Comment Response: Of INFJs, Principles of Typing and Characters that *POP*

The other day, I got a fantastic comment on Type Heroes: INFJ – The Paladin by a cool INFJ named Match.  In addition to comments about liking the blog in general, he brought up some great questions about why I typed some of the characters in the INFJ collage the way I did.  Because it was a fantastic and well thought out comment, I thought it deserved a well thought out response.  I started typing and this behemoth came out.  Rather than try and fit it into like 50 comments all broken up, which would end up feeling like I was spamming everyone on my own blog -_-, I decided to turn it into a post that might set the precedent for future response posts that deserve this kind of care and attention.

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