Politic, Economic and Law World
Absent or broken pic
Politic, Economic and Law World
Absent or broken pic
Given what he spent on architecture, his "ascetic lifestyle" may be a bit of a stretch. Besides, INTPs are generally disengaged to their basic needs. As for not reading Hume, I am an ENTP who was raised in a religious family. When I was very young, I remember having an indignant hatred of atheists because I was raised to hate them. Now I am an atheist. The only thing I can say is that if Jefferson were INTP, he would never be entirely certain of the reason he did not want to read Hume. NTPs like to test out ideas, including testing out the idea that atheists should be ignored. I do not expect to convince anybody as it is not an especially strong argument. but I still see Jefferson as more of an INTP.
I understand INTP. But I have difficulty accepting inferior Fe for him. I've read and argued all opinions but inferior Fe doesn't make sense. He is known to be a great judge of character and had great rapport with many friends and a close friend in Madison. Also his ascetic lifestyle leads me to believe inferior Se. His avoidance to read Hume because of his atheism also puts a question mark on dominant Ti.? I believe the best fit for him is INFJ with INTP as a second best option.
I will admit, however, that it is somewhat uncommon for an INTP to dislike to publicly debating important issues, being only one step off from those infamously argumentative ENTPs. I'll attribute it to introversion, but I'll admit that it's odd.
I voted INTP. A good case can be made for INFJ, as he was naively idealistic and could very well be Ni-dominant, but his general behavior seems more P-like. He over-spent on everything and had very diverse, erratic interests rather than consistent focus. My gut for Jefferson had been INFJ but I find his general behavior to be more INTP.
I agree with the overall jist of what you said.
The problem is that most voters here vote based on their pre conceived stereotypical notions of type. Most voters don't use congnitive functions and most don't even argue their case. I'm not sure there is inherent bias for INFJ by default but there sure is favour for stereotypical typing.
@impeccable: Well said. However at a level I understand scotty's frustration (not in regards to Jefferson though, who I still think is an INFJ)—this site does seem to me to have a slight pro-INFJ bias (by default) with some less forceful INTJs and especially more cerebral/metaphorical INFPs often getting typed as INFJ unless someone argues otherwise.
Note 1: An INTP would not be mistyped as an INFJ. No one with average knowledge of the subject will miss the dominant Ti of an INTP. An Ni-dom with strong tertiary Ti would be typed an INFJ however. Similarly an INTJ with strong Fi would still be an INTJ (e.g Nietzsche). Note 2: Most of the artists are usually pegged as ISFPs and INFPs, they are by no mean reclusives but tend to show their individuality quite passionately, more so than INFJs. Note 3: Artistic INTJs are more expressive of their "souls" than their INFJ cousins. An INFJ is an INFJ if he/she is a dominant Ni, extraverts feeling and uses Ti in forming their intellectual ideas. Jefferson in my opinion is an INFJ due to Ni and very evident Fe but he may still be an INTP (since most quiet intellectual introverted types are INFJs/INTPs, INTJs being more forceful intellectuals). Clear INTP presidents are Madison and Lincoln.
And yes I did vote INFJ. I was bribed to do so. I am stupid because I'm an ESTJ and can't think for myself. If Jefferson isn't an INFJ he is an INTJ.
I guess the INFJ propaganda department is behind this. They've infiltrated all typing sites just to mess with fellow IN__s.
Odd argument against INFJ. The same argument can be made against any other type with same results. Jung wrote alot on puerile or tertiary functions, using that functional loops can be argued. You can't dismiss them just because you don't like it.
Why is EVERYONE typed as INFJ? It's literally ridiculous. If you are an INTP, you get typed as INFJ cause of some bullshit "Ni-Ti loop" crap. If you're an INTJ, you get typed as INFJ if you have a soul. If you're an INFP you get typed as INFJ if you ever make anything of worth because all INFP are avoidant recluses.
Its hard to choose between INFJ and INTP. Both appear as introverted intellectual types. However for now I'd vote for INFJ because of better arguments in its favour.
Provide sources that refute the Big Five study. Can't do it? Perhaps that's because it is indeed a reputable source of information. It's not the end-all-be-all of course and Big Five doesn't perfectly correlate with MBTI anyway but you can't just reject a comprehensive psychological study without providing strong evidence for why it should be rejected. For the record I'm pretty uncertain of Jefferson's type still (even though INFJ is my vote for now and does seem to be the best option) so if you are at some point up for arguing INTP I'm all ears.
And I do not trust the Big FIve President study. There seems to be a lot of inaccuracy and strong bias there. Jefferson really was not very conscientious at all. His difficulty keeping track of his affairs is well-documented, as is his spontaneity, erraticism, flexibility, indecisiveness and relative laziness.
Not going through this, but I am extremely disappointed. There is not a snowball's chance in hell Jefferson was anything other than INTP. "Purposeful and more concerned with humanity" - give me a break. Apparently INTPs can not ever share these qualities? Was Lincoln a sociopath, or was he also INFJ? There is simply no consistency here. The important thing is that he preferred Thinking and Perceiving. That's all there is to it guys. You could make a decent case for Judging, but not Feeling.
Yeah I do see what you're saying. His varied interests and high logic may give the impression of INTP but ultimately he was more purposeful and concerned with humanity. I'm still uncertain on this one but can certainly see INFJ, now more than ever, and I think I'll change my vote to INFJ for now. Not certain of INFJ but it does seem like the best option even though he was very rational.
About human heart being complicated! Textbook INFJ. Delved into understanding human nature and the quotes only points out how well he understands that. He is merely pointing out hiw complex and strange a human is. Regarding his love for reason and logic, there are numerous INFJ philosophers and logicians whi deal with it. Its just that their prime use of reason and logic is relevant to their vision and through humans as focal point. INFJ for me. INTP my second guess.
Well if we go by the model then conscientiousness is typically higher in INFJs than in INTPs. Jefferson has been attributed by his contemporaries as a sound judge of character and someone who meddled more with understanding humans and morality and ethics than he did in law making. Lincoln and Jefferson infact share alot in common personality wise. But Jefferson is clearly Ni. INJs indeed are inquisitive beings and can have numerous interests especially those which complements their main focus.
Good points. Though I must also point out Lincoln (INTP) had virtually the same score on conscientiousness. And Jefferson had an extremely wide array of interests while INFJs tend to have more depth than breadth. Nonetheless Jefferson was quite motivated and driven, more so than most INTPs, so I could see INFJ too. And yes I see his appeals to ethics but he also said, "Of all machines, the human heart is the most complicated and inexplicable." And read the first two posts on this thread. Point being I am not certain of INTP but I also am not certain of INFJ.
I must also point that Jefferson's score on conscientiousNess is very high and though it doesn't directly relate to MBTI/Jungian P/J it sure is a good hint in that direction.
In Jungian congnitive functions. Jefferson is definitely high on Ni and Ti and therefore my conclusion on him being an logical but ethical INFJ (which is quite common)
Jefferson in my opinion can't have Ne in that abundance. Gosh look at the life of the person. Highly singular in vision and action. Is very mild in speech, abhors personal attack, dislikes debates fave to face! Is not and I dare say not a Ti-Dom. Madison is a perfect example of INTP, and therefore a clear contrast between the two can be made. People keep ignoring Jefferson's constant appeal to ethics and his ideas of ethical government which Madison fully endorsed. INTP is an option but INFJ is more likely. Madison and Jefferson share alot but Ni is too strong in Jefferson to be an INTP. Alot of times in F types are portrayed as not logical etc. and thus alot of F types wrongly type themselves as T types in online communities.
Update: In a comprehensive study on U.S. Presidents using the Big Five, Jefferson's score on Agreeableness was the 51st percentile, which is a bit high for the average INTJ, and probably closer to where INTP/INFJ score. They grouped him with Lincoln and Jimmy Carter while grouping INTJs John Adams and Woodrow Wilson together, so I change my vote to INTP. INFJ isn't really out of the question either, though if he is INFJ, he's an extremely rational one that also avoids heeding his sentiments and emotions. In my view, being a more purposeful INTP still makes more sense.
Well for the record I don't fiercely discount INFJ; I just disagree with it :) . But when you remove all the insults and etc. from this thread, you're still left with a rather strong case for INTx. Ni does not automatically equal "strong willed" and avoiding personal confrontation could apply to any healthy individual. Te/Fi users probably are more argumentative than Ti/Fe users on average and thus are more likely to engage in debate but that's still not enough evidence for me, certainly not enough to make INFJ and INTP immediately both more likely than INTJ. I think INTP and INTJ both make good sense. I really don't think an INFJ would be so opposed to making decisions based on emotions. Whether you use cognitive functions or not, let's not kid ourselves: though INFJ can definitely be rational if need be, they pretty much always believe there are times where logic and reason are to be discounted in favor of emotions, goodwill, or preserving others' feelings. From what I know about Jefferson, he was extremely rational, intellectual, and purposeful, which imply INTx, not INFJ. If you have a good argument for INFJ I'm interested, but don't just reiterate the evidence CT has already accumulated; I've already read it and don't think it makes INFJ clear. Jefferson was very rational, intellectual, and purposeful, so to me, he seems like either a more calmly rational INTJ or a more purposeful INTP.
Nope not and INTJ. Both INTP and INFJ make sense. I don't understand why INFJ is si fiercely discounted given that although laid back he was incredibly strong willed (Ni) and avoided debates and personal confrontation (Ti, Fe) so INFJ is as possible as INTP. He is definitely a Ti user so INTJ is not a very viable choice.
.........I think he's an INTJ. A bit too purposeful to be likely P, though it's not a strong difference and it's fairly close. I haven't heard a convincing argument for F or anything that refutes the first two posts on this thread so for me it's between INTP and INTJ. I'm going with INTJ.
Anyway, the one thing that is certain is that you have not argued any actual case for Jefferson being INFJ or his not being INTP or INTJ or anything else. Rather, all you have done is launch a bunch of nasty, warrantless, personal attacks and ironic projections at me for having the balls to question and disagree with your unexplained decision. If nothing else, I have at least clearly explained my line of reasoning. You are 100% free to disagree. But if you're going to, try to use a little less emotional angst and a little more well-reasoned tact. If you don't, I will not hesitate to find your weaknesses and the inconsistencies in your argument and exploit them for all they are worth as I have here.
Now the real question is: Why do you, the almighty Celebrity Types master, care so much about what other people think? Why do you come to sites like this and pick fights with people who disagree with your own typings, as though everyone must be "educated" and converted to your point of view like some kind of religious maniac? Clearly you are infallible. Why then do you let it bother you so much that poor peasants like me don't reach the same perfect conclusions you do? It's the same puzzle I've pondered about God for so many years: If he's so much greater, why does he care about what us inferior beings do? Clearly you are an INTJ. And not one of the smart, mature, well-rounded INTJs either, but more of the Ayn Rand/007 Villain variety: Immature, whiny, unhealthy and pouty. Cannot tolerate dissent. Completely self-absorbed. Completely oblivious of how you sound to others. Projects an aura as though you are absolutely certain of what you are saying and don't care what people think, yet at the same time there seems to be a kind of deep rooted inner insecurity that makes you terrified of being wrong and causes you to feel threatened whenever someone disagrees with you, so that is why you react the way you do. It all makes sense now. Oh, you probably also have an extremely small penis. That usually explains behavior like yours. Though I am sure you are extremely timid in real life, that is on the rare occasion you leave your mother's basement.
Actually, what I said was that Jefferson was in debt for most of his life. A historical fact. Managing one's personal finances and dealing with the theoretical field of economics/making fiscal policy are very, very different beasts. Failure at the former indicates one may lack conscientiousness, may not be very practical, down to earth, thorough, good at management, keeping track, keeping order, etc. and may instead be forgetful, irresponsible, and a spendthrift - in their real world personal lives, not necessarily in theory. That is, they more likely prefer perceiving over judging. This says nothing about how good one may be at dealing with economic theory. They are completely unrelated. In fact, I would not be surprised in the least if many INTPs who are brilliant economists suck at managing their own personal finances. I never said Jefferson was bad at economics or fiscal policy anyway; he wasn't. Your argument is a complete non sequitur. Moreover, the idea that just because one generally prefers introversuon, intuition, thinking and perceiving he must be good at economic and fiscal policy is absurd. As I have said many times before, personality, not ability, is measured, and these basic preferences may manifest in many varied ways depending on other factors like experience, strength of preferences, etc. The idea of there being precisely 16 "types" of people, all of whom act more or less exactly the same way, is completely absurd and there is not a shred of evidence supporting it. All that can be concluded and predicted if one is an INTP is that he generally will be more reserved, intellectually open, prefers hard truth and reason over subjective feelings, and prefers open-endedness, randomness and flexibility to plans, orderliness and decisivenesss. Along with of course a handful of associated traits. But that's about it. As for Jefferson, the first three are obvious to me. The last has been made apparent to me upon further research, even if the preference is not extremely strong. But come on, the guy had a mockingbird flying around the white house and was very disorderly, scatter-brained and worked in bursts of energy. Even Keirsey agrees with me.
I am not dogmatic about anything and do not pretend to know everything. I know what I know and present that much firmly, but I make no illusions otherwise. "A man's gotta know his limitations," as Clint would say. It's not like this is a subject where it is really possible to "know" anything, despite what some projective people would like to believe, and I am no exception. And I never claimed to be an "expert" on Presidents. I do like US History and Presidents in particular, and I know a thing or two about most of them, but I never said I was an expert. Anyway, to answer your semi-serious questions asked in an extremely defensive, emotional and hostile manner (it's obvious I hit close to home), a single quote did not change my mind. I gave multiple reasons for why. The grounds I am standing on and premise for typing I have made clear repeatedly, in this very thread and others. In Jefferson's case, I should note that I never made any argument specifically in favor of INTJ in the first place. Rather, I provided reasons for why he preferred thinking over feeling and made no mention of judging or perceiving. The latter I never had as strong an opinion on and still have not declared one. I find it paradoxical that you attack me for my changing my mind and at the same time accuse me of being "dogmatic" and pretending to know everything. Just because I disagree with you, that does not make me delusional, and I find it absolutely hilarious that you accuse me of being "dogmatic" when that is precisely how I would describe you and your web site. I readily admit it is impossible to know anything in this realm for certain and I am more than willing to change my mind when shown evidence contradicting my previous opinion. And I rarely make strong claims about a particular "type" one must be. If I do make a strong claim, it is only when I see overwhelming evidence for a particular preference. Even then I will not rule out plausible alternatives, but if you want to, say, claim US Grant was an ISFP or that Bob Dylan is a sensor, when everything I know about these people contradicts these conclusions completely, yes I will argue strongly against it. But beyond that I am quote flexible, and I don't ever pretend to know more about a person than I do and until I acquire enough information about an individual to say and have a thorough understanding, I will rarely make a definitive claim for a particular type. You, however, cling dogmatically to the insane Jungian notion that every human ever to exist was wired according to one of 16 fixed patterns of 4 of 8 "cognitive functions" for which not a single shred of evidence exists. You claim you can perfectly read this pattern in hundreds of celebrities, when it is impossible you could know enough about all of them to even read their basic preferences. You insist that this approach is infallible without providing any real evidence or reasoning and then snobbishly shoot down all who dare question your approach, based entirely on shoddy inductive reasoning full of holes and quotes cherry picked while conveniently ignoring any abundance of facts and tendencies which contradict your conclusions. You rigidly cling to this approach. Then you sir accuse me of dogmatic delusions. I'll leave it to you to see the irony here.
Uh... What the hell are you talking about? Let me teach you some basic math: There were 3 votes for INFJ, 2 votes (including mine) for INTJ and 2 votes for INTP. I changed my vote from INTJ to INTP. So what exactly do you expect to happen? For Lennon, I changed my vote from ENTJ to ENTP and explained why in the appropriate section. There was already a large number of votes for ENTP before that. Eminem, Jobs and Miles I literally voted for and commented on like 2 weeks ago and haven't looked at since. And really, you have no business calling anyone a loser if you are spending all your time trying to track votes on an MBTI typing site (hardly a serious, objective subject) and getting your panties in a knot because people aren't unanimously drinking the Celebrity Types Kool-Aid. Or should I say, all the free time you have when you're not busy running that scam site of yours. I would say someone who makes a career out of pseudoscience is the real loser man. And someone who cannot maturely tolerate the slightest disagreement about such a subject clearly has serious issues anyway. Believe it or not, there are valid reasons why someone may disagree with you. Trying to bully and pout your point across like an insecure pussy nerd trying to act like some kind of hard-ass genius is not fooling anyone and it is not how you win an argument. I genuinely feel sorry for you man. I know you probably don't make that much money running Celebrity Types, and I wouldn't doubt that you have never been laid in your life. Plus you have apparently dedicated your life to something which is not scientifically valid or respected. Maybe that's why you have such a massive stick lodged in your ass.
INTPs make most famous economists and fiscal policy makers so your ground on calling Jefferson an INTP because he was bad at them is ridiculous.
So called expert on presidents and a single quote changes your decision! Whats grounds are you standing on? What's you premise on typing? I mean you're dogmatic about certain celebrity types and pretend to know everything. Seriously get out of your delusions.
Hahahaha. So thats why all INTJ votes suddenly turned INTP and dozens of similar votes on Eminem, Miles, Jobs, Lennon etc. It looked fishy. C'mon you're such a loser man!
Actually, now I think Jefferson was probably INTP instead. John Adams called him "lazy," he was rather all over the place and eccentric, invented an assortment of stuff, lots of varied interests and talents, constantly in debt, poor at managing and little fiscal responsibility, always curious, changed his views a lot. He could still maybe be INTJ because he was nonetheless puroposeful, motivated and passionate, but definitely INTx and not INFJ.
"Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck." Yeah, not an INFJ. He refuses to acknowledge the validity of faith or any opinions or conclusions not based on logical reasoning.
Definitely INTJ, not INFJ. "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." Plus he could not tolerate anything slightly irrational. He rewrote the Bible by literally taking a knife to it and cutting out all things he found supernatural or illogical.