• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[INTP] Sherlock Holmes - Possible INTP

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
First off, this is not a 100% definite thing. I just read something about this recently and wanted to ask. I still think it's more likely he's INTJ, but there are some interesting thoughts on an INTP type. I originally thought the detective L from Death Note was an INTJ, but after listening to peoples arguments, I could see where the INTP idea comes from, and I thought that Holmes also shared some of this sort of trait. He has a vast array of knowledge on the subject of his proffesion, and is often very organised in some ways, which is J like, but in other ways, such as the condition of his home, he is very disorganised and messy, which is rather more P.

Firstly, his motives for detecting. These aren't always entirely clear, I don't think. Sometimes he shows a lot of interest in the traditional justice and purposeful stance of an INTJ, and he did shoot V.R (Victoria Regina) into his wall, which was pretty patriotic one would think. However, it is repeatedly stated that he only takes on cases thatchallenge his mind and that really interest him, which seems rather INTP in the search for knowledge and intellectualism without a whole lot of concern for tha final outcome (keeping the country safe and fighting for a purpose). In fact, I think he sometimes complains when there is no criminal activity because he loves his job so much.

One of the things I think is a misconception about Holmes is the idea that he is ISTP. Apparently, because he has so much motivation and determination, notices details, enjoys the occasional fistfight and is capable of doing footwork, he is not an INTP because all INTPs are inconquerably lazy and only 100% interested in purely intellectual matters and oblivious to reality. Needless to say, I think this is rubbish. I understand the claim that an ISTP can think intuitively and make connections between situations using Ti and you don't have to be an N to do this sort of thing, but at the same, Sherlock Holmes' focus so overwhelmingly intellectual. He has made his sole purpose in life the discovery of facts and information, a lot of the time requiring him to imagine potential possibilities before the evidence has even arrived and then 'eliminate the impossible' until remains the truth. I have seen plenty of S detectives in TV shows but I cannot imagine an S denying themselves almost entirely of earthly pleasures such as sleep, love (debateable/he might be entirely asexual and aromantic) and such just to think. Holmes spends many hours on end silently thinking about a case while Watson goes about his life. In the Dancing Men, he absolutely jumped for joy at the thought of studying and solving a complex cryptogram and put many hours into it. And as much as an S can think intuitively, so can an N notice fine details. It's not your ability but your preference that defines your type. He also likes the occasional fight. So do I (well if I COULD fight, I would, plus I used to do fencing and enjoy it) and I'm definitely an N. He gave up boxing to detect anyway, so you can see his preference lies in that section. And INTPs I have known, including myself, are willing to put a lot of work into something if we find it really interesting, so footwork is hardly an anti N excuse.

Anyway, other opinions are welcome. Love to hear what you think on the subject. Please correct me if I have made any blatant logical errors.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
L is an INTP but not a very realistic one. He has hardcore Ti Ne efficiency and way of thinking but I don't see much Tertiary/Inferior SiFe. He has a flowingly weird way of expression(Inferior Fe) but, in actually, I think INTP's aren't so unconventional in terms of outlook(Fe). But I guess he's a genius. =_="

Sherlock, I cannot say but INTJ. Straight Ni Te Fi Se in the ways he solve the problems. He get's an insight out of the small details(NiSe) and deduces them using honed Te. The difficult problems pickiness is based on his twisted worldview. Indirect stuff like motivation usually have an adaptable relationship with functions.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
L is an INTP but not a very realistic one. He has hardcore Ti Ne efficiency and way of thinking but I don't see much Tertiary/Inferior SiFe. He has a flowingly weird way of expression(Inferior Fe) but, in actually, I think INTP's aren't so unconventional in terms of outlook(Fe). But I guess he's a genius. =_="

I must say I was rather confused by what you have said here, especially that last part. Could you please explain to me as I am less farmiliar with the functions? What do you mean that INTPs are not conventional in terms of outlook?
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
\ What do you mean that INTPs are not conventional in terms of outlook?

Actually, What I said was that "I think INTP's do have a more conventional outlook(compared to L's) because of their objectively oriented and traditional SiFe." L has that strange NiFe'ish mentality, as oppose to SiFe. But that's just my theory so don't take take me so seriously. His Ti Ne is pretty straight on though.

Pi, which is Si and Ni, is kind of like a "wordlview" function.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
Oh. I actually did mean to write 'unconventional' rather than conventional. But what is unconventional about L's outlook? Not saying it's wrong, just not sure what you mean. Is it his steadfast stance against Kira or something?
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Oh. I actually did mean to write 'unconventional' rather than conventional. But what is unconventional about L's outlook? Not saying it's wrong, just not sure what you mean. Is it his steadfast stance against Kira or something?

No, it's more about his attitude to things. He will just stare at you for no reason. He doesn't try to adapt to the more traditional way of "sitting". He eats a lot of candy, fo' gawds sake. and you know, his violent contrast from the norms.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
No, it's more about his attitude to things. He will just stare at you for no reason. He doesn't try to adapt to the more traditional way of "sitting". He eats a lot of candy, fo' gawds sake. and you know, his violent contrast from the norms.

Do you think this is particularly abnormal for an INTP. Okay, well, it is very abnormal, and most INTPs wouldn't do that sort of thing, but are INTPs REALLY that interested in the norm? I sometimes conform just to be accepted by people more, but if I was L and had detecting take up my whole life, or people were more likely to accept me for who I am, I think I would be quite the eccentric. I already am, but I tone it down slightly. I don't think conventional is a word I would ever use to describe myself. I argue with teachers, I sit in a variety of positions. I walk around aimlessly kicking dirt while thinking. I say totally off the wall things that don't relate to anything outside my head etc.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Do you think this is particularly abnormal for an INTP. Okay, well, it is very abnormal, and most INTPs wouldn't do that sort of thing, but are INTPs REALLY that interested in the norm?

Nope but they're not Ni dom's.

I sometimes conform just to be accepted by people more, but if I was L and had detecting take up my whole life, or people were more likely to accept me for who I am, I think I would be quite the eccentric.

Yes, L is pretty special. (Yes, fictional but I mean "genius" and all)

I already am, but I tone it down slightly. I don't think conventional is a word I would ever use to describe myself. I argue with teachers, I sit in a variety of positions. I walk around aimlessly kicking dirt while thinking. I say totally off the wall things that don't relate to anything outside my head etc.

Yes, but like I said, 'compared to L', you're(or many INTP's) I believe are pretty conventional.

So INTP's are weird but not L-weird.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
I don't think it's what sort of weird unconventional things you do that matter, but whether you're willing to do them. L sits that way and eats sugar because he LIKES to and wouldn't change that for anybody. I might not like sitting like that (all the time) or eating a lot of sugar, but what weird things I do like to do, I don't change because it might be abnormal. And same as for L. He might not like wandering in circles, so he doesn't do it, even though wandering in circles isn't particularly normal. What I'm saying is that what is normal and what is not is dictated by society and is not a part of nature. In that way my weird habits are no less weird than L's, and the principle is the same. I'm not sure how it makes our tertiary functions different.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
Also, couldn't L's habits simply be seen as an Si style necessity to comply to personally decided norms?

Wow, this has gone a bit off topic.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I don't think it's what sort of weird unconventional things you do that matter, but whether you're willing to do them. L sits that way and eats sugar because he LIKES to and wouldn't change that for anybody. I might not like sitting like that (all the time) or eating a lot of sugar, but what weird things I do like to do, I don't change because it might be abnormal. And same as for L. He might not like wandering in circles, so he doesn't do it, even though wandering in circles isn't particularly normal. What I'm saying is that what is normal and what is not is dictated by society and is not a part of nature. In that way my weird habits are no less weird than L's, and the principle is the same. I'm not sure how it makes our tertiary functions different.

Have you ever considered how much control/freedom you really have?

Preferences are still significantly determined by what functions we use. If we liked to hug and say nice things and smile a lot, it would indirectly mean that we have a preference for that type of behavior. The little details do matter. But I guess that's where my argument ends. The rest is really just my experience of reality and people.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Also, couldn't L's habits simply be seen as an Si style necessity to comply to personally decided norms?

It has to be SiFe. What is judged from the social environment is stored in the factual(traditional) world-view.

He could decide to do the same routines out of his own want to comply with his own norms but it seems like he does it intuitively right? He doesn't care much for it but he does it. He just does it because doing it differently(in a different way "Ni) is more comfortable for him.
 

Mr. Sherlock Holmes

Consulting Detective
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,450
MBTI Type
JiNe
Enneagram
5W4
Have you ever considered how much control/freedom you really have?

Preferences are still significantly determined by what functions we use. If we liked to hug and say nice things and smile a lot, it would indirectly mean that we have a preference for that type of behavior. The little details do matter. But I guess that's where my argument ends. The rest is really just my experience of reality and people.

Well we could get into the whole free will debate, but since your functions are just rationalisations of your mental process, which is you, I'd say you have total freedom. Which wasn't really what I meant anyway. I was reffering to how it was against the norm despite the fact that our Si apparently means we must comply to the norm.

Anyway, in a similar idea of defying the laws of functions, like L apparently does, I think no matter what type you give Sherlock Holmes, he probably won't fit 100% into it. I think that comes with the extreme eccentricity. Perhaps his functions are messed around a bit as well. I think there are strong arguments for both INTJ and INTP, and even a tiny bit for ISTP.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Well we could get into the whole free will debate, but since your functions are just rationalisations of your mental process, which is you, I'd say you have total freedom. Which wasn't really what I meant anyway. I was reffering to how it was against the norm despite the fact that our Si apparently means we must comply to the norm.

...to a certain degree. The higher it is in our hierarchy, the likelier it is that we prefer to do things by known methods. I'd say that the idea of 'norms' is a combination of Si and a Je function.

Anyway, in a similar idea of defying the laws of functions, like L apparently does, I think no matter what type you give Sherlock Holmes, he probably won't fit 100% into it. I think that comes with the extreme eccentricity. Perhaps his functions are messed around a bit as well. I think there are strong arguments for both INTJ and INTP, and even a tiny bit for ISTP.

Actually, I'm also not sure of my own function definitions so you can't really judge functions on what I say.

I am pretty sure about Sherlock's INTJ's. I've even had quotes with me last time I argued about this but yeah, wooT! Nah, I gots no time to argue further so yeah...maybe next time.
 

guesswho

Active member
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
1,977
MBTI Type
ENTP
First off, this is not a 100% definite thing. I just read something about this recently and wanted to ask. I still think it's more likely he's INTJ, but there are some interesting thoughts on an INTP type. I originally thought the detective L from Death Note was an INTJ, but after listening to peoples arguments, I could see where the INTP idea comes from, and I thought that Holmes also shared some of this sort of trait. He has a vast array of knowledge on the subject of his proffesion, and is often very organised in some ways, which is J like, but in other ways, such as the condition of his home, he is very disorganised and messy, which is rather more P.

Firstly, his motives for detecting. These aren't always entirely clear, I don't think. Sometimes he shows a lot of interest in the traditional justice and purposeful stance of an INTJ, and he did shoot V.R (Victoria Regina) into his wall, which was pretty patriotic one would think. However, it is repeatedly stated that he only takes on cases thatchallenge his mind and that really interest him, which seems rather INTP in the search for knowledge and intellectualism without a whole lot of concern for tha final outcome (keeping the country safe and fighting for a purpose). In fact, I think he sometimes complains when there is no criminal activity because he loves his job so much.

One of the things I think is a misconception about Holmes is the idea that he is ISTP. Apparently, because he has so much motivation and determination, notices details, enjoys the occasional fistfight and is capable of doing footwork, he is not an INTP because all INTPs are inconquerably lazy and only 100% interested in purely intellectual matters and oblivious to reality. Needless to say, I think this is rubbish. I understand the claim that an ISTP can think intuitively and make connections between situations using Ti and you don't have to be an N to do this sort of thing, but at the same, Sherlock Holmes' focus so overwhelmingly intellectual. He has made his sole purpose in life the discovery of facts and information, a lot of the time requiring him to imagine potential possibilities before the evidence has even arrived and then 'eliminate the impossible' until remains the truth. I have seen plenty of S detectives in TV shows but I cannot imagine an S denying themselves almost entirely of earthly pleasures such as sleep, love (debateable/he might be entirely asexual and aromantic) and such just to think. Holmes spends many hours on end silently thinking about a case while Watson goes about his life. In the Dancing Men, he absolutely jumped for joy at the thought of studying and solving a complex cryptogram and put many hours into it. And as much as an S can think intuitively, so can an N notice fine details. It's not your ability but your preference that defines your type. He also likes the occasional fight. So do I (well if I COULD fight, I would, plus I used to do fencing and enjoy it) and I'm definitely an N. He gave up boxing to detect anyway, so you can see his preference lies in that section. And INTPs I have known, including myself, are willing to put a lot of work into something if we find it really interesting, so footwork is hardly an anti N excuse.

Anyway, other opinions are welcome. Love to hear what you think on the subject. Please correct me if I have made any blatant logical errors.

Are you INTP?
 
Top