Personality Cafe banner

81 - 90 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
Tolkien... has an enormous amount of Si. I actually think he's ISTJ, but I've seen good arguments for INTP. (Not sure he's INTP, though -- he got into some hissy fits with Lewis about blending fantasy and the real world by crossing over elements, which might hint at SiNe instead of NeSi with a Te function involved.)
Based on his quotes and the world he created, he doesn't seem someone whose worldview is based on Ti, he seems more value-based than reason. At the same, he colud have seem a Si-Fi kind of ISTJ, with Fi values giving support to Si impressions. Now take George RR Martin, he loves Tolkien for the details of his world-building (Si) but he thinks Tolkien didn't deal with the implications of his world (Ne or Ti): what if a good king is not a good ruler? what happens with the baby orcs? If you compare the two, it's clear Tolkien couldn't have been an INTP. At the same time, yeah, he couldn't have been an INFP. INFP doesn't mean one is good at characters, but they have a need to exorcise their own internal cinflicts in a story, deal with moral conflicts or moral nuances, which Tolkien lacks in favor of the simple white vs black.
So, for an INFP we need a fantasy author getting different moral dillemas that follow from a story, or at least one with a genuine sense of tragism. Anybody like that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
My opinion on Poe as a potential Ni-dom stems from this blog post, in which they quote Poe's methodology in framing "The Raven" :

Edgar Allan Poe wrote an essay, ‘The Philosophy of Composition’, in which he details the writing of his sensational poem ‘The Raven’. If we are to believe the account, he carefully planned the theme, the setting, the metre and every poetic effect – ‘each step with the precision of a mathematical problem’. He downplayed the role of intuition and accident but elevated Beauty to ‘the sole legitimate province of the poem’. Poe elaborates that the apprehension of Beauty ‘excites the soul’ and furthermore hitches it to its cousin, Melancholy. The third member of this abstract trio is Death! This Poe-esque trio is memorably summed up by his assertion, ‘the death of a beautiful woman is . . . the most poetical topic in the world’.

That, to me, is a clear Ni-indicator: it's not about the words so much as their deep, internalized meaning. The idea that he formed the poem conceptually from start to finish, including a heavily abstract theme, is also Ni-indicating. A lot of his stuff is along this vein ... which is what makes it so interesting and disturbing at the same time.
Coming back to the Poe question after all this time, and feeling more confident in my understanding of functions.

Actually, that essay Poe wrote about his composition method strikes me as more INTP than INJ.
From what I understand, he says he starts a work from the effect he tries to create in the reader, and chooses the words and the rhythm to create this effect. Seems like an Ti-dom approach to art: analyze what makes a piece of art good composition-wise and then arrange to elements to create the effect.
This might seem a very J thing to do, but I think that while INJ types are goal focused they put an emphasis on intuition as leading, rather than piece by piece analysis leading as in the case of Poe, which suggest T-dom, rather than N-dom.
Ni-dom is not actually very piece by piece, but works by synthesis.
I think INJs are more likely to ponder the themes and then the nucleus of the story/poem emerges from this and they try to flesh it out.
Poe's method seems kinda shallow and somewhat silly by contrast, like putting a puzzle together, in a way that I think would strike a real Ni-dom as uninspired and lacking a necessary organic quality.
T.S. Elliot by contrast would be an example of an INFJ poet, he thinks his poetry but the whole process can't by described piece by piece as in Poe's case, it's more abstract.

At the same time, an INTP being so into melancholy and saying stuff like ''there's nothing more poetic than the death of a beautiful women'' ?
There are people who doubt the veridicity of what Poe wrote in that essay, including the writer of that article you posted.
Apparently ''The Raven'' got very bad reviews so there's the possibility that this essay was Poe's way of trying to be taken serious rather than his true method. Like him seeing ''I'm not this depressed weirdo making emo poetry, I'm more a scientist using rational analysis when writing this stuff''.

So either an INTP using poetry to better understand his emotions, or an INFP who tried to fool people he was more cold-headed than he was.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
My NF suggestions:


INFJ
Dante Aligheri:
The seer preaching justice based on divine wisdom, strong imaginative but a rigid moralist. I appreciate his imagination but loathe his view on morality.

Fyodor Dostoyevski:
Based on his writing could be INFP as well, as I think both types are most inclined to deal with moral complexities but he had a thing for trusting the wisdom of the common people that strikes me as Fe trying to get on good terms with his own culture, compared to INFP who can value individuals in themselves but are very skeptical of the majority. Also the way he saw in the Russian Orhodox Church as having a holy mission to rid Europe of all evils comes off as Ni-Fe.

Lev Tolstoy:
Once he found Christianity he dealt with it in such a dogmatic preaching way that I can see Ni-Fe much better than Fi-Ne, like a priest rather than a tortured believer, such as Kierkegaard (INFP). The way he went from having sex right and left to praising chastity later in life as comes off as inferior Se. Some might say ENFJ could work as well, but an ENFJ leading with Fe would have been much more agreeable in dealing with his values I think.

Yukio Mishima:
Like Dostoyevski, he seems like he could be Fi, but the Ni dominance and inferior Se compensation is too obvious, so I would say INFJ or INTJ+Fi rather than INFJ or INFP. Like Dostoyevski, had a thing with integrating in an idealized cultural value but in a more aggressive way. Like Nietzsche (INTJ) he had one hell of an ESP shadow but even more over the top in his case.

Herman Hesse:
From how his books are described, he seems to be the kind of writer that bases his whole composition around the theme he wants to explore and has a thing for merging opposites. The way he's very value based and about authenticity can seem very INFP, but I read Steppenwole and the ending is so over the top surreal symbolism. Ne can be surrealistic like that, but for him the surrealism seems to have a clear meaning.

Emily Dickinson:
Very sensitive and perfect in style, hoped INFP for her but I read some of her letters and they're so Fe.

T.S. Elliot:
His views of poetry was that it must be based on emotion, but the author himself must extract his personality as much as he can from the poem, which seems anti-Fi.

Basically, the best of writers seem to be INFJ.


INFP:

Hans Christian Andersen:
Looking for an actual INFP fantasy writer, he seems to be best candidate. Unlike the goody-feelly fantasy of Tolkien and Rowling, his stories have a sense of genuine tragic beauty to them. If there's an author in the fantasy genre whose author bleeds his feelings on the page and whose imagination seem only restricted by an aesthetic sense, it has to be him.

Emily Bronte:
Haven't read her, but between she and her sister, is Emily who seemed to value intense emotions for their own sake, and Charllote the socially conscious one, so I can't see how people type the wise Charllote INFP and the uncompromising rebel Emily as INFJ?

Charles Baudelaire:
Very intense mix of romantism and darkness, clearly Fi. Some could say INTJ in the way he seems a dark and brooding sort of character, but I think an unhealthy sx/sp Fi-dom can be like that in their art. I can actually see ISFP as well but he says he prefers the monster of his imagination to reality so I take his word for it that he preffered N over S.

Marcel Proust:
Seems like a perfect example of Fi-Si loop in an INFP, continously revisiting the past for the sake of getting intense emotions out of it.

Virginia Wolfe:
She's considered another example of Fi-Si in INFP, like people saying she could talk pages and pages about her feelings associated with some sensorial impressions, and I have to check her out. Her personality seemed quite ENFP but her work is very introverted, so the extroversion qualities could have been her manic side of bipolar disorder.

Fernando Pessoa:
Another author I need to check out, from what I read he had a thing for creating alter egos through which to explore very different viewpoints like his readers praising him for the emotional intensity of his writings, which seems very Fi-Ne.

J.D. Sallinger:
Not a fan, but it seems to fit.

I'm more sure of the INFJ list so I need to read some of these authors to make it clear. I'm in a deception phase, where I fear that every great INFP author is actually an INFJ or if not,an ENFP, ISFP or an emotional NT.
It makes me want to quite MBTI for good.


ENFP::
William Shakespeare:
The way he could get inside his characters emotions, passions and conviction before it was a thing is very Fi, and his plot are definitely more Ne than Ni, I mean I've read Macbeth and Hamlet and the plot it's always on the move, specially in MacBeth. From what we know about his life tough, that he run a succesfull theatre company and that he was also an actor, ENFP seems more plausible than INFP tough.

Oscar Wilde:
I understand why people may think he was ESFP but I think that was just eneagram 7. His wit is very Ne and his short stories has this plot twist that he could only be Ne.

Ray Bradbury:
Said he says himself as a fairytale writer than a SF writer and had so much genuine warmth in interviews, but also clearly extroverted.


ENFJ:

Victor Hugo:
Has this paternal/maternal instinct towards society as a whole that strikes as very Fe+Ni.

Charles Dickens:
He gives me a much more Fe sentimentality vibe than Fi romanticism and I could see ESFJ as well. The way he treated his wife doesn't seem Fe tough but ESFJs can be very bitchy honestly.
 

·
Registered
INFJ 4w5
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
My NF suggestions:


INFJ

Dante Aligheri:
The seer preaching justice based on divine wisdom, strong imaginative but a rigid moralist. I appreciate his imagination but loathe his view on morality.

Fyodor Dostoyevski:
Based on his writing could be INFP as well, as I think both types are most inclined to deal with moral complexities but he had a thing for trusting the wisdom of the common people that strikes me as Fe trying to get on good terms with his own culture, compared to INFP who can value individuals in themselves but are very skeptical of the majority. Also the way he saw in the Russian Orhodox Church as having a holy mission to rid Europe of all evils comes off as Ni-Fe.

Lev Tolstoy:
Once he found Christianity he dealt with it in such a dogmatic preaching way that I can see Ni-Fe much better than Fi-Ne, like a priest rather than a tortured believer, such as Kierkegaard (INFP). The way he went from having sex right and left to praising chastity later in life as comes off as inferior Se. Some might say ENFJ could work as well, but an ENFJ leading with Fe would have been much more agreeable in dealing with his values I think.

Yukio Mishima:
Like Dostoyevski, he seems like he could be Fi, but the Ni dominance and inferior Se compensation is too obvious, so I would say INFJ or INTJ+Fi rather than INFJ or INFP. Like Dostoyevski, had a thing with integrating in an idealized cultural value but in a more aggressive way. Like Nietzsche (INTJ) he had one hell of an ESP shadow but even more over the top in his case.

Herman Hesse:
From how his books are described, he seems to be the kind of writer that bases his whole composition around the theme he wants to explore and has a thing for merging opposites. The way he's very value based and about authenticity can seem very INFP, but I read Steppenwole and the ending is so over the top surreal symbolism. Ne can be surrealistic like that, but for him the surrealism seems to have a clear meaning.

Emily Dickinson:
Very sensitive and perfect in style, hoped INFP for her but I read some of her letters and they're so Fe.

T.S. Elliot:
His views of poetry was that it must be based on emotion, but the author himself must extract his personality as much as he can from the poem, which seems anti-Fi.

Basically, the best of writers seem to be INFJ.


INFP:

Hans Christian Andersen:
Looking for an actual INFP fantasy writer, he seems to be best candidate. Unlike the goody-feelly fantasy of Tolkien and Rowling, his stories have a sense of genuine tragic beauty to them. If there's an author in the fantasy genre whose author bleeds his feelings on the page and whose imagination seem only restricted by an aesthetic sense, it has to be him.

Emily Bronte:
Haven't read her, but between she and her sister, is Emily who seemed to value intense emotions for their own sake, and Charllote the socially conscious one, so I can't see how people type the wise Charllote INFP and the uncompromising rebel Emily as INFJ?

Charles Baudelaire:
Very intense mix of romantism and darkness, clearly Fi. Some could say INTJ in the way he seems a dark and brooding sort of character, but I think an unhealthy sx/sp Fi-dom can be like that in their art. I can actually see ISFP as well but he says he prefers the monster of his imagination to reality so I take his word for it that he preffered N over S.

Marcel Proust:
Seems like a perfect example of Fi-Si loop in an INFP, continously revisiting the past for the sake of getting intense emotions out of it.

Virginia Wolfe:
She's considered another example of Fi-Si in INFP, like people saying she could talk pages and pages about her feelings associated with some sensorial impressions, and I have to check her out. Her personality seemed quite ENFP but her work is very introverted, so the extroversion qualities could have been her manic side of bipolar disorder.

Fernando Pessoa:
Another author I need to check out, from what I read he had a thing for creating alter egos through which to explore very different viewpoints like his readers praising him for the emotional intensity of his writings, which seems very Fi-Ne.

J.D. Sallinger:
Not a fan, but it seems to fit.

I'm more sure of the INFJ list so I need to read some of these authors to make it clear. I'm in a deception phase, where I fear that every great INFP author is actually an INFJ or if not,an ENFP, ISFP or an emotional NT.
It makes me want to quite MBTI for good.


ENFP::
William Shakespeare:
The way he could get inside his characters emotions, passions and conviction before it was a thing is very Fi, and his plot are definitely more Ne than Ni, I mean I've read Macbeth and Hamlet and the plot it's always on the move, specially in MacBeth. From what we know about his life tough, that he run a succesfull theatre company and that he was also an actor, ENFP seems more plausible than INFP tough.

Oscar Wilde:
I understand why people may think he was ESFP but I think that was just eneagram 7. His wit is very Ne and his short stories has this plot twist that he could only be Ne.

Ray Bradbury:
Said he says himself as a fairytale writer than a SF writer and had so much genuine warmth in interviews, but also clearly extroverted.


ENFJ:

Victor Hugo:
Has this paternal/maternal instinct towards society as a whole that strikes as very Fe+Ni.

Charles Dickens:
He gives me a much more Fe sentimentality vibe than Fi romanticism and I could see ESFJ as well. The way he treated his wife doesn't seem Fe tough but ESFJs can be very bitchy honestly.
I like your list a lot overall, and I've come to similar conclusions for the types you chose for the authors. I'm in total agreement with Hesse, Eliot, and Dante as INFJs. I think Dostoevsky is too, and for the reasons you state. In Socionics, he's used as the example for EII (INFj or INFP in Myers-Briggs), though, which I find puzzling in a way. Bradbury is typed IEI, or INFJ, in their system. Would you like to add James Joyce, who owes much to Dante, to INFJs? ;) I think I read once that he was called the Dante of Dublin.

It's interesting because Woolf, who I also believe to be INFP, loved Proust, assuming they're the same type, but hated Joyce. If Joyce were INFJ and Woolf INFP, they'd be quasi-identicals in Socionics, which almost speaks to this theory quoted below. And Eliot praised Joyce too. Quasi-Identical relations between psychological ("personality") types

In these relations partners always have difficulty understanding each other in full. Quasi-Identical partners always need to convert each other's information in such a way that it corresponds with their own understanding. This conversion requires much energy and does not bring the desired satisfaction. Books written by your Quasi-Identical are impossible to read. The creations of your Quasi-Identical look monstrous.
Woolf on Joyce haha:

''I finished 'Ulysses' and think it is a mis-fire. Genius it has, I think; but of the inferior water. The book is diffuse. It is brackish. It is pretentious. It is underbred, not only in the obvious sense, but in the literary sense. A first-rate writer, I mean, respects writing too much to be tricky; startling; doing stunts.''
Oh what a bore about Joyce! Just as I was devoting myself to Proust—Now I must put aside Proust—and what I suspect is that Joyce is one of those undelivered geniuses, whom one can’t neglect, or silence their groans, but must help them out, at considerable pains to oneself.
''I should be reading 'Ulysses,' and fabricating my case for and against. I have read 200 pages so far - not a third; and have been amused, stimulated, charmed, interested, by the first two or three chapters - to the end of the cemetery scene; and then puzzled, bored, irritated and disillusioned by a queasy undergraduate scratching his pimples. Tom, great Tom'' - meaning Eliot - ' 'thinks this is on a par with 'War and Peace'! An illiterate, underbred book, it seems to me; the book of a self-taught working man, and we all know how distressing they are, how egotistic, insistent, raw, striking, and ultimately nauseating.''
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
I like your list a lot overall, and I've come to similar conclusions for the types you chose for the authors. I'm in total agreement with Hesse, Eliot, and Dante as INFJs. I think Dostoevsky is too, and for the reasons you state. In Socionics, he's used as the example for EII (INFj or INFP in Myers-Briggs), though, which I find puzzling in a way. Bradbury is typed IEI, or INFJ, in their system. Would you like to add James Joyce, who owes much to Dante, to INFJs? ;) I think I read once that he was called the Dante of Dublin.

It's interesting because Woolf, who I also believe to be INFP, loved Proust, assuming they're the same type, but hated Joyce. If Joyce were INFJ and Woolf INFP, they'd be quasi-identicals in Socionics, which almost speaks to this theory quoted below. And Eliot praised Joyce too. Quasi-Identical relations between psychological ("personality") types



Woolf on Joyce haha:
Have no idea about Joyce and from what I read about him he's not on my reading list anytime soon, sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Although an old thread, I'd like to revive it with some typings of the British Romantic poets. I spend a lot of time with these figures, as I am an English Lit. grad student, and they are my focus. Regardless, I would appreciate hearing what others think about these bad ass poets.

Samuel Taylor Coleridge- INTP

A perfect example of an INTP who delves more into the art world than the scientific. A Ti basis for analysis is fiercely present in his prose works, as highly influenced by Kant, follows the tradition of system building typical for INTP theorists. His Ne shows itself in his incredibly abstract and philosophical poetry, most of which encounter the unsensed and ethereal aspects of human imagination. I mean, Coleridge himself said that, "Poetry also is purely human; for all its materials are from the mind, and all its products are for the mind." Clearly, Coleridge privileged intuitive facts more than the sensual. His Si presents itself in his massive collection of data and references, as well as his reputation as one who knew every piece of knowledge accumulated at the time. However, it is hard to place his inferior Fe, but he tended to bore his students to death in his later lecturing years, so perhaps he lacked the ability to read a room in favor of the concepts and theories he was intellectually passionate about.

Percy Bysshe Shelley- INFJ

Shelley is a tricky beast, but upon reading his poetry and prose, he is undoubtedly a Ni dom, with a very rich and abstract world view, and a knack for mythological allegory to support his grand observations on human civilization and its fate (see Prometheus Unbound for his best demonstration of his Apocalyptic vision). For Fe, one of Shelley's most common themes is the wellfare of the oppressed and down trodded, serving as an influence to Marx's Socialism. Shelley appears to be a man of the people who aimed for equality for all humans. Shelley is highly logical for an INFJ, tho much of that could be the influence of his INTJ mentor William Godwin. Shelley prizes Reason as the highest of human faculties, and through which Poetry is able to serve as a revolution in the mind of man. For inferior Se, Shelley was notorious both for his melancholic attitude and pre-dilection for drug usage, which on a shallow level, can reflect disconnect from his immediate environment and sensual processes. Also, the rich imagery produced in his poetry could represent the interestingly complex relationship of Se inferiors with sensual data.

John Keats- INFP

Keats is obviously a legend for the Romantic movement, though he died at 24, he was able to produce a life's worth of genius poetry, just in the last two years of his life. Unlike Coleridge, whose poetry and theory reflected the cerebral centric nature of Ti, and Shelley's metaphorical humanism and immortal Mythology show the rich intuition of Ni, Keats' poetry is foundationally Fi driven. His poetry revolves around his individual artistic ability, and relation to the world around him, all steeped in the sentiment of Fi. Similar to Coleridge, Keats' Ne comes to play in his poetic style itself, depending on mythological figures, philosophical musings, and personified Nature, all imaginative tools not restricted to Intuitive, but prevalent in their artistic productions. As for Si, Keats' subjective focus as already been mentioned, but it is the same for sensing, where the richness of his imagery comes from his own sensual lens, lacking the objective power of Se imagery. As for Te, a myth regarding Keats is that his death was caused by a bad review of his epic poem Endymion, which sent him into a self-doubting sickness ending with death. This is an exaggeration clearly, since he had been suffering form tuberculosis for most of his life, yet it does show an extreme sensitivity to criticism typical for Fi doms.

Lord Byron- ESTP

Lord Byron is another tricky one, since he was notoriously unreliable as an artist and wrote mainly for reaction and controversy. Regardless, his poetry still manages to be top tier and essential in the movement. Lord Byron was a man of action, while this does not cement him as an Se dom, the vibrant and sensuous imagery of his poems surely does. A common theme in Byron is his quest for "true sensation" seen in one facet in the sublimity of a night's thunderstorm. His Ti shows itself in a with a sharp wit and mind, which combined with his powerful sensual imagery produce much of his poetry. Byron's characters are usually of the brooding type, and while that usually represents preference of feeling, Byron is explicitly detached from his fellow humans in an alienation of mind. A cynic and skeptic through and through, his sentiment does not rise from his emotions, rather his intense relationship with physical phenomena and his mentally detached broodings on them. Fe is hard to place in Byron's poetry, but his raucous sex life and fame within his lifetime lead to a more Fe oriented view of people. Byron was undoubtedly a charming dude, and loved playing off the emotions of others for his own pleasure (this can maybe be seen in his humorous dedications to friends and contemporaries). There is controversy whether Byron was an authentic poetic voice, and this can be seen as a preference of receiving and playing with the emotions of others over his own artistic integrity). Lastly, his inferior Ni is present in the entirety of his poetry, as elucidated in his use of Ti, his internal world was both his temple and his dungeon. Byron does not philosophize as much as his fellow Romanticists, and shows a rocky relationship with his own psyche, and anxiety surrounding the unseen and unconscious. Now, all of this may be thrown off by the theory that he was a complete psychopath made in recent years so who knows! Regardless, he wrote damn good poetry!
 
81 - 90 of 90 Posts
Top