One good reason why Diana was unlikely to be an N type:
Academically weak, she failed all her exams at school twice, passing no O levels, despite having had every educational advantage, apparently trying hard and being a fairly well adjusted and popular student. For the benefit of the non-British: her performance these days would put her roughly in the bottom 10% of students. Americans in particular: she wouldn't have graduated high school. Unless there are other factors to impede their performance, IN types (and intuitives generally) represent the more academically able portion of the population. INFPs are usually high achievers unless there is a good reason not to be. I don't see any in her case.
Despite going on to do very well academically eventually and now educated to masters level - I did very poorly at school like Diana - nothing made a great deal of sense (except books and poetry - but that still didnt help me in a school system which expects you to jump through specific hoops at specific times) and I found school a scary place. Without the support of my wonderful Dad I think I may have left school without a single qualification - instead of going on to do well at university.
In Diana's case I think it was as much to do with her class - english aristocracy - she was meant to go to finishing school and make a good marriage! I dont have a problem seeing her as an infp - just not one that I can say I really admired.
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.
Don't INFPs have learning problems? Something about how they have to observe for a long period of time, and then get the "hang" of it rather well?
This was from some weird socionics website, and an INFP friend was all "YEAH, THAT IS TOTALLY ME!!!!!!!111one"
I'm like that, but I don't think it makes me anything....except slow. But that's fine with me, it appears a lot of people have an issue with it though.
The problem with pace is that it's never your issue unless you make it so, but the rest of reality? Different story.
"An upsidedown wire heart
Being sucked into a periscope
Still the mind is dull
Like you need another excuse"
… a theory is primarily a form of insight, i.e. a way of looking
at the world, and not a form of knowledge of how the world is….
.. all our different ways of thinking are to be considered as
different ways of looking at the one reality, each with some
domain in which it is clear and adequate…. - David Bohm
I don't agree with INFP and I don't care that she typed herself. She read a description in a book, which isn't the same as taking the inventory. Though she was very caring and warm, she doesn't click with INFP in any form. She fought for things and aligned herself with the causes that moved her, but that doesn't make her an INFP, an NF, or even an intuitive. I don't care how rigid the environment is, one's true nature always leaks out.
Also, she's an extravert. If you really study her interviews, she's very forthcoming with personal details. I've never, ever known an INFP to willingly spill about their emotional life that way, that generously.
I am pretty shaw Princess Diana was typed as a 3w2 as that would make her an ISTJ.
I kinda saw Diana as a gambler (Ti) and I saw her as being subjectively sweet (Se) she could play the "I'm sensitive" (Fe) card. But I think she had pore judgment. (Ne)
Diana seemed to place her passions-wants before common sense and that lead to the demise of a posability of a happy and successful life's narrative.
During the timespan that she manifested her success and celebrated her own personal power she achieved well,and in fact manifested the public persona,she so desired. And that was cool.
But I always thought of her as a fraud and a fool, I thought that she had no business manifesting a lifetime relationship with Charles an old man. Who was within a relationship with a women of his own age, despised by the Princes own power base, The Royal Family and it power structure.
A lot of silly games within that match between Diana and Charles.. Crazy cognition must have been the norm.
But over all I thought she was a nice person and defiantly a person lead by the hart centre, her type structure stemmed from the hart triad, she was a type three who over played the Se and Ne , cards.
Being lead by mood (Ni) and playing her hand via her shadow wing (Ti), lead to her downfall and I also think she had a strong wilfully directed focus Agenda lead (Point:2) why she did not trust her Si first I am uncertain. I have no insight into the real inner life of the young Diana,working out her place within the world,and her real understandings, stemming from her inter family relationships. I think she kept he SJ guarded and and channeled it in to being publicly congenial.
She lead an interesting life, raised a couple of good kids and managed to do some good in the world. But had a tragic out come via the inner working of her own inner vortex of stupidity. Something that we all have to some degree within or own minds machinations. Defiantly a 3w2 - SJ - ISTJ - Sx/So methodically driven via mood and ideals generated by her inner tritype.
She was ok she became a female archetype of her time and made her place noted in history.