User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: The Godfather

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, here, but your reasoning seems to be that if someone is good at logically organizing outer world tasks to get stuff done and also good at harmonizing with group-oriented values, he must be using both Te and Fe, but this is a mistake based on the misconception that functions are equated with singular actions.

    They are not. Functions are value systems that make up the building blocks of one's worldview. If we want to understand Vito's functional makeup, we need to look for the ultimate root motivation for his behavior, in the most fundamental components of his value system--not simply label surface actions as "using" this or that function.
    Having spent a lot of time around ENFJs (and other FJs), I can tell you that they are good at organizing things and getting things done, but they don't do it in anything resembling a TJ fashion...

  2. #12
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fecal McAngry View Post
    Having spent a lot of time around ENFJs (and other FJs), I can tell you that they are good at organizing things and getting things done, but they don't do it in anything resembling a TJ fashion...
    Indeed. And it would be a mistake to declare that they are "using Te" simply because they're good at many of the same tasks that Te users are good at. It's motivation, not action!

    I've seen ENTJs do a stellar job of showing overt respect for the values and emotions of others in order to complete some goal that they want. This does not mean they're "using Fe"; it just means that Te recognizes the strategic value in giving off this appearance (and/or that Fi has a personal, subjective belief that it's important to respect people's feelings.)
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  3. #13
    Senior Member evilrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    nite
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I got it from Psychological Types, where Jung says that using the four non-preferred functions, if possible at all (which he is uncertain of), would require "tremendous expenditure of energy."

    In Jung's functional theory, each type prefers one form of each of the four functions N, S, T and F. So being an NTJ means that one prefers Ni over Ne, Se over Si, Te over Ti and Fi over Fe. He does not ever explicitly say that we can or cannot use the four other functions, but he does make it clear that the four standard ones are the preferred forms--ergo, ENTJ prefers Fi to Fe (if he even uses Fe at all.)

    Your conception of "using functions" is inconsistent with Jung's definition of what a function actually is. It doesn't matter what you did; it only matters why you did it. You're not actually "using Fe" unless you did something because you believe in Fe's values purely for their own sake. Even if you did something that "looked Fe" on the surface, if you did it to appease a more important Te value, then Te is the real function at work. (e.g., "I should give an appearance of respecting other people's cultural values because that's the most effective way to get what I want" is Te, even though it involves doing something that appears Fe on the surface.)

    When you say that EJs are often "good at both Te and Fe" you seem to be associating Te and Fe with particular tasks rather than underlying value systems. Correct me if I'm wrong, here, but your reasoning seems to be that if someone is good at logically organizing outer world tasks to get stuff done and also good at harmonizing with group-oriented values, he must be using both Te and Fe, but this is a mistake based on the misconception that functions are equated with singular actions.

    They are not. Functions are value systems that make up the building blocks of one's worldview. If we want to understand Vito's functional makeup, we need to look for the ultimate root motivation for his behavior, in the most fundamental components of his value system--not simply label surface actions as "using" this or that function.
    The mbti and Jung arenít the same thing. The mbti is based on Jung, but itís a revision and expansion of his definitions and theory of the functions. You can quote Jungís text on psychological types, but you canít offer proof of its validity. His typology was a brilliant first draft, no question, but he didnít develop it nearly as much as some of his other theories; it was hardly his magnum opus.

    Myers-Briggs, however, spent much of her life researching and developing the mbti, as did Keirsey. Itís not a perfect system, but itís proven to be more accurate than Jungís original blueprint. Most people, including myself, are lowest or near lowest in their typeís inferior function.

    Youíre forgetting, too, that some people are close in preferences. You seem to be arguing that, in this case, even if an ENTJ has a slight to moderate T preference, it still guarantees that Te is at the top of the order and Fe the bottom; itís impossible for an EJs ďvaluesĒ to be fairly balanced in the two with one being a little more dominant. Itís all one and very little of the other. I donít see this fitting all EJs or people of other types.
    Last edited by evilrobot; 01-21-2010 at 10:18 PM.
    X___________________________________

    If things are not what they seem, and we are forever reminded that this is the caseóthen it must also be observed that enough of us ignore this truth to keep the world from collapsing. ĖThomas Ligotti, The Mystics of Muelenberg

  4. #14
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    The mbti and Jung are not the same thing. The mbti is based on Jung, but itís a revision of his definitions and theory of the functions. And I donít know about you, but in just about every function test Iíve ever taken, I score lowest in my type's inferior function.
    Function tests are nonsensical because they depend on self-report. Anything you erroneously believe about yourself will come out on a function test as being true. I could design a test to determine if you have superpowers, and if you told it that you can fly and leap over tall buildings, it would confirm that you can do these things--but that doesn't make them true.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    Youíre also forgetting that these are unproven theories. You can quote what Jung said, fine, but thereís no proof that everyone fits that perfectly, never mind that we werenít even typing these characters with Jungís system.
    I'm not forgetting anything. I'm working within the framework of Jung's theories because that's what typology was based on. There's nothing to "prove" or "disprove" because typology is just a bunch of arbitrary categorizations that can't be tested empirically. The only thing I'm arguing is interpretation.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    Youíre also forgetting that some people are close in preferences. You seem to be arguing that even if an ENTJ has a slight to moderate T preference, it means that Te is at the top of the order and Fe at the bottom. Itís impossible for someoneís ďvaluesĒ to be fairly balanced in the two. Itís all Te and little Fe or vica versa. Jungís unproven theory nothwithstanding, I just donít see that in all EJs Iíve known.
    No, it means that Te is at the top of the order and Fi is at the bottom, and that Fe doesn't really come into play. If you're opposed to "unproven theories" then I don't know why on earth you're interested in typology in the first place. You say this as if MBTI somehow has more empirical evidence than Jung--but it doesn't.

    If you're discussing functions using labels like Te or Si, you're already working in Jungian territory because MBTI doesn't even differentiate between the different forms of each process--it just condenses them into general preferences for E/I, N/S, F/T, and J/P. By even using the terms Fe vs. Fi, you've already moved out of MBTI's box and implied use of Jung's ideas--and now you want "proven theories"?

    You're looking in the wrong place if you want an empirically verifiable or testable system. Typology is all up to interpretation.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Both Michael and Vito are INTJ's. Where you guys get E or even F ,I have know idea.
    Sonny is ESTP
    Fredo is ESFP
    Tom is ISTJ

  6. #16
    Senior Member evilrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    nite
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Function tests are nonsensical because they depend on self-report. Anything you erroneously believe about yourself will come out on a function test as being true. I could design a test to determine if you have superpowers, and if you told it that you can fly and leap over tall buildings, it would confirm that you can do these things--but that doesn't make them true.



    I'm not forgetting anything. I'm working within the framework of Jung's theories because that's what typology was based on. There's nothing to "prove" or "disprove" because typology is just a bunch of arbitrary categorizations that can't be tested empirically. The only thing I'm arguing is interpretation.



    No, it means that Te is at the top of the order and Fi is at the bottom, and that Fe doesn't really come into play. If you're opposed to "unproven theories" then I don't know why on earth you're interested in typology in the first place. You say this as if MBTI somehow has more empirical evidence than Jung--but it doesn't.

    If you're discussing functions using labels like Te or Si, you're already working in Jungian territory because MBTI doesn't even differentiate between the different forms of each process--it just condenses them into general preferences for E/I, N/S, F/T, and J/P. By even using the terms Fe vs. Fi, you've already moved out of MBTI's box and implied use of Jung's ideas--and now you want "proven theories"?

    You're looking in the wrong place if you want an empirically verifiable or testable system. Typology is all up to interpretation.

    By your logic you donít know your own type. Not that I disagree people often mistype themselves by relying on tests. But all you have to go by are tests plus your knowledge of the types, functions and preferences. Itís all based on self-report

    If you're working within the framework of Jungís typology, your framework is wrong for this thread, which was about the mbti types of these characters, not the Jungian types.

    Didnít say I was opposed to unproven theories or that these systems have no value. But you have to allow for margin of error. Jungís typology and the mbti are approximations, not precise sciences. And the functions extracted from mbti types (Fi, Ti, Te, etc.) are based on Jungís types, yes, but not exactly the same. True, itís a Jungian interpretation of the mbti, but the theory of their usage order is different, just as socionics is different. In a way itís like you're arguing that my mbti typings and interpretation are wrong based on socionics theory, which is related to the mbti, but a different system, as Jungís original system is different than the mbti, including the Jungian interpretation of the mbti.

    I wonder how many people agree with you? For example, do INTPs find Fi less influential than Fe (their inferior function)? Do INTJs find Si weaker or "fainter" than Se, their inferior function? You could argue that the inferior function has strong unconcious influence, but my point about Vito Corleone is that he had conscious use of Fe, the ďfamily valuesĒ related to it, even though he's more Te overall (more head than heart).
    X___________________________________

    If things are not what they seem, and we are forever reminded that this is the caseóthen it must also be observed that enough of us ignore this truth to keep the world from collapsing. ĖThomas Ligotti, The Mystics of Muelenberg

  7. #17
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benny View Post
    Both Michael and Vito are INTJ's. Where you guys get E or even F ,I have know idea.
    Sonny is ESTP
    Fredo is ESFP
    Tom is ISTJ
    Vito is an ENFJ, and here's why:

    His primary value is family and keeping the family together as one cohesive, content, and productive unit. For Vito, family is more important than power, as a stable familial structure enhances one's ability to gain power. For NTJ power-mongers, it's less an issue of unit power and more an issue of individual power.

    In the 2nd film, that focuses very much on Vito, he explicitly states that his family is the most important thing to him. He says this to his Italian friend while watching that Italian play in New York.

    Additionally, Vito attempts to unite those around him in a common cause to reach a common social goal; he's a motivator. He does this when he unites the community against the other Don that's bullying people around.

    Vito's primary way of gaining power over people is by instilling the belief in them that he's a compassionate, sympathetic, and understanding guy, and subtly manipulating them into returning the favor (you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours). An example of this occurs when Vito finds out that he's to be fired, and the other Don's minion is to take Vito's place. Vito does not react with contempt or disdain towards his boss; he displays an air of understanding and sympathy, and he expresses the sincere notion that he believes it to be for the greater good of everyone if Vito just backs down (of course he has ulterior motives regarding the Don, but that's beside the point). Vito's basis for building his reputation in the community rests upon maintaining trustworthy and reliable relationships by granting favors/kindness in exchange for favors/kindness in the future.

    Additionally, Vito has a natural penchant for using subtle emotional manipulation to establish a level of authority/inferiority (a skill to which the standard NTJ is not privy). An example of this occurs when he some how causes the landlord to change his mind about the old woman's lease in the apartment (again, 2nd film). The old woman is going to be kicked out of her apartment and Vito agrees to speak to the landlord about the issue (and he does this out of a social obligation that he feels). That landlord walks into Vito's olive oil shop, and all it takes is one minute of discussion for the landlord to yield to Vito's wishes. Some how Vito made the landlord feel guilty for treating the lady discourteously, so the landlord changed his mind.

    Anyway, all of the above just reeks of Fe/Ni. The fact that he kills people doesn't make him an NTJ.

  8. #18
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    By your own logic you donít know your own type. Not that I disagree people often mistype themselves by relying on tests. But all you have to go by are tests plus your knowledge of the types, functions and preferences. Itís all based on self-report
    Well, nobody knows his own type (or anyone's type) for certain because the whole thing is subjective. I always tell people I think of it like musical genres, except genres of people--you can't empirically verify whether an artist is post-rock or indie rock, but there are still generally accepted standards. You can't empirically "prove" that Jay-Z isn't a jazz fusion artist, but if you say that he is it's generally understood that you're probably wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    If your working within the framework of Jungís typology, your framework is wrong for this thread, which was about the mbti types of these characters, not the Jungian types.
    That's interesting; I don't see anything in the OP signifying that you only wanted MBTI analysis. If you didn't want to discuss Jungian functions, I find it odd that you used them freely in your responses to other posts here. If you stick strictly to MBTI, Te, Ti, etc. are meaningless terms because MBTI only deals with E, I, N, S, F, T, P and J as separate and distinct concepts. There's no sub-classification of S, N, T or F.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    Didnít say I was opposed to unproven theories or that these systems have no value. But you have to allow for margin of error. Jungís typology and the mbti are approximations, not precise sciences. And the functions that are extracted from mbti types (Fi, Ti, Te, etc.) are based on Jungís types, yes, but not exactly the same. True, itís a Jugian interpretation of the mbti, but the theory of the order of their usage is different, just as the socionics interpretation is different. In a way itís like your trying to argue that my mbti typings and interpretation are wrong based on socionics theory, which is related to the mbti, but a different system, as Jungís original system is different than the mbti, including the Jungian interpretation of the mbti.
    You've got it backwards. The MBTI types were extrapolated from Jung's functions, not the other way around. MBTI doesn't actually discuss directional functions at all--it doesn't differentiate between Fe and Fi; both are just condensed into "F." Therefore, if you're discussing Fe, Fi, Te, etc., you are using Jungian terms.

    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    I wonder how many people agree with you? For example, do INTPs always find Fi less influential than Fe (their inferior function). Do INTJs always find Si weaker than Se, their inferior function? If you can prove me wrong, Iím fine with that. I guess you could argue that the inferior function has strong unconcious influence, but my point about Vito Corleone is that he had conscious use of Fe, that he had ďfamily valuesĒ related to it, even though he is clearly more Te overall (more head than heart).
    Nobody can prove anybody wrong about the types of anyone, so I don't understand why you keep asking for that. Typology, since it is not testable or empirically verifiable, operates on inductive reasoning--the best you can do is make a "strong" argument that x person is y type; you cannot evaluate subjective analysis in terms of deductive reasoning. There is no such thing as a truly "correct" or "incorrect" typing, only "strong" or "weak" arguments for types (which are ultimately subjective anyway.)

    Aside from that, though, I think you've missed my point about Fe vs. Te. Having strong family values doesn't necessarily indicate Fe use; having a conception of morality based on an external standard does.

    So one could have strong family values based on Fe--if his idea of ethics is based on an external standard and that external standard says that family values are important.

    Or one could have strong family values based on Fi, if his idea of ethics is personal and internal, and he feels it's important to support his family structure.

    Or one could have strong family values based on Te, if his idea of logic comes from an external standard and he sees that keeping a family together is an objectively effective method of reaching whatever goals he has.

    Or one could have strong family values based on Ti, if his idea of logic is personal and internal and he believes that it's logically consistent to support his family structure.

    etc., etc...you're still defining functions according to displayed behavior, but functions don't do that. That's what MBTI's basic four-dichotomy sliding scale system is for. Observing and categorizing obvious surface behaviors--the what, not the why.

    Functions are more difficult because they describe fundamental components of value systems--if we say someone uses Fe, all we're saying is that he bases his concept of ethics on some external standard. This may (and frequently does) result in "strong family values", but some Fe users do not have strong family values. The defining characteristic of Fe is that it motivates people to define morality according to an objective external standard--the why, not the what.

    If you're not interested in discussing functional value systems/would prefer to discuss only MBTI, that's fine, but it does make it confusing when you use terms like Te and Fe in your analysis. MBTI doesn't encompass these terms at all.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #19
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    yeah, you can't empirically prove that your representation is the true representation of something. you can make a claim or a proposition, but it's always representational. and getting a linguistic system and the world to stick together or cohere fully doesn't make sense, not as an account of the world as it is. it's compacted, encoded, shrunk, etc. intended to be a compressed approximation according to a specific information system.

    with that said, the system makes no fucking sense if the representations don't work together in a logical way. and the whole cognitive function test approach doesn't do that at all, in my opinion. as a system it doesn't map on to anything, it doesn't have any internal logic, it just allows people to avoid understanding the subtleties that are necessary to see differences and other factors that are not well-accounted for under mbti-related perspective, while muddling the one layer of understanding/perspective that mbti DOES bring. and mbti is just another way of saying jungianism, for me. like marxism, regardless base, superstructure, commodity, they're all in play. it's an extension of one discourse, an attempt at testing it, exploring it, reading/interpreting it in different ways under different sets of premises/guidelines.

    i think intj for vito and entj for michael make sense. or infj for vito. and michael is a different enneagram type than vito, who could easily be a 5. very deliberate, thoughtful, wants to make sure he knows what he's doing before he does it. michael is much brasher, aggressive, angry, and image-conscious. the goal is the goal is the goal. why doesn't matter. it never does.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Killjoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    215

    Default

    With Michael, you have to take into consideration the effect Apollonia's death ultimately played in what he would become.

    He's definitely an NTJ, even before Sicily. Obviously calculated, calm, even dispassionate - The way he handles himself at the hospital (even surprises himself), it's his decision to kill Sollozzo and McCluskey... Hell, even the way he handles himself with Apollonia's father. Still, he was nothing like what he became after Sicily.

    When she was murdered, he seemed completely hollowed by it. Everything was business from that point.

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. The What Godfather Character Are You Test
    By Gentleman Jack in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-07-2017, 12:03 PM
  3. The Madmin Blog
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-19-2013, 05:40 AM
  4. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-08-2011, 08:09 AM
  5. Just Watched The Godfather Trilogy For the First Time (Spoilers)
    By LunarMoon in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-14-2010, 12:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO