Nice debate,
@yeghor ! I'm very attracted to E1 issues as I was born and raised in a heavy E1 environment, both at home (E1 mother), at school, at church and in general values and attitudes. So I can speak from experience as well.
However, to be quicker I'd like to quote some more stuff from more authoritative sources than myself:
This is Claudio Naranjo from "Character and Neurosis", in the Chapter about E1, opening section:
Yes, there is anger in the heart, mostly in the form of resentment, yet not so prominently as anger may be experienced by the lusty, the envious, or the cowardly. As for verbal behavior, it is most characteristic of the anger type to be controlled in the expression of anger, in any of its explicit forms: we are in the presence of a well-behaved, civilized type, not a spontaneous one. In regard to action, ennea-type I individuals do express anger, yet mostlyunconsciously, not only to themselves but to others, for they do so in a way that is typically rationalized; in fact, much of this personality may be understood as a reaction formation against anger; a denial of destructiveness through a deliberate, well-intentioned attitude.
Oscar Ichazo’s definition of anger as a “standing against reality” has the merit of addressing a more basic issue than the feeling or expression of emotion. Still, it may be useful to point out at the outset that the label “anger type” is scarcely evocative of the typical psychological characteristics of the personality style in question—which is critical and demanding rather than consciously hateful or rude. Ichazo called the ennea-type “ego-resent,” which seems a psychologically more exact portrayal of the emotional disposition involved: one of protest and assertive claims rather than mere irritability. In my own teaching experience, I started out calling the character’s fixation “intentional goodness”; later I shifted to labeling it “perfectionism.” This seems appropriate to designate a rejection of what is in terms of what is felt and believed should be.
So: anger but not like a reactive type (4-6-8), because it is CONTROLLED (inward control). Reaction formation against anger: displaying the opposite of what's felt. This is inner control.
However, normal behavior is "deliberate, well-intentioned attitude" aka moralism. Not real morals per se: the Intellectual Formula that's been mentioned: Te. Of course, Te is paired with either Si or Ni by necessity.
"Protest and assertive" claims is quite compatible with E. Actually, E is basically high energy and receptiveness towards rewards in the environment, so quite action oriented (J). J is the core of this type.
From the list of traits:
Dominance
Though already implicit in intellectual criticism, which would be without force if not in a context of moral or intellectual authority, and implicit also in the controlling-demanding-disciplinarian characteristic (for how would that be effective without authority), it seems appropriate to regard dominance as a relatively independent trait, comprising such descriptors as an autocratic style, a self-confident and dignified assertiveness, an aristocratic self-concept and a superior, haughty, disdainful and perhaps condescending and patronizing demeanor. Dominance, too, may be regarded as an implicit expression or a transformation of anger, yet this orientation towards a position of power entails subordinate strategies as the above and also a sense of entitlement on the basis of high standards, diligence, cultural and family background, intelligence, and so on.
Hardly the description of an introvert. Assertiveness, dominance, patronising,.. actually I wouldn't see a very strong I being compatible!
Over-Control
What dominance—a transformation of anger—is to others, self-control is to perfectionism. Excessive control over one’s behaviors goes hand-in-hand with a characteristic rigidity, a sense of awkwardness, a lack of spontaneity with the consequent difficulty to function in non-structured situations and whenever improvisation is required. To others the over-control may result in boringness. Excessive control over one’s self extends, beyond outer behaviors to psychological functioning in general, so that thinking becomes excessively rule bound, i.e. logical and methodical, with loss of creativity and leaps of intuition. Control over feeling, on the other hand, leads not only to the blocking of emotional expression but even to alienation from emotional experience.
I put this quote too because IMHO it argues my usual claim that real, true Intuition / Openness to experience is incompatible with this type. E1 is really, truly an STJ at the core.
I know there are a lot of famous INTJ E1 (Batman) or INFJ (Ghandi), but they are the exception, not the rule.
If one is sure about being E1 and types as either F or N, I would strongly suggest they question their MBTI preferences. They can be right, or not.
