paladin and the trailers had gotten me *sooo* excited for an INFJ Superman.  The trailers for Man of Steel portrayed a conflicted Clark Kent who had to hide what he was from the world, even if it meant letting people suffer, because his father believed, probably rightly so, the world wasn’t ready for him yet, that they would despise him for his gifts and how different he was.  That Superman seemed to encapsulate so much of what INFJ means… but since I still haven’t seen the movie, I’m not sure they did that… and from what I’ve heard… they haven’t

Some versions of Superman could very well be ENFJ (though I’ll bet a lot of especially old ones are ISFJ instead), but I’m still pouting that I didn’t get the INFJ Superman that would have brought out the real hero in his super-ness.

When Actors are Different Types than Their Characters

My final thought this time is that, as you probably realize, actors don’t have to be the same type as their characters and so they may put a slightly different character spin on a character than how they’re written, which can make typing a little harder.  Most often characters are played by one-offs or Paradoxitypes, which makes them close, but not exactly of the same cognition as their character…but that’s not a rule or anything.  For example, I tentatively type Chris Evans (Captain America) as an ISFJ, Elijah Wood (Frodo) as an INFP (Robert Pattinson who plays Edward Cullen, too), Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) as ISFP (which is ironic considering), and I’m pretty sure Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker) is actually INFJ  Those are based on observation as well as facial typing theorems I’m working on that aren’t even in Beta yet…

I guess my point here is that people have a complex range of emotion and being able to understand others, so just because a person isn’t of the same cognition as a character, doesn’t mean they can’t portray them excellently.  It’s also important to realize that just because we’re a different type than a character, doesn’t mean we can’t apply and relate their experience to ourselves for benefit and learning in our lives

{Update 5-29-14: Though I was absolutely right about actors playing characters who are different types from themselves, facial typing was *veeeery* young when I wrote this post.  Therefore several of these actor’s types are incorrect and should be disregarded until Facial Typing is released and the “Canon” aLBoP typings for these actors comes out  … Although they’re not all wrong.  The INFPs were correct… but Mark Hamill is definitely *not* INFJ, etc. <3 Calise}

Well, as long and insanely drawn out as this was as a response to your comment, Match, I hope it answers your questions as to why I typed these characters the way I did and gave you some insight into my typing process in general.  I’m epically glad you’re enjoying the blog and I’d love to get to know you better and I hope you stick around!!  Thanks so much for commenting; well-thought out comments make my day and make all of this worth it!

<3, Calise Sellers

The post Comment Response: Of INFJs, Principles of Typing and Characters that *POP* appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

Now, I can’t make stick people like the greats, and I don’t want anyone to think I’m trying.  This is just literally the best I can draw  Well, pretty much…  {On an interesting side-note about XKCD, I’ve noticed webcomic writers are often IP’s, especially INP’s (the author of XKCD being very classically INP).  It makes sense to me that they would enjoy that format since IP’s focus on and love details; webcomics give them an opportunity to savor each moment and detail, rather than needing to get to the end of a plot arch, the way a J especially might.  I could also go off about IP’s liking “Magnetic Poetry” titles such as “XKCD” or “Death Cab for Cutie” but maybe some other time…}

Everyone thinks :O  It’s kind of a necessary part of being conscious.  But we don’t all do it in the same way or in the same order.  These differences in thought processes are what eventually translate into personality types.  So here, step-by-step in pictures, is the cognition process and how it works for each type.

A common misconception about Introversion vs. Extraversion (which I’ve been soap-boxing against often lately) is that Extraverts are social, prefer parties and constant social interaction and love to be the center of attention, while Introverts are shy and prefer a good book to the company of others, preferring a quiet atmosphere.  While this may be the common definition of Extraversion and Introversion in our culture, it is *not at all* the definition of a psychological Introvert or Extravert and *does not* match with Jung’s or Myers-Briggs’ definitions of I/E.

Instead, Introversion and Extraversion describe where you primarily turn for information and input.  Do you, in Introversion, turn first inside yourself to understand the world, or do you, in Extraversion, turn first to the outside world and others to grasp the world and how it works?

In truth, it’s as simple as that, though those differences affect all a person’s decisions and actions.  For example, Introverts being used to working inside their own heads, are naturally more confident making decisions without needing the input of others, while Extraverts naturally feel off-balance if they don’t get input from others–like running around with their eyes closed.  But since they are constantly interacting with the world for information, Extraverts are very aware of how people will affect and interact with their plans, while Introverts may not be as aware of the effects others will have.

The difference between iNtuition and Sensing has a slew of misconceptions as well.  In reality, Sensing is based on patterns of  things previously experienced while iNtuition is based on things conceptualized through noticed patterns mentally.  Both Sensing and iNtuition functions are used to understand how things and people work universally, but Sensing forms a physical picture, based on previous experiences, and iNtuition forms a mental picture, based on underlying concepts.  What defines an “iNtuitive” individual versus a “Sensor” individual is if they naturally think in concepts early in their cognitive process or experiences early in their cognitive process, respectively.  Those are the only requirements of being an N or an S.

Typical side effects of these focuses, again, are varied.  Sensors, focusing on things they’ve personally experienced, tend to think in a more linear, straight-forward, on-the-ground and in the moment sort of way, which is fine.  {This doesn’t mean that iNtuitives *can’t* think this way, only that for Sensors it will come more naturally.} Only unhealthy Sensors will focus on what’s right in front of them at the *expense* of concepts they don’t yet understand.  iNtuitives, focusing on the underlying patterns they find mentally, tend to think in a more abstract, overarching, complex way, and that’s fine too.  {This doesn’t mean that Sensors *can’t* think this way, only that for iNtuitives it will come more naturally.}  Only unhealthy iNtuitives will focus on abstract patterns at the *expense* of what’s right in front of them.

With N/S as with all the letters, stereotyping those different from you is hurtful as well as something that indicates an insecurity with your own way of functioning.  All the types are equal; there’s no need to put others down in order to feel safe and okay being yourself.

Thinkers are defined by the way they focus early in their cognitive process on the use of things, whether it be information or people.  Feelers are defined by the way they focus early in their cognitive process on the meaning of things, whether it be information or people.  Thoughts teach us the usefulness of objects, situations, people and actions; Feelings bring meaning to objects, situations, people and actions.  *We all have both*, it’s just the order we prioritize them that makes us a Feeler or a Thinker.  Once again, differences in personality stem from those differences in cognition order.

Now while “Thinker” and “Feeler” are accurate terms according to what Jung meant, in our modern culture (and maybe English has more of this connotation than German), these two terms do not mean equal things, when an essential point of Jung’s type theory was that the functions were equal.  These terms have come to imply that Feelers are illogical but nice, while Thinkers are logical and rational, but cold and unfeeling.  These implications can’t be allowed to stand because they’re damaging, degrading and beyond that, simply untrue.

As Jung said, both Thinking and Feeling are “rational” functions (“Application Functions” as we now call them on aLBoP), whereas “Sensation” as he called it and Intuition are the “irrational” ones (which aLBoP calls “Compilation Functions”), meaning that those functions compile patterns about the world rather than coming to conclusions about it.  To imply that Feelers can’t be equally logical or that Thinkers can’t be equally compassionate is just not in line with reality and terribly dangerous. 

Thinker vs. Feeler tends to be dangerous territory where one must tread with utmost care.  It’s an emotionally charged topic and I find one of the groups that gets the most emotional about it is Thinkers who are trying to declare that Feelers are illogical.  The irony astounds me.  While I do run into the occasional Feeler trying to claim moral superiority over us “heartless” Thinkers, they seem to be the minority of the problem.

It’s amazing to me how many Thinkers believe that their reasoning could never be influenced by emotion, because their emotions tend to demonstrate more through feelings like fear, anger, distaste, catastrophizing, and pessimism, which are moods and beliefs as much as giddiness, excitement, sensitivity, security and optimism.  *Every* human being is subject to emotion and while it may gall Thinkers to have them, we are often the most controlled by our emotions when we fail to realize their presence and strength.

I know from personal experience that I’m certainly the most unreasonable when I’m trying to prove how reasonable I am.  My ENTP debate mechanism doesn’t weaken when I angrily slam the door on my INFJ while yelling why I’m sure I’m right, but you better believe I feel like an idiot when I come to my senses and see how emotionally compromised my reasoning really was.

A lot of the stereotypes of T/F are actually characteristics that tend to follow ITs and EFs (as well as the common stereotypes of I/E, as a matter of fact).  Not that ITs are extra smart or have to be mean, and not that EFs are irrational or have to be sweet; instead ITs’ focus on the use of information in conjunction with Introverts’ tendency to get stuck in their own heads, can make ITs act or seem hard-headed and stereotypically “T.”  EF is the same story from the opposite side; EFs’ focus on the meaning of information, along with the Extraverted tendency to get pulled around with what others think, can make EFs look or act flighty and stereotypically “F.”

But of course, part of going into the cognitive process in depth here is to show, once again, that *all* the personality types have the tools at their disposal to make informed, meaningful decisions that take all the information, both use and meaning, into account.  They just have to work *with* their own psyches and not against them.

I’ve heard people think that Js are called “Judgers” because they’re more judgmental.  If they mean they tend to care more if a person is being of use than of meaning, that’s more of a T/F thing than a J/P thing, though being a TJ can certainly compound that tendency.  If they mean that Js are more decisive, that’s *closer* to the real difference.

In actuality, a Judger is defined by when in the cognition process they focus and decide on Action.  Judgers decide on a course of action in either their first cognition step (EJs) or second (IJs).  Percievers, instead, take more time to explore possibilities before acting, with their Action step coming either third (IPs) or last (EPs).

Now these differences can often result in stereotypically J/P actions, like Js liking things to be orderly or Ps enjoying spontaneity, but often that’s simply not the case and people are commonly mistyped over misconceptions of J/P.

For example IPs and especially ITPs, tend to be *more* meticulous than a lot of Js because of IPs’ unique focus on detail.  A lot of IPs *don’t* like surprises and are very particular about things being just so.  EPs tend to be the more quintessential Ps, and even we get meticulous about things that actually matter to us (like ending up with a blog post that was over twice as long as anticipated, trying to get important points across).  In contrast Js can sometimes rush into action in a way that looks spontaneous.  EJs, with Action being their unique emphasis, are often the quintessential Js, with ETJs especially saying the equivalent of “Let’s just get it done already!”

The main differences to watch for are that Judgers’ focus is on what action to take, based on the information they already have, and they prefer to plan ahead and then carry through with that plan; Perceivers’ focus is on exploring additional options and they prefer to react to new information and prefer not to set plans in stone.

It makes sense that EJs would be “More J” and EPs “More P”; because the Extraverts are on the extremes about taking action early versus observing longer, with the Introverts in the middle.  You often find these kinds of extremes in personality typing.  TJs and ITs tend to be more expectedly “T,” FPs and EFs more expectedly “F,” with the TPs, ETs, FJs and IFs somewhere in the middle.

These extremes aren’t necessarily better or worse, just more specialized in that particular function.  Though, it might be said that the extremes in any function have extra need to get in touch with their Paradoxitype for balance.

Cognition – Step One

There are four different ways to embark on the thought process, one of which each of us does naturally without even thinking about it.  You may consciously decide what to cognate about; you don’t consciously decide *how* to cognate.

I make subtle faces sometimes when people say things like “Well, I’m somewhere between T and F,” or “I used to be an Extravert, but now I’m an Introvert.”  I understand people thinking that way, especially when the definitions of the types are vastly oversimplified most the time.  But when you see how the letters define the way you think and how your brain works, which affects your actions but does not determine them, you can see that it’s not the kind of thing that changes during your lifetime.

Now, don’t confuse me, I’m *not* saying that people can’t change or that they’re limited by their personality type and letters.  You *absolutely* can overcome the weaknesses of your own type as well as gain the strengths of every other.  *But* my caveat is that you must start by understanding the way you function naturally.  It is nearly impossible to gain the strengths of other types without first embracing the strengths of your own.  In contrast, it is insanely easy to gain the weaknesses of the other types you may try to emulate, if you are not *first* comfortable with who you are and the way your mind works naturally.

Take home lesson: Your personality type doesn’t change.  You change what you do with it.  Be happy being you and *then* you can adopt the traits you appreciate in other personality types.

Also, don’t do drugs.

Introverts, whether Judgers or Perceivers, begin this thought process inside their heads.  For IJs, the process starts with grasping Principles, which is information as it is universally applicable.  For IPs the process starts with contemplating gathered Data and Details, which is information as it is applicable to specific situations.

Introverts’ primary cognition is like a Heads-up Display, letting them sift through and understand information already in their database, constantly.

IJs’ HUD covers an intricate network of information and they are constantly finding the common threads behind that information; the one line of computer code that causes all the results they see around them.

IPs’ HUD includes a powerful microscope, able to zoom in on and understand the tiniest detail that other types might simply overlook and are able to draw complex conclusions from that data.

Because of their cognitive emphasis on Principles and the way things work universally, IJs care most about the direction the World is headed in and make plans to see that direction accomplished (which leads into their Step Two — Action).  That World Direction can be either good or bad, depending on whether the IJ is healthy or unhealthy.

Because of their cognitive emphasis on Details and specific Data, IPs care most about fully understanding and exploring specific Situations, whether that means using a situation to its fullest as an ITP or fully appreciating a moment as an IFP.  That Detail Exploration can be put to good or bad purposes, depending whether the IP is healthy or unhealthy.

Extraverts, whether Judgers or Perceivers, begin the thought process with their eyes wide open, taking in information from the outside world.  For EJs, the process starts with evaluating what Actions lead to which Consequences, watching how results follow choices.  For EPs, the process starts with Observing individuals in order to understand Motivations, watching what reactions demonstrate about a person’s character.

Extraverts’ primary cognition is like Sonar, sending out signals and watching what the signals bounce off of.

EJs’ Sonar “Pings” are more direct, focusing on the course ahead and loudly pinging the terrain in front of them.  EJs send pings through making decisions and everything is a decision for an EJ, whether it’s forming an opinion of someone or choosing a stance on a cause; they can change course by making new decisions according to the consequences and results their action-pings get (“Ahh!  We’re too close to the underwater wall!  Turn back, turn back!!!”), but each J judgment is decisive.

EPs’ Sonar “Pings” are more passive, trying to map out the entire terrain, not just the course ahead (see, I said in the sidebar that I was going to type cartographers ;)).  Everything an EP says or does is a ping; even just sitting back and watching others ping off each other is pinging for an EP.  EPs watch for the way the people-terrain reacts to their pings to get a complete picture of individuals and the way they function.  Most of all, EPs are constantly pinging themselves in order to understand their own motivations and character and to explore how people in general work.  This can look self-centered to non-EPs, but really EPs are just excited by individuals in general and understand themselves the best (“My submarine is so cool!  Look what this button does!”).

Because of their cognitive emphasis on Actions and the Consequences of choices, EJs care most about the direction the Groups they support are headed in and they make plans to carry out that direction.  Those Groups can be families, friends, people who believe in the same causes, etc.  Once again, the purposes they desire to put their Groups to can be good or bad, depending on whether the EJ is healthy or unhealthy.

Because of their cognitive emphasis on Observing Motivations and understanding what makes people tick, EPs care most about exploring Individuals and the way people work in general.  And, like the other three kinds of types, whether that People exploration is good or bad depends on whether the EP is healthy or unhealthy.

Along with Introversion and Extraversion, Judging and Perceiving, obviously a person’s middle letters interact with their cognition process.  In a lot of ways, first and last letters (E/I, J/P) determine what information a person is gathering or processing, while the middle letters (N/S, F/T) determine what form that information takes within your psyche.

Carl Jung’s original type theory was divided into 8 types, based on a person’s primary form of understanding information.  These were INJ, ENP, ISJ, ESP, ETJ, ITP, EFJ and IFP, though it was Briggs and Myers who later noticed the J/P pattern.

As you can see, in those original 8 types, IJs and EPs are sorted based on their primary function of either iNtuition or Sensing, while the EJs and IPs are sorted by their primary function of either Thinking or Feeling.  We can simplify those 8 types again into just 4:  Is your primary function Feeling (EFJ, IFP), Thinking (ETJ, ITP), Sensing (ISJ, ESP), or iNtuition (INJ, ENP)?

See the pattern?  The IPs and EJs are always buddies and so are the EPs and IJs.

But what does that really mean?  What makes Sensing and iNtuition similar and what makes Feeling and Thinking similar?  Well, as I mentioned in the T/F Definition section above, Jung called Thinking and Feeling the “Rational” functions and Sensing and iNtuition the “Irrational” ones.

Now before conclusions are jumped to, *NO,* I’m not saying that IJs and EPs are irrational (/eyeroll).  A “Rational” function is one in which a person evaluates information based on either how useful (Thinking) or meaningful (Feeling) that information is.  In contrast, an “Irrational” function is one in which a person collects information by seeing patterns, whether in physical experiences (Sensing) or mental concepts (iNtuition).

So Thinking and Feeling are called “Rational” functions because they’re evaluating how to think, feel, process and apply information to specific circumstances and applications; Sensing and iNtuition are called “Irrational” functions because they’re seeing, observing and collecting information for general applicability without yet evaluating it.

{Update: Due to the obviously confusing nature of Jung’s well-intended terms, on aLBoP we’ve updated these terms to clarify the definitions and avoid misconceptions.  It’s a thing we like to do.

We now refer to “Rational” functions as “Application Functions,” because they apply information to specific circumstances, and we call “Irrational” functions “Compilation Functions” because they compile and sift through large quantities of information in order to find universal patterns.}

IPs and EJs start with {Application Functions}, making specifics their primary focus (either specific Data or specific Action respectively), and IJs and EPs start with {Compilation Functions} making things that are generally applicable their primary focus (either general Principles or general people Observations respectively)… and then they switch.    But that’s Step Two.  The point is, everyone does *both* {Application and Compilation} functions, but IJs and EPs start with the Big Picture and zoom in to Specifics; EJs and IPs start with Specifics and zoom out to the Big Picture.

Okay, moving right along here  Believe me, you’ll want this information here for reference when we get into the later steps of the cognition process.  At least there are pictures!!

Now, in practice each primary function–each type’s “Step One”–is pretty straightforward.

INJs’ first step and primary focus is using their iNtuition (N) inside their heads (introverted) to understand how Conceptual Principles apply universally as Trends.  They use their Heads-up Display to visualize conceptual information and organize it into universally applicable pictures and patterns.
We shorthand this as:  Principles via Ni (introverted iNtuition).

ISJs’ first step and primary focus is using their Sensing (S) inside their heads (introverted) to understand how Experiences Principles apply universally as Trends.  They use their Heads-up Display to understand the patterns behind experiences and to organize those patterns so they are universally applicable.
Shorthand:  Principles via Si (introverted Sensing).

ENPs’ first step and primary focus is directing their iNtuition (N) outside themselves (extraverted) to Observe people’s Motivations and character, Conceptually.  They use their Sonar “Pings” to map out conceptually the way an individual functions and the way people function in general.
Shorthand:  Observation via Ne (extraverted iNtuition).

ESPs’ first step and primary focus is directing their Sensing (S) outside themselves (extraverted) to Observe people’s Motivations and character, through Experiences.  They use their Sonar “Pings” to notice the way an individual functions and the way people function in general, through experiencing people with their five senses.
Shorthand:  Observation via Se (extraverted Sensing).

ITPs’ first step and primary focus is using their Thoughts (T) inside their heads (introverted) to understand the Use of gathered Data and Details.  They use their Heads-up Display microscope to be able to evaluate and apply data to specific situations and to see when they’re missing additional data.
Shorthand:  Data via Ti (introverted Thinking).

IFPs’ first step and primary focus is using their Feelings (F) inside their heads (introverted) to understand the Meaning of gathered Data and Details.   They use their Heads-up Display microscope to feel and experience the power and importance of even the minutest detail.
Shorthand:  Data via Fi (introverted Feeling).

ETJs’ first step and primary focus is directing their Thoughts (T) outside themselves (extraverted) to Act and see the Use of Actions.  They use their Sonar “Pings” to decide and map the course ahead according to what will be of the most use for the group/groups they support and to see what works and what doesn’t work.
Shorthand: Action via Te (extraverted Thinking).

EFJs’ first step and primary focus is directing their Feelings (F) outside themselves (extraverted) to Act and see the Meaning of Actions.  They use their Sonar “Pings” to decide and map the course ahead according to what will bring the greatest meaning and experiences to the group/groups they support and to see what actions hurt or help people.
Shorthand: Action via Fe (extraverted Feeling).

And that’s Step One!  Yay!

Cognition – Step Two

Now, the thought process builds on itself; a person takes whatever information they gleaned from Step One, and applies it to Step Two.  They then take the combined information from steps One and Two, and apply that to Step Three; same with Step Four, and the same with applying *all* of that to Step One again on the Rinse and Repeat.

Because Step One is a person’s focus and priority, with the most time spent there, it becomes the context for all the other steps, with Step Two coming in a close second, etc, and Step Four being a person’s weakest area.  So as we go through all the steps, remember:  The information and decisions gleaned from each step gets added to the grand total which is a person’s current understanding of life, the universe and everything.

Okay, now everyone, *SWITCH!*  For “Step Two” of the thought process, the Percievers (EPs and IPs) swap functions and the Judgers (EJs and IJs) swap functions.  I could just say, “to see what Step Two is, swap a type’s first letter and then look above for what they do,” but that would be confusing and I’m not going to do that.  Plus, there is a tad more elaboration required  Isn’t there always?

Step Two is simply your “auxiliary” function at work; so your middle letter that *wasn’t* at work in Step One.  The IPs and EJs, who used their {Application} functions (F/T) in Step One, switch to their {Compilation} functions (S/N) in Step Two.  The IJs and EPs, who used their {Compilation} functions (S/N) in Step One, switch to their {Application} functions (F/T) in Step Two.  Also, if a person was inside their own head before (introverted), they then take that information and apply it outside themselves (extraverted)… and vice versa.

Stated simply:

IJs apply their understanding of Principles and how things work universally from inside their heads (introverted) to specific circumstances outside themselves (extraverted) to see what Action to take and to understand the Consequences of Action.  From the Big Picture of Principles, they derive Specifics in the form of Action.

IPs apply the specific Data and Details they’ve come to conclusions about inside their heads (introverted) to the Observation of people outside themselves (extraverted) to see individuals’ Motivations, understand how people in general function and make character judgments.  From the Specifics of Data, they derive the Big Picture in the form of Observing individuals.

EJs apply their findings from Acting, receiving Consequences and watching specific Actions outside themselves (extraverted) to draw an understanding of Principles and how things work universally, inside their heads (introverted).  From the Specifics of Action, they derive the Big Picture in the form of Principles.

EPs apply their Observations of individuals’ Motivations, character judgments and noticing how people work in general (extraverted) to draw Conclusions in the form of specific Data and Details inside their heads (introverted).  From the Big Picture of Observing Motivations, they derive Specifics in the form of Data and Details.

Like I said, IJs and EPs work in terms of Thinking or Feeling on Step Two; adding to their thought process either Action or Data in the form of either Thoughts or Feelings.

ETPs’ second step of cognition is drawing Data and Conclusions from the Observations they made in Step One, in the form of Thoughts (T) inside their heads (introverted), in order to make Use of those Observations of Individuals, including making Use of themselves.
Shorthand:  Data via Ti (introverted Thinking).

ITJs’ second step of cognition is applying the Principles they came to understand in Step One to individual situations to see the Use of Actions by directing their Thoughts (T) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to find which Actions will be of the most Use to the World.
Shorthand: Action via Te (extraverted Thinking).

IFJs’ second step of cognition is applying the Principles they came to understand in Step One to individual situations to see the Meaning of Actions by directing their Feelings (F) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to find which Actions will bring the most Meaning to the World.
Shorthand: Action via Fe (extraverted Feeling).

EFPs’ second step of cognition is drawing Data and Conclusions from the Observations they made in Step One, in the form of Feelings (F) inside their heads (introverted), in order to understand Meaning of those Observations of Individuals, including understanding the Meaning of Themselves.
Shorthand:  Data via Fi (introverted Feeling).

IPs and EJs work in terms of Sensing or iNtuition on Step Two; adding to their thought process either Observations or Principles in the form of either Experiences or Concepts.

ENJs’ second step is using their iNtuition (N) inside their heads (introverted) to understand how the Consequences of Actions made in Step One form Concepts that apply universally as Principles.
Shorthand:  Principles via Ni (introverted iNtuition).

INPs’ second step is applying the Data, Details and Conclusions they reached in Step One, to Observing people’s Motivations and character by directing their iNtuition (N) outside themselves (extraverted) in order to make Conceptual pictures of individuals and how people work in general.
Shorthand:  Observation via Ne (extraverted iNtuition).

ISPs’ second step is applying the Data, Details and Conclusions they reached in Step One, to Observing people’s Motivations and character by directing their five senses (S) outside themselves (extraverted) in order to understand individuals and how people work in general by Experiencing them.
Shorthand:  Observation via Se (extraverted Sensing).

ESJs’ second step is using their Sensing (S) inside their heads (introverted) to understand how the Consequences of Actions made in Step One are Experiences that apply universally as Principles.
Shorthand:  Principles via Si (introverted Sensing).

See the beautiful balance of the human mind?  Each brain does a dance of zooming in and out of the big picture and specifics; contemplating, then applying; observing, then understanding.  Even by this point, only halfway through the steps, we can see how equal and balanced all the personality types are.  Also we can see how each type can find connections and relate with the thinking of all the others.  Whether it’s through similarity in Introversion or Extraversion and how you primarily process the world, similarity in focusing on either Big Picture or Specifics, or similarity in Judging or Perceiving which means your Step Two is the same as someone else’s Step One; *no type* is so foreign that we can’t understand how they think or feel.

Pretty rock-awesome, no?  Now onto Step Three!!!

Cognition – Step Three

So once upon a time, there were the first two steps.  They lived in harmony, being coordinated and making obvious sense.  N/S applied to Big Picture things, T/F to Specific ones; Action was Specific, Principles were Big Picture; Action was extraverted, Principles were introverted.  It was a time of peace, serenity and reason.

And then the Perceivers got involved…

For some odd reason, which I suppose makes sense in retrospect, Perceivers don’t view Action the same way Judgers do.  The retrospect part is: that’s what makes them Perceivers

While everyone’s Data step is introverted F or T (information applied specifically, inside your head), and everyone’s Observation step is extraverted S or N (big picture information, from outside yourself), in the Action/Principles area, it isn’t so simple.

It seems that Judgers and Perceivers don’t just act at different times, but they view and understand action differently too.  In the cognitive process, Data and Observation are buddies and so are Principles and Action; no matter the order, they come in pairs with character Observation and Data being the Perceiving part and Principles and Action being the Judging part.  Though all four of a person’s cognitive functions work together, the first two and the last two are really BFFs (that’s “Best Friends Forever;” not a {cognitive} term, but still useful!), helping a person zoom in and out to understand all the information and its applications.

So, by this point, we’ve already seen how Judgers do the Action/Principles stage; Js understand Principles as being generally applicable and Action as being specific–Principles in S/N and Action in T/F.

But those weird Perceivers (;D) do just the opposite.  With Perceivers’ emphasis on “perceiving” the way people function in general (the result of Observation + Data), they see Action and decision-making in a similar way to how Judgers see Principles; as generally applicable patterns of information (found via S/N) discovered inside their heads (introverted).

Likewise, Perceivers view Principles in a similar way to how Judgers view Action, as specifically applicable information (found via F/T) with direct results and Consequences in the world (extraverted).

So keep the weirdos in mind as we look at how each type does Step Three.

The cognition process is a beautiful chiasmus, with each type’s Step Three function being a complete mirror-image of their Step Two function, and their Step Four function being a mirror-image of their Step One function.

In Step Three, IJs and EPs use the opposite {Application} function (T/F) than they used in Step Two; IPs and EJs use the opposite {Compilation} function (S/N) than they used in Step Two.

Step Three includes a lot of Paradoxitype elements, since it’s from a person’s tertiary function, it lies beneath the obvious, and yet isn’t a person’s weakest function like Step Four.  Step Three is cool too, because each type-set derives information in a way and order that none of the other type-sets do.  This just shows, once again, how much we all need each other and the strengths that each type provides.

IJs on Step Three, take the specific Consequences of Actions they made in Step Two (via Te or Fe), and derive specific Data and Details from it in the form of either Thoughts or Feelings inside their heads (opposite T/F, introverted).  They’re the only ones to derive Data from Actions.

IPs on Step Three, take their Observations of how people work in general from Step Two (via Se or Ne) and apply it to an understanding of how to use Actions in general, make decisions and to understand Consequences in the form of either Experiences or Concepts, inside their heads (opposite S/N, introverted).  They’re the only ones to derive Actions from Motivations.

EJs on Step Three, take the universally applicable Principles of how the world works they came to understand in Step Two (via Si or Ni) and apply it to the Observation of people and their Motivations to understand how people work in general by directing their Senses or iNtuition, outward (opposite S/N, extraverted).  They’re the only ones to derive Motivations from Principles.

EPs on Step Three, take the specific Data and Details they’ve found in Step Two (via Ti or Fi) and derive specific Principles of the way the world works by directing their Thoughts or Feelings outward (opposite T/F, extraverted).  They’re the only ones to derive Principles from Data.

ITJs’ third step of cognition is drawing Data and Details from the Consequences of Actions they made in Step Two, in the form of Feelings (F) inside their heads (introverted), in order to make Meaningful Conclusions.
Shorthand: Data via Fi (introverted Feeling).

ETPs’ third step of cognition is using the Data and Conclusions they came to in Step Two to see universal Principles, by directing their Feelings (F) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to understand the Meaning in the world.
Shorthand:  Principles via Fe (extraverted Feeling).

EFPs’ third step of cognition is using the Data and Conclusions they came to in Step Two to see universal Principles, by directing their Thoughts (T) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to make Use of the world.
Shorthand:  Principles via Te (extraverted Thinking).

IFJs’ third step of cognition is drawing Data and Details from the Consequences of Actions they made in Step Two, in the form of Thoughts (T) inside their heads (introverted), in order to make Useful Conclusions.
Shorthand: Data via Ti (introverted Thinking).

INPs’ third step is applying their Observations of people from Step Two, to finding patterns inside their heads (introverted) from the things they’ve Experienced with their five Senses (S), to decide on courses of Action based on Linear scenarios and general Consequences.
Shorthand:  Action via Si (introverted Sensing).

ENJs’ third step is applying the universal Principles they learned in Step Two to Observing people’s Motivations by reaching out (extraverted) and Experiencing people with their five Senses (S).
Shorthand:  Observation via Se (extraverted Sensing).

ESJs’ third step is applying the universal Principles they learned in Step Two to Observing people’s Motivations by directing their iNtuition (N) outside themselves (extraverted) to form Conceptual pictures of people.
Shorthand:  Observation via Ne (extraverted iNtuition).

ISPs’ third step is applying their Observations of people from Step Two, to finding patterns inside their heads (introverted) in the form of Concepts through their iNtuition (N), to decide on courses of Action based on Conceptual scenarios and general Consequences.
Shorthand:  Action via Ni (introverted iNtuition).

You get the drill  On to Step Four!

Cognition – Step Four

If you have trouble remembering Step Four, just remember it’s what you suck at.  I’m joking… kinda.  While it’s totally feasible to overcome and work with the weaknesses of this last step, it will always bring up the rear.  It’s just not possible in our limited humanity to be equally good at everything.  We don’t have the brainpower, time or energy.  But as we let our Step Four be taught and mentored by our Step One, it too can become strong… though maybe not *as* strong…

But since it’s our weakest area, Step Four is where we feel the most off-step, vulnerable and get the most defensive of our choices.  While we all use our Feelings in one of the steps, Step Four is where we get the most overemotional no matter what function we use there.  No matter what your Step Four is, it would be prudent to learn to cool it when it comes to your weakest area.  Be patient with yourself; recognize that this weakest area is where you’re most likely to be incorrect.  Be willing to recognize when you’re wrong, and go back to your Step One (your greatest strength) to find your own errors in judgment.  Otherwise the errors in your thought process are going to be misapplied on the Rinse and Repeat and skew your whole method of thinking.

IJs on Step Four take the specific Data and Conclusions they found in Step Three and use that information to Observe the general character and Motivations of Individuals by directing their iNtuition or five Senses outside themselves (opposite N/S, extraverted).

Individual Observation is the hardest for IJs because while their primary focus of Principles may be universal, Principles are also single threads behind infinite applications; people are the most complicated applications of all, and IJs can make blanket character judgments if they try and make those applications too simple and apply Principles as straightforwardly to their Observations as they do to Action or Data.

IPs on Step Four take the Consequences of Actions made in Step Three and apply it to what they see to make specific Principles of how the world works universally by applying their Thoughts or Feelings outside themselves (opposite T/F, extraverted).

Principles are the hardest for IPs because their primary focus of Data and Details means their minds are focused on depth over breadth of information; they explore the world, primarily on their own (introverted) focusing on detailed specific applications of information, and can’t possibly expect to also be as good at understanding how that information applies to the entire world.

EJs on Step Four take the understanding of Individual Motivations they Observed in Step Three and draw specific Data, Details and Conclusions from them in the form of Thoughts or Feelings inside their heads (opposite T/F, introverted).

Conclusions are the hardest for EJs because their primary focus of Action means they’re always in motion and it’s difficult for their minds to slow down and examine the Data themselves, and yet their Actions are so oriented around people and the actions of others that it’s difficult for them to analyze a specific situation for its intrinsic value and Conclusion without being influenced by others’ opinions about a given situation or data.

EPs on Step Four take the specific Principles of how the world works that they learned in Step Three and apply them to a general understanding of how to choose Actions, make decisions and to understand Consequences in the form of either Experiences or Concepts, inside their heads (opposite S/N, introverted).

Actions and Consequences are the hardest for EPs because their primary focus is Observing, a focus that continues on with them throughout deriving Data and Principles from those Observations; it’s all about information-gathering, up until the last second, when formed scenarios finally become literal action… but often what an EP pictures in their mind doesn’t pan out when actually put into motion.

ENPs’ fourth step and weakest function is applying the Principles they learned in Step Three, to finding patterns inside their heads (introverted) from the things they’ve Experienced with their five Senses (S), to decide on courses of Action based on Linear scenarios and general Consequences.
Shorthand:  Action via Si (introverted Sensing).

INJs’ fourth step and weakest function is applying the specific Data and Conclusions they came to in Step Three to Observing people’s Motivations by reaching out (extraverted) and Experiencing people with their five Senses (S).
Shorthand:  Observation via Se (extraverted Sensing).

ISJs’ fourth step and weakest function is applying the specific Data and Conclusions they came to in Step Three to Observing people’s Motivations by reaching out (extraverted) to form Conceptual pictures of people (N).
Shorthand:  Observation via Ne (extraverted iNtuition).

ESPs’ fourth step and weakest function is applying the Principles they learned in Step Three, to finding patterns inside their heads (introverted) in the form of Concepts (N), to decide on courses of Action based on Conceptual scenarios and general Consequences.
Shorthand:  Action via Ni (introverted iNtuition).

ETJs’ fourth step and weakest function of cognition is drawing Data and Details from the Observations of Motivations they made in Step Three, in the form of Feelings (F) inside their heads (introverted), in order to make Meaningful Conclusions.
Shorthand: Data via Fi (introverted Feeling).

ITPs’ fourth step and weakest function of cognition is using the Consequences of Actions they made in Step Three to see universal Principles, by directing their Feelings (F) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to understand the Meaning in the world.
Shorthand:  Principles via Fe (extraverted Feeling).

IFPs’ fourth step and weakest function of cognition is using the Consequences of Actions they made in Step Three to see universal Principles, by directing their Thoughts (T) outside themselves (extraverted), in order to make Use of the world.
Shorthand:  Principles via Te (extraverted Thinking).

EFJs’ fourth step and weakest function of cognition is drawing Data and Details from the Observations of Motivations they made in Step Three, in the form of Thoughts (T) inside their heads (introverted), in order to make Useful Conclusions.
Shorthand: Data via Ti (introverted Thinking).

Cognition – Rinse and Repeat

“This is the song that never ends!  It just goes on and on, my friends!”

Now I got that song stuck in your head.  I’m sorry, I truly am.  What happens when we reach the end of the thought process?  When we’ve finished our weakest step and everything is accumulated in our brains?  We do it again of course!  Like a toddler yelling, “Again!  Again!” we just do the whole thing over, this time applying everything we learned the time before to fresh steps.

So we become an amalgamation of all our Thoughts, Feelings, Experiences and Concepts.  This is why the cognition process demonstrates in everything we are.  Our decisions, conclusions, worldview and our motivations are what define us; the things that truly make us who we are.

But I hope that this demonstrates just how much all the types have in common, while also demonstrating how different and unique we all are too.  We need each and every type for the special things they bring to the table.  It’s a beautiful Jenga game that would all fall down if any one type were to be lost.

I hope you recognize too how special and balanced your own way of thinking is, and that if you learn to use it healthily, you can feel confident, powerful, useful and meaningful in your own skin.

Here on the aLBoP Guided Tour?  Yay!  That means you’ve finished the three Dictionary Posts!  You earn an aLBoP gold star!  Oooh, ahh! o_o  Now we get into how to type actual people and characters, with stick figures Gwen and Phil in our Typing Tutorial!

Want a unique picture of how *you* think?  I made a picture for each of the 16 unique cognitive processes!  Because you’ve always wanted to be a stick figure.

Just click on each picture to zoom in, then you can right click to save or to Pin/Tumblr/Share the large version!

The post The Cognition Process in Stick Figures appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

 Introverts, whether Introverted Perceivers or Introverted Judgers, naturally excel at the parts of the cognitive process that require inside-their-heads, solitary thought.  Whether this is IP’s understanding and coming to Conclusions about Data and situational details based on either thoughts or feelings inside their heads (Ti or Fi), or IJ’s understanding of how Principles apply to the world at large based on either applying their intuition or their senses inside their heads (Ni or Si), introverts are quite comfortable working things out within their own minds.

Because Introverts prioritize those inside-their-head steps, they naturally feel confident making decisions without external input.  Even an Introvert struggling with self-confidence issues is unlikely to feel like they need others to help make their decisions.  Even when an Introvert regrets or feels inadequate in their decisions, they’ll still feel like they alone have to make the decision.

For more information on what all the letters mean, click here, and stay tuned for more aLBoP (a Little Bit of Personality) Personality Tips

The post aLBoP Personality Tips #3-5: Introverts appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

In order to understand how people make good decisions, we need to explore *why* they make the decisions they do.  Namely, *why* do the different types have the specializations and focuses they do; how do each of us see the world and people and how do we choose to affect the world the way no one else can?

How we view the world is based on how our cognition interacts with our experiences.  Based on our cognitive patterns, two different types will interpret the same experiences quite differently.  Through those experiences, each type tends toward a different worldview.  Now I’m not talking about who you voted for or where you choose to spend your Sundays, though those choices are certainly based on your worldview and personal experiences.  No, I’m talking about optimism, pessimism and our intentions of world and self change.  I have to note that *each* of these, when healthy,  are valid and necessary ways of viewing the world so that as a society we don’t miss anything or go off wildly half-cocked.  In fact you can be sure that a broken culture is the result of one or many of the types’ unique strengths being ignored in favor of a few select types.  More on that later though.

Not just for the sake of tooting my own horn (though, as an ENTP, you know I love to ), I want to point out that you’re not going to find this information anywhere else.  I see the patterns and I share them; I don’t get them from anywhere “official” because those individual human beings who are just people too, haven’t discovered them yet.  Sometimes Tony Stark is better at inventing something in a cave than researchers in a million dollar lab with their heads up their booties could ever be.  If the “experts” want to tell the “amateurs” they’re wrong, feel free… they should just prepare to have said butts handed back to them.

Here are the graphs, because I <3 pretty graphs!

The two graphs correspond, the second being a “flipping” of the first, with each type’s place in the first graph corresponding to its place in the second.

The graph on the top is about the way each type tends to view people.

• I’s, whose primary functions are inside their own heads, concentrate their focus on people on the whole, while E’s, whose primary functions are through taking things in from the world outside themselves, concentrate their focus on individuals.

• F’s, who focus on the meaning of people and things, tend to be more optimistic about people.  T’s, who focus on the use of people and things, tend to be more pessimistic about people.

• Idealistic — IF’s tend to think people on the whole are good and meaningful.  When they do feel cynical, it tends to be about individuals failing.  (“People rock!”)

• Optimistic — EF’s tend to think individuals are good and meaningful.  When they do feel cynical, it tends to be about people on the whole failing.  (“You rock!”)

• Pessimistic — IT’s tend to think people on the whole are bad and useless.  When they do feel optimistic, it tends to be about individuals who matter to them.  (“People suck!”)

• Skeptical — ET’s tend to think individuals are bad and useless.  When they do feel optimistic, it tends to be about people on the whole who matter to them.  (“You suck!”)

The graph on the bottom is about what each type chooses to do about how they view people.

• S’s, who take in the world in a linear, literal, on-the-ground way, care especially about keeping things the same and protecting what is already there, while N’s, who take in the world in a conceptual, non-linear, far-reaching way, care especially about changing things to reach their full potential.

• J’s, who focus on the relationship between actions, consequences and principles of the way things work, specialize in the direction the world and groups are headed in.  P’s, who focus on the relationship between data, the way things are, and the motivations of individuals, specialize in exploring the world and people.

• Game Changers — NJ’s focus on changing the world.

• Motivators — NP’s focus on changing individuals, starting with themselves.

• World Protectors — SJ’s focus on keeping the world the same.

• Individualists — SP’s focus on keeping individuals the same, starting with themselves.

• ISFJ — The Idealistic World Protectors — tend to think people on the whole are good, so they desire to protect the parts of the world they love.  (The Knight)

• ISFP — The Idealistic Individualists — tend to think people on the whole are good, so they desire to keep the parts of people they love the same.  (The Explorer)

• ENFJ — The Optimistic Game Changers — tend to think individuals are good, so they believe it’s possible to change the bad parts of the world.  (The Veteran)

• ENFP — The Optimistic Motivators — tend to think individuals are good, so they believe it’s possible to change the bad parts of individuals, starting with themselves.  (The Standard-Bearer)

• ESFJ — The Optimistic World Protectors — tend to think individuals are good, so they desire to protect the parts of the world they love.  (The Cavalry)

• ESFP — The Optimistic Individualists — tend to think individuals are good, so they desire to keep the parts of people they love the same.  (The Morale Officer)

So how can we snap out of it, overcome fear and return to sanity?  How can we know what decisions to make when we’re scared?  I’ll explain in Part 2 – Playing to Your Strengths

The post How to Make Good Decisions While Still Being You: Part 1 – Optimism, Pessimism and What We Do About It appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

It’s that time of year again; the time of year when stores put out Halloween decorations ridiculously early and you know their Christmas decorations are just around the corner.  I swear they start marketing this stuff earlier every year.  All the same, if you want an attractive and complex costume for Halloween (or wherever else you might wear a costume) you need time to prepare.  Too many Halloweens I ended up trying to pick something to wear on the 31st and was bummed out when it didn’t come out as planned or no one knew what I was.  While I think it’s worth it to go for the 1% who know what you’re dressed as, you want enough time so that *you* are happy and feel good about yourself.

In that vein, I love the idea of wearing a costume that matches your personality type or Paradoxitype!  For Dragoncon this year, I dressed up as a steampunked version of Meg from Disney’s Hercules, with my INFJ dressed as a hydraulically powered Herc.  We put the cosplays together last minute and had some armor issues.  We didn’t end up getting *any* pictures together, which really bummed me out (though a bunch of strangers have pictures of us, wherever they are ).  imho, they looked better in person, but with our little budget, they came out pretty great.  Rocket-pack Pegasus is my favorite feature, along with Herc’s working arm pumps that pushed air into tubes every time he moved without limiting his range of motion very much.  I’m also insanely proud of my guns, Pain and Panic, which started out as dollar store neon plastic and ended up with a torched steel effect.  It’s the little details that make it special, even if other people never see it.

So, in order to aid you in your own costuming adventures of self-discovery and second-degree glue gun burns, I thought I’d provide you with a list of costume possibilities by personality type.  These will hopefully span a wide variety of fandoms and complexities so that you may be decked out in possibilities and have the ability to tailor one to your own needs!  I am also not above giving personal recommendations if you want to leave me a comment and ask for a suggestion to fit your personal situation and personality, y’know, within reason.  Most of all, I advise you to have fun, be yourself and *own it*, whatever you wear.  Take it from an ENTP, you look a lot less stupid when you roll with it.

INTJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Batman
Loki, The Avengers
Nick Fury, The Avengers
Charles Xavier, X-Men*
Magneto, X-Men
Phoney Bone, Bone*

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Sauron, Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion
The Witch King of Angmar, LoTR
Elrond, LoTR
Thorin Oakenshield, The Hobbit
Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter
Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter
Jane of the Volturi, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Dr. Simon Tam, Firefly
Darth Vader, Star Wars
Anakin Skywalker, Star Wars (especially in The Clone Wars cgi series; actually one of the major problems with the prequels is that Anakin doesn’t act INTJ most of the time… but that’s a topic for another day.)
Captain Picard, Star Trek: The Next Generation
GLADoS, Portal

TV Shows:
Sherlock, BBC’s Sherlock
Detective Carlton Lassiter, Psych

Disney and Animated:
King Triton, The Little Mermaid
The Beast, Beauty and the Beast
Jane, Return to Neverland*
Twilight Sparkle, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Princess Luna, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Princess Azula, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Lin Bei Fong, Avatar: The Legend of Korra*
Maleficent, Sleeping Beauty
Scar, The Lion King
Captain Hook, Peter Pan
Shifu, Kung Fu Panda
Tigress, Kung Fu Panda

Other Iconic Characters:
Indiana Jones
Mr. Darcy, Pride and Prejudice
Elphaba, Wicked
The Phantom, Phantom of the Opera*

ISTJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Agent Hill, The Avengers

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Lady Galadriel, LoTR
Professor Minerva McGonagall, Harry Potter
Rosalie Hale, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Spock, Star Trek
HAL 9000, 2001: A Space Odyssey (Could be very iconic with a black sheet and a red lightbulb :D)
Zoe Washburne, Firefly
Charles Gunn, Angel

TV Shows:
Monica Geller, Friends

Disney and Animated:
Tiana, The Princess and The Frog
Queen Elinor, Pixar’s Brave
Mother Gothel, Tangled
Zazu, The Lion King
Sebastian the crab, The Little Mermaid
Cogsworth, Beauty and the Beast
Frollo, The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Tenzin, Avatar: The Legend of Korra
Zecora, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic

Other Iconic Characters:
The Operator, Marble Hornets
Bert, Sesame Street
Sam the Eagle, The Muppets

INFJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Captain America, The Avengers
Spiderman
Ra’s al Ghul, Batman
Thorn, Bone
Susie Derkins, Calvin and Hobbes

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Harry Potter
Frodo, LoTR
Strider/Aragorn, LoTR
Gandalf, LoTR
Angel, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel
Edward Cullen, Twilight
Aro, Twilight
Wesley, The Princess Bride

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Luke Skywalker, Star Wars
Emperor Palpatine, Star Wars
Master Yoda, Star Wars
Revan, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
River Tam, Firefly
Inara Serra, Firefly
Peeta Mellark, The Hunger Games
Wanderer/Wanda, The Host
Sonny, iRobot

TV Shows:
Molly Hooper, BBC’s Sherlock
Pam Beesly, The Office

Disney and Animated:
Cinderella
Rapunzel, Tangled
Hercules
Tarzan
Esmeralda, The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Mufasa, The Lion King
Aang, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Prince Zuko, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Princess Celestia, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Hiccup, How to Train Your Dragon
Nemo, Pixar’s Finding Nemo

ISFJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Hawkeye, The Avengers
Jean Grey, X-Men
Jarvis, Iron Man

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Samwise Gamgee, LoTR
Jasper Hale, Twilight
Victoria, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Jim Raynor, Starcraft
Master Chief, Halo
The Arbiter, Halo
Optimus Prime, Transformers

TV Shows:
Michael Westen, Burn Notice*
Jack Bauer, 24
Burton Guster, Psych
Detective Inspector Lestrade, BBC’s Sherlock

Disney and Animated:
Nala, The Lion King
Jim Hawkins, Treasure Planet
Woody, Toy Story
The Iron Giant
Jack Skellington, Nightmare Before Christmas
Kim Possible
Prince Eric, The Little Mermaid
Prince Phillip, Sleeping Beauty
The Prince, Snow White
Captain Li Shang, Mulan
Goliath, Gargoyles
Shrek
Suki, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Mako, Avatar: The Legend of Korra
Shining Armor, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic

Other Iconic Characters:
Kermit the Frog, The Muppets
Will Turner, Pirates of the Caribbean
Christine, The Phantom of the Opera

ENTJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Cyclops, X-Men
Rachel Dawes, The Dark Knight Trilogy

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Eowyn, LoTR
Boromir, LoTR
Hermione Granger, Harry Potter
Buffy Summers, Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Princess Buttercup, The Princess Bride

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Obi Wan Kenobi, Star Wars
Princess Leia Organa, Star Wars
Commander Will Riker, Star Trek: The Next Generation
Bastila Shan, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic

TV Shows:
Jessie Spano, Saved By the Bell
Ryan Howard, The Office*

Disney and Animated:
Pocahontas
Tinkerbell, Peter Pan
The Great and Powerful Trixie, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Demona, Gargoyles
Katara, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Anastasia
EVE, Wall-E
Chip, Chip ‘n’ Dale Rescue Rangers
Blossom, The Powerpuff Girls*

Other Iconic Characters:
Elizabeth Swann, Pirates of the Caribbean

ESTJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Grandma Ben, Bone

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Eomer, LoTR
Dolores Umbridge, Harry Potter

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Lieutenant Commander Worf, Star Trek: The Next Generation
HK-47, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
Jubal Early, Firefly*

TV Shows:
Topanga Lawrence, Boy Meets World*
Dwight Schrute, The Office*
Mr. Richard Belding, Saved by the Bell

Disney and Animated:
Buzz Lightyear, Toy Story
Helen Parr/Elastigirl, The incredibles
Edna Mode, The Incredibles
Captain Amelia, Treasure Planet
Applejack, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Nani Pelekai, Lilo and Stitch*
Yzma, The Emperor’s New Groove
Maximus the Horse, Tangled

ENFJ Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Storm, X-Men
Pepper Potts, Iron Man
Alfred Pennyworth, The Dark Knight Trilogy
Harvey Dent/Two-Face, The Dark Knight Trilogy*
Hobbes, Calvin and Hobbes

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Legolas, LoTR
Captain Faramir, LoTR
Arwen, LoTR
Carlisle Cullen, Twilight
Remus Lupin, Harry Potter

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Martha Jones, Doctor Who
Penny, Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog

TV Shows:
Kelly Kapowski, Saved By the Bell (90’s ftw!)

Disney and Animated:
Belle, Beauty and the Beast
Princess Aurora, Sleeping Beauty
Kida Nedakh, Atlantis: The Lost Empire
Miss Bianca, The Rescuers
Wendy Darling, Peter Pan
The Blue Fairy, Pinocchio
Princess Odette, The Swan Princess
Anita Radcliffe, 101 Dalmatians
Quasimodo, The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Rafiki, The Lion King
Mirage, The Incredibles
James P. Sullivan, Monsters Inc.
Uncle Iroh, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Hudson, Gargoyles
Minion, Megamind
Princess Cadance, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Lady Tremaine, the Wicked Stepmother, Cinderella

Other Iconic Characters:
Sister Encarnacion, Nacho Libre

ESFJ Costume Ideas

Source

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Molly Weasley, Harry Potter
Draco Malfoy, Harry Potter
Gilderoy Lockhart, Harry Potter
Nearly-Headless Nick, Harry Potter
Rita Skeeter, Harry Potter*
Lavender Brown, Harry Potter
Cornelius Fudge, Harry Potter*
Alice Cullen, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
C-3PO, Star Wars
343 Guilty Spark, Halo
Effie Trinket, The Hunger Games

TV Shows:
Mrs. Hudson, BBC’s Sherlock
Rachel Green, Friends
Janice, Friends
Lisa Turtle, Saved by the Bell

Disney and Animated:
Princess Jasmine, Aladdin
Mrs. Potts, Beauty and the Beast
Minnie Mouse
Charlotte La Bouff, The Princess and the Frog
Metro Man, Megamind
Flo, Pixar’s Cars
Celia, Pixar’s Monsters Inc.
Bomb Voyage, Pixar’s The Incredibles
Kronk, The Emperor’s New Groove
Jiminy Cricket, Pinocchio
Prince Charming, Shrek
Rarity, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic

Other Iconic Characters:
Barbie
Miss Piggy, The Muppets
Glinda, Wicked
Link Larkin, Hairspray
Edna Turnblad, Hairspray
Raoul, The Phantom of the Opera

INTP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
The Joker, The Dark Knight

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Vizzini, The Princess Bride
Arthur Weasley, Harry Potter

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Dr. Leonard McCoy, Star Trek
Willow Rosenberg, Buffy the Vampire Slayer

TV Shows:
Jim Moriarty, BBC’s Sherlock
Toby Ziegler, The West Wing
Mozzi, White Collar
Dr. Ross Geller, Friends

Disney and Animated:
Jane Porter, Tarzan
Milo Thatcher, Atlantis: The Lost Empire
Roger Radcliffe, 101 Dalmatians
Maurice, Beauty and the Beast
Marlin, Pixar’s Finding Nemo
Syndrome, The Incredibles
Megavolt, Darkwing Duck
Bernard, The Rescuers
Gadget Hackwrench, Chip ‘n’ Dale Rescue Rangers
Ferb Fletcher, Phineas and Ferb*
John Darling, Peter Pan*

Other Iconic Characters:
Dr. Henry Jones Sr., Indiana Jones
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew, The Muppets
Telly Monster, Sesame Street

ISTP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow, The Avengers
Wolverine, X-Men

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Smeagol/Gollum, LoTR
Ginny Weasley, Harry Potter
Severus Snape, Harry Potter
Bella Swan, Twilight
Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Katniss Everdeen, The Hunger Games
Shepherd Book, Firefly
The Ninth Doctor, Doctor Who
Asoka Tano, Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Asajj Ventress, Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Sarah Kerrigan, Starcraft
Marvin, the Paranoid Android, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

TV Shows:
Dr. Gregory House, House M.D.

Disney and Animated:
Princess Merida, Pixar’s Brave
Violet Parr, The Incredibles
Shego, Kim Possible
Buttercup, The Powerpuff Girls
Scootaloo, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Astrid, How to Train Your Dragon
Eeyore, Winnie the Pooh
Pascal the Chameleon, Tangled
Mai, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Joon, Avatar: the Last Airbender
Korra, Avatar: The Legend of Korra

Other Iconic Characters:
James Bond
Agent Ethan Hunt, Mission:Impossible

Police Chief John Anderton, Minority Report
Oscar the Grouch, Sesame Street

INFP Costume Ideas

Source

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
George McFly, Back to the Future*

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Luna Lovegood, Harry Potter
Sybil Trelawney, Harry Potter
Alice, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland

TV Shows:
Samuel “Screech” Powers, Saved By the Bell

Disney and Animated:
Sally, The Nightmare Before Christmas
Fluttershy, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Wall-E
Lewis, Meet the Robinsons*
Linus van Pelt, Peanuts*

ISFP Costume Ideas
Comic Book Characters:
Bruce Banner/The Hulk, The Avengers

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Treebeard, LoTR
Fezzik, The Princess Bride

Source

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Chewbacca, Star Wars
Data, Star Trek: The Next Generation

Disney and Animated:
Princess Ariel, The Little Mermaid
Snow White*
Alice, Disney’s Alice in Wonderland
Pinocchio
Piglet, Winnie the Pooh*
Guido, Pixar’s Cars
Red, Pixar’s Cars
Big Macintosh, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Strong Sad, Homestar Runner*

Other Iconic Characters:
Snuffleupagus, Sesame Street

ENTP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Tony Stark/Iron Man, Iron Man and The Avengers
Calvin, Calvin and Hobbes

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Sirius Black, Harry Potter
Fred and George Weasley, Harry Potter
Xander Harris, Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Han Solo, Star Wars
R2-D2, Star Wars
Captain Malcolm Reynolds, Firefly (Do the “Pretty floral bonnet” version if you want to make my day )
The Tenth Doctor, Doctor Who
Dr. Emmett Brown, Back to the Future
Billy/Dr. Horrible, Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog
Haymitch, The Hunger Games
Cortana, Halo
Q, Star Trek: The Next Generation
Dark Helmet, Space Balls

TV Shows:
Neal Caffrey, White Collar
Shawn Spencer, Psych
Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother
Chandler Bing, Friends
Jim Halpert, The Office
Sam Axe, Burn Notice
Irene Adler, BBC’s Sherlock
Zack Morris, Saved By the Bell
Shawn Hunter, Boy Meets World

Disney and Animated:
Mulan
Megara, Hercules
Hades, Hercules
Flynn Rider/ Eugene Fitzherbert, Tangled
Simba, The Lion King
Captain Phoebus, The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Ursula, The Little Mermaid
Long John Silver, Treasure Planet
Mike Wazowski, Pixar’s Monsters Inc.
Frozone, Pixar’s The Incredibles
Megamind
Dimitri, Anastasia
Miss Frizzle, The Magic School Bus
Phineas Flynn, Phineas and Ferb
Discord, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Applebloom, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Dash Parr, Pixar’s The Incredibles*
David Xanatos, Gargoyles
Darkwing Duck/ Drake Mallard
Negaduck, Darkwing Duck
Toph Bei Fong, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Toothless, How to Train Your Dragon*
Lilo Pelekai, Lilo and Stitch*

Other Iconic Characters:
Captain Jack Sparrow, Pirates of the Carribean
Chris Knight, Real Genius
Ferris Bueller, Ferris Bueller‘s Day Off
Alex Hitchens, Hitch
Gonzo the Great, The Muppets

ESTP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Thor, Thor and The Avengers

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Gimli, LoTR
Ron Weasley, Harry Potter
Cordelia Chase, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel
Spike, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel
Jacob Black, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
James T. Kirk, Star Trek
Jayne Cobb, Firefly
Badger, Firefly
Captain Hammer, Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog
Biff Tannen, Back to the Future
Captain Jack Harkness, Doctor Who (and I’m guessing Torchwood, though I haven’t watched it)
Cato, The Hunger Games

TV Shows:
Fiona Glenanne, Burn Notice
Joey Tribbiani, Friends
Abby Sciuto, NCIS*

Disney and Animated:
Aladdin
Peter Pan
John Smith, Pocahontas
Lightning McQueen, Pixar’s Cars
Mushu, Mulan
Iago, Aladdin
Lumiere, Beauty and the Beast
Gaston, Beauty and the Beast
Timon, The Lion King
Cruella De Vil, 101 Dalmatians
Rainbow Dash, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Strong Bad, Homestar Runner
Bender, Futurama
Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible, Pixar’s The Incredibles
King Fergus, Pixar’s Brave
Princess Fiona, Shrek
Sokka, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Stitch, Lilo and Stitch*
Gosalyn Mallard, Darkwing Duck
Monterey Jack, Chip ‘n’ Dale Rescue Rangers
Tigger, Winnie the Pooh*
Wilbur, The Rescuers Down Under
McLeach, The Rescuers Down Under

Other Iconic Characters:
Animal, The Muppets
Rizzo the Rat, The Muppets
Cookie Monster, Sesame Street*
Marian Ravenwood, Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark

ENFP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Agent Phil Coulson, The Avengers
Fone Bone, Bone*

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Bilbo Baggins, The Hobbit and LoTR
Wesley Wyndam-Pryce, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel
Rene, Twilight

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Hoban “Wash” Washburne, Firefly
The Eleventh Doctor, Doctor Who
Marty McFly, Back to the Future
Johnny Five, Short Circuit
Wheatley, Portal 2

TV Shows:
John Watson, BBC’s Sherlock
Cory Matthews, Boy Meets World
Michael Scott, The Office

Disney and Animated:
Genie, Aladdin
Flounder, The Little Mermaid
Jessie, Toy Story
Dr. Delbert Doppler, Treasure Planet*
LeFou, Beauty and the Beast
Spike, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Po, Kung Fu Panda
Mickey Mouse
Winnie the Pooh
Prince Charming, Cinderella
Michael Darling, Peter Pan
Tinkerbell, Disney’s Fairies*
Bowler Hat Guy, Meet the Robinsons*
Charlie Brown, Peanuts*

Other Iconic Characters:
Elmo, Sesame Street
Nacho Libre*

ESFP Costume Ideas

Source

Comic Book Characters:
Harley Quinn, Batman
Smiley Bone, Bone

Fantasy, Harry Potter and LoTR:
Peregrin “Pippin” Took, LoTR
Nymphadora Tonks, Harry Potter*
Wormtail, Harry Potter*

Sci-Fi and Space Opera:
Kaylee Frye, Firefly

TV Shows:
Phoebe Buffay, Friends

Disney and Animated:
Prince Naveen, The Princess and The Frog
Dory, Pixar’s Finding Nemo
Crush the Turtle, Pixar’s Finding Nemo
Mater, Pixar’s Cars
Pinkie Pie, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
Donkey, Shrek
Hal Stewart/Tighten, Megamind
Ron Stoppable, Kim Possible
Scuttle, The Little Mermaid
Smee, Peter Pan
Pumba, The Lion King
Launchpad, Darkwing Duck
The Fairy Godmother, Cinderella*
B.E.N., Treasure Planet
Fender, Robots
Dale, Chip ‘n’ Dale Rescue Rangers
Ty Lee, Avatar: The Last Airbender
King Bumi, Avatar: The Last Airbender
Bolin, Avatar: The Legend of Korra

Other Iconic Characters:
Big Bird, Sesame Street
Fozzie Bear, Sesame Street

*Added later

My personal apologies to the types that are grossly underrepresented in our media, but I wasn’t about to do what most sites do and say characters were the types *I* wanted them to be just for a pinnable infographic or to feel better about myself.  I tried desperately to find more examples for the less common fictional types, especially INFP, before posting this, even submitting myself to the agony that was Googling for fictional character typings.  It’s an eye-bleeding last resort that didn’t turn up anything anyway because everything I found was not only grossly mistyped, but I could start my own game show and showcase each week, “What Your Mistyping Says About You!” where I could tell you what each person was trying to prove through suggesting the characters were the types they wanted them to be.  Unfortunately, there would be far too many to showcase and each one would rip out my soul and stomp on it a bit, so I suggest we move along instead.

Jilted Bride ~ Halloween 2006 ~ My skirt was a white trash bag, but I think it looked pretty good

INFP, even though you are badly represented, I <3 each of your examples!  You can’t *not* love Fluttershy, Luna Lovegood or Waaaaaall-E.  Seriously.  And you can always go with your Paradoxitype, ENTJ, because they tend to be a Hollywood darling.  Not that I really have anything to complain about personally; can’t say I mind that ENTP list.

As you pick what you want to be for Halloween… or a Tuesday… don’t forget your options of changing genres, like going steampunk or modern with a character, or gender-swapping a character.  A girl version of Flynn Rider is *so* in my costuming future.

And if that’s not enough options for you, feel free to be a character of a different personality type or something else entirely, like jilted bride or a giant box of french fries.  Whatever you choose, strut well my friend.  And send me pictures!

Box of French Fries ~ Halloween 2005 ~ Sixteen was probably too old to Trick or Treat, but nobody seemed to mind

The post Costuming with Personality appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

All the typings and observations in this post are based on definitions and information presented in the aLBoP Guided Tour So if any of it bugs you, please go read that before leaving me a grumpy comment… Or, you know what?  Let’s just skip the grumpy comments!  Have a nice day! <3

ISFJ
The Knight

“Because the one thing I know…
some things are just worth fighting for.”
Jim Raynor, Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty

The ISFJ Knight is the flagship of dependability.  Noble, loyal and chivalrous are words that describe these on-the-ground captains.  They have the world perspective to understand why the people and ideals they serve are so important and are great at seeing in the moment plans of action.  They live to serve something greater than themselves in a straight-forward, get-it-done sort of way.  They don’t usually mind getting a little dirt on their hands because they don’t think they’re special enough to be looked to as an example anyway.  And though they don’t expect to be thanked, they’ll get touchy when it’s suggested they weren’t doing their all.

From childhood, ISFJ’s love the wide-world they live in; they love to see it and know it and enjoy it.  And yet they have a quiet contentedness that means they’re usually happy to stay within that world.  They want to experience and appreciate their own world, culture and spheres of influence but, for the most part, they’re fine for everything outside that sphere to go along its way.  They love to just fit in their place and fulfil their duties, helping others out of principle, for the good of the world more than for the social benefit.  In a lot of ways, they’re the most live-and-let-live J’s (they’re almost reactive like P’s); that is, until their world is in peril.

While an INFJ turns inward for their quest, their intuition showing them naturally how things can be improved, a sensing ISFJ focuses on taking joy in what’s already there, going about their business, carrying out their responsibilities… until all of the sudden they see something they weren’t meant to see.  Be it that their boss or fiancée is trying to take over the world, their best friend or mentor is really planning a mutiny or that the people they revered most are actually trying to destroy all life in the galaxy, ISFJ’s (IFJ’s really) are notoriously bad about making overly-positive character judgments.

When they see the curtain peeled away, what will they do?  Will the ISFJ continue to protect a world, a culture or a mindset that isn’t the valiant errand they signed up for?  Or will these noble beings hear the call and set out to set things right, even if it means turning on a world they previously protected?

It’s easiest for an ISFJ to go with the flow, to ignore the signs and signals of corruption that they’ve seen and just let things keep being the way they are.  Can’t things just be good, like they’ve always been?  Can’t they just be home and keep plodding on and being good little soldiers, regardless of the big picture?  But an ISFJ will never truly be satisfied with a world where good is tainted, where they let injustice go on because they were too afraid to rock the boat.

But if they stand up in the name of the good and truth that they wanted to protect from the beginning, using their feelings of betrayal as motivation to protect others from the same injustice, an ISFJ can become a powerful force of good for the benefit of all; this is the ISFJ Knight.

If you need a tactical, self-sacrificing hero, the ISFJ Knight is on your side.  Excellent soldiers and dedicated best friends, the Knight makes a great comrade-in-arms.  Often the kind of protagonist a writer will turn to when they need someone who understands what they’re fighting for but is rugged enough to knock a few heads and not talk too much along the way (read: video games with a decent story).  Also beloved as the straight-man to an off-the-wall companion (read: EP) or as an ever steady lieutenant to a protagonist who doesn’t have a lot that’s steady in their lives (usually INFJ).

The Knight is one of my latest favorites (I’m allowed to have those right?  Especially when their letters are opposite of mine?).  I love their endearing dedication despite opposition–spurred on by their introverted judgement– their subtle and yet literal S sense of humor, and the way their feeling side reigns in their full-steam-ahead dedication when they let it.  I guess I shouldn’t wonder at the number of ENTP/ISFJ duos in fiction when I enjoy the contrast so much myself.

Like all IJ’s, the ISFJ feels that they must do what no one else will; in the Knight’s case, they fear no one cares enough to protect the things they love, making their persistence and dependability necessary to preserve the things most important to them.  The Knight is okay to serve and protect what’s important, but they may wish there was someone else to take part of the load or at least stop making their job harder.

The Knight is sure to be a valued asset in their party, demonstrating leadership by example and reminding the others what they’re fighting for.  If there’s one to be had, they’re likely to appreciate an INFJ Paladin to give them direction while keeping the big picture in mind.  If possible the Knight likes to have someone else have the overall vision, but wants the freedom to move on the ground as they see fit towards that vision, knowing that they personally have the sweeping understanding to get the important things accomplished.

An ISFJ Knight turns dark… Dark Knight… crap.  Stupid formulas.  Evil Knight?  That sounds a little “Bwahaha” but whatevs.  A Knight turns villainous when they begin to spurn the principles they initially loved and espoused so deeply because they’d rather hold on to a previous world-view or character judgement and end up actually damaging the very thing they fought to protect in the first place.  This isn’t truly evil so much as unhealthy, unless it’s done on purpose, the Evil Knight lying to themselves about the truth no matter who or what they hurt in the meantime.

Though ISFJ’s may not go “bwahaha,” it is extremely commonplace for them to make bad character judgments and not re-examine their worldviews, because the things they fight for are so precious to them.  But a true ISFJ Knight will remember that truth will remain true, no matter how many times you examine it; so looking again will merely help rekindle truth’s passion afresh.

Knight or… -_- Evil Knight (bwahaha), a strong ISFJ knows that honor, chivalry and dependability make you strong and have their own reward.

Examples:
Male:  Samwise Gamgee, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy
Female:  Kim Possible
Villain:  Victoria, The Twilight Saga

Who are the Type Heroes?  Read the intro here, and stay tuned to meet them all!

Want more information on ISFJ, the Knight?  Read their Cognitive Orientation Guidebook here.

The post Type Heroes: ISFJ – The Knight appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.

These barely scratch the surface of the famous A.I. we love.

Caught in the crossfire between his programing and his instructions, HAL 9000 has terrified and intrigued audiences since the 60’s.  His linear thinking (ST) and objective planning (IJ) demonstrates negatively and powerfully as he’s been programmed to value his mission at the expense of the human life put in his care.

Though I personally think Kubrick needed a more discriminating editor, bc holy crap are those shots interminable, HAL is a complex character who we really feel for as he moans “Daisy” to his demise.

One of my favorites, GLaDOS is the most charming thing that has ever tried to burn me alive or kill me with deadly neurotoxin.  A hilarious parody of all the fine print in the world, she shows us just what we can expect if a world vision (INTJs specialty, though not exclusive) gets carried out regardless its effect on others.

“Did you know you can donate one or all of your vital organs to the Aperture Science Self Esteem Fund for Girls?  It’s true!”  Side effects may vary.

Demonstrating an absurd amount of ISFJ, Optimus Prime has been sharing aesop’s about protecting goodness with us since our youth (er… some of our youths anyway).  He also may have been really good at selling cool toys that were both trucks and robots, but we’ll ignore that in favor of how he teaches us to protect humanity at the expense of our very lives and that things are more than meets the eye.

Where ITJs are excellent at obscuring their emotions from onlookers, IFJs are excellent at cloaking their thoughts.  It’s interesting how IFJ actions with just one missing piece of information can go from scary to comforting within the course of a movie.  I love how this robot who is expected to be focused on tasks and systems instead finds and applies sweeping principles to his own life as well as others.

It seems the largest majority of robots and computers in fiction are Ss, the straightforward and in-the-moment way we expect droids to be, unless there is a theme at work of “what could they be instead?”

The favorite assassin droid of “meatbags” everywhere, HK-47 was my personal favorite part of KotOR, though the game had plenty to offer in the way of storyline.  It was fascinating to see how such rampant loathing and violence really didn’t seem malicious in any way.  I’ll have to study the patterns more to see if that’s a trend in ESTJ, although the utility (though maybe not the violence) seems typical of ESTJs.  I understood ESTPs first and ESTJs are like the ESTPs of action.  They also tend to have a little more discipline; this is why you should never give Bender a gun (though I’d love to see the two in a room together).

Normal for a crusader, EVE always has her directive in mind.  Potential (NT) and group (EJ) oriented, she keeps her mind on her cause and her mission… though she doesn’t plan for her passionate heart to fall for Wall-E, who coincidentally is her Paradoxitype.

“Living” proof that if you annoy other characters instead of the audience you will be thought of as memorable and not suicide worthy (~shivers at the thought of Jar-Jar~), C-3PO demonstrates a typical ESFJ desire to please everyone and to be seen doing things right.  Desiring to be the shining (*rimshot*) example of his role, he shares the ESFJ tendency to want to be the exemplar of what everyone else should do.  Though he gets on the others’ nerves for desiring to do what will be considered normal instead of what will work, C-3PO has his moments.  Though I might not want him bringing up my flank, he’s an endearing character and Star Wars wouldn’t be the same without him.

Dishwasher Herb Copperbottom, in his ENFJ way, has had a hard time standing up for himself and for his own dreams, but as he stands up for his son Rodney and his big dreams, he ends up seeing his own fulfilled.  It seems apparent that it was the way Herb had taught him and the support Rodney was getting from back home that motivated him to save the old robots of Robot City and get Bigweld out of his slump.

Plus, Herb Copperbottom plays a mean “junk” (jazz + funk).

If you seek to know quintessential ESTP, look no further than Bender.  Beautifully irreverent and epically specializing in individual (EP) worth (ST), behind it all, you can’t help but love him… even if at times you’re glad he’s not real so that he can’t tell you to bite his shiny metal…

Droid on a mission, R2-D2 may have communication issues, but he will stop at nothing to get to Obi Wan Kenobi, save Princess Leia and bring the stolen Death Star plans to the Rebels.  This includes tricking his new master Luke Skywalker to get his restraining bolt removed, obstinately not showing him the message he said he would and lying about its existence, and running off into the night to find Obi Wan on his own.  Though he’s not going to win any “Most Obedient Droid” awards, R2-D2 does kinda save the galaxy and everyone’s lives on multiple occasions, so I think he’s forgiven.

I find it interesting how fictional maladies, curses and situations that befall characters are usually things that befit their personality, either in parallel or in contrast to their normal selves.  For example; like Dory in Finding Nemo, short-term memory loss seems a normal trend in fictional ESFPs because it brings out their already goofy, random nature and tendency to live in the moment.  Though his main plot point is fairly irrelevant, B.E.N. does provide comic relief, necessary shelter and memories of dancing with an android named Lupé.

If any phrase encapsulated ENFP “Number 5 is alive!” is it.  Specializing in individual (EP) meaning/significance (NF), their entire focus is on “I think, feel and am, therefore I matter!”  As he comes to recognize just what being alive really means, self-dubbed Johnny Five realizes just how desperately he desires “no disassemble!”  But he’s willing to give up even that for the humans he’s come to care about, including “Ste-fa-nee.”

Linear and observant (ST) enough to be miserable, but not about to do anything about those observations (P), Marvin is a fantastic foil to the typical upbeat, do as their told robots we’re so used to.

Opting to seduce her prey through logic rather than brute force, as INTPs consider the real battles to be, the Borg Queen thinks in situational (IP) systems (NT) and values the efficiency of the collective over the will of the few.  She turns to logic in the details, avoiding the big picture, as all INTP villains do, to try and keep Data from seeing the… data (no pun intended) right in front of him.  Though it doesn’t work on him, it’s that kind of “makes sense if you only look at part of it” that makes hive-mind collectivist villains so effective and creepy.

A fantastic Pinocchio parallel, Data is the ultimate situational experiencer (ISFPs specialty).  His whole existence revolving around understanding and experiencing what it’s like to be human, Data is an explorer that perceivers can be proud of.  (While writing this I accidentally typed “Star Wars;” so glad my INFJ caught it and saved me from certain death at the hands of angry fans.)

Is insanely cute enough to qualify someone as an INFP?  No, but Wall-E definitely has that trait in common with a lot of INFPs.  He focuses on meaning (NF) in details and situations (IP) and has an abstract understanding of what’s going on even if he’s mostly along for the ride.  You can’t really say no to those giant goggle eyes.  My main real problem with that movie was that there were people active enough to invent spacecraft that advanced and yet no one was willing to stop what was happening to the world and the culture.  I’m jaded enough to think that *most* people wouldn’t have done anything, just not jaded enough to think that *no one* would have done anything.

Runners Up:

In making this post, there were more great A.I. that I wanted to include, but I could only have one of each type.  Here are some of my favs that didn’t make it into the line-up for various reasons.

I’m fairly bummed that I didn’t get to include this one; he’s a fantastic example of ISFJ.  In the end Optimus’ quote couldn’t possibly get more ISFJ and “Superman…” didn’t work as well out of context.  /tear

C-3PO was slightly more iconic, though Guilty Spark is the floating ball I love to hate and I’ll always have fond memories of his maddeningly cheerful voice while being absolutely bombarded by Flood.  Ah, shotgun, how I love thee!

This one was an odd predicament.  Fender was actually going to be my first choice bc I’ve always thought B.E.N. was kind of random, but I could not for the life of me find another ENFJ robot besides Rodney’s dad.  (I didn’t think Minion from Megamind counted; cyborg you see.)

R2-D2 chirped adorably and I listened.  While I absolutely love Cortana, again more people know the Star Wars franchise and in a lot of ways Cortana was almost *too* human.  Obviously I’ll just have to do a whole Halo post sometime.

GLaDOS, diva that she is, demanded that she receive the Portal spotlight.  Also, both Short Circuit and Short Circuit 2 made me cry as a child.  Possibly for a long period of time.

Don’t make me recall the time I watched Small Wonder in preparation for this post.  I shall never get those tragically lost minutes back and I weep at the way they were sucked from my existence.

The post A.I. Typed: Robots and Their Personality appeared first on A Little Bit of Personality.