Moby

[hommefatal]

I would say he is an INFP or an INFJ.

 

[Night]

INFJ

 

[Fluffywolf]

The singer I assume? INFJ

The whale was most definatly ENTJ.

 

[soleil]

^^

I'm assuming an INFJ.

 

[entropie]

ISFP

 

[Night]

ISFP

Why do you say ISFP?

 

[hommefatal]

The singer I assume? INFJ

The whale was most definatly ENTJ.

Yes, the singer. It pleases me you all agree with me.

 

[Lightyear]

Why do you all say INFJ? Am just curious.

The one thing I remember about him is that he let MTV Cribs into his home and while normally celebrities would show off how great and expensive their homes are he lived in this pretty empty, basic flat which wasn't impressive at all but he seemed to be fine with living low-key and just having the basics. That's very non-Se I think and points towards I and N.

 

[Fluffywolf]

The lyrics of the songs he wrote. His body language when performing. The way he speaks inbetween songs in live performances and the style of his music.

Pretty positive of Introverted iNtuition Feeling,

J is a bit of a guess for me, He might be more balanced in that regard though.

 

[Night]

INFJ with a mature Ti backbone.

Here is a snippet of one of his essays:

1 Fundamentalism (of any kind) troubles me. The world is too big and too
intricate to conform to our ideas of what it should be like. In my experience
I've found that most fundamentalists aren't so much attached to their
professed ideologies as they are to the way in which these ideologies try to
make sense of a confusing world. But the world is confusing, and just
because we invent myths and theories to explain away the chaos we're still
going to live in a world that's older and more complicated than we'll ever
understand.

So many religious and political and scientific and social systems
fail in that they try to impose a rigid structure onto what is an inherently
ambiguous world. I'm not suggesting that we stop trying to understand
things. Trying to understand the world can be fun and, at times, helpful. But
if we base our belief systems on the humble assumption that the complexities
of the world are ontologically beyond our understanding, then maybe our
belief systems will make more sense and end up causing less suffering.

 

[Lightyear]

INFJ with a mature Ti backbone.

Here is a snippet of one of his essays:

1 Fundamentalism (of any kind) troubles me. The world is too big and too
intricate to conform to our ideas of what it should be like. In my experience
I've found that most fundamentalists aren't so much attached to their
professed ideologies as they are to the way in which these ideologies try to
make sense of a confusing world. But the world is confusing, and just
because we invent myths and theories to explain away the chaos we're still
going to live in a world that's older and more complicated than we'll ever
understand.

So many religious and political and scientific and social systems
fail in that they try to impose a rigid structure onto what is an inherently
ambiguous world. I'm not suggesting that we stop trying to understand
things. Trying to understand the world can be fun and, at times, helpful. But
if we base our belief systems on the humble assumption that the complexities
of the world are ontologically beyond our understanding, then maybe our
belief systems will make more sense and end up causing less suffering.

That sounds very INFJ to me. It reminds me of one of my favourite quotes ever: "Poets do not go mad, but chess players do." by G.K. Chesterton.

 

[Night]

Here's more:

2 It horrifies me that we allow prisoners to be treated so poorly. If someone is found guilty of committing a crime then we as a society have given ourselves the right to punish them by locking them up. But we also acknowledge that even someone convicted of committing a crime retains some basic civil rights. Unfortunately our prisons (especially here in the U.S.) are places where people's basic rights are trampled on pretty much as matter of course. Prisoners shouldn't have to fear rape, abuse & murder while they're incarcerated. A civilized nation should concern itself with protecting and maintaining the rights of all of its citizens, be they prisoners or not. A prisoner should be able to pay their debt to society with ample, constitutionally guaranteed, protection from harm. And while I'm getting worked up about the rights of prisoners, let me take a minute to point out the utter absurdity of consensual crimes in a supposedly free society. How can we justify locking people up for committing actions that have no demonstrable repercussions to anyone else? If someone's actions compromise the rights or will of another individual, then fine, punish them. But if someone's actions don't affect anyone other than the person committing the actions, then what business is it of the state's? I'm specifically referring to drug use. I don't use drugs, and I think that drugs can be terribly destructive and dangerous, but I don't see how the state can arrest an adult for doing something to their own body. An enlightened state should warn its citizens about dangerous activities, but it shouldn't be allowed to lock people up for doing things to themselves. I do not want any government making decisons regarding what I can put in to or do to my body. An individual's own body is not the jurisdiction of the state. Although we may find suicide, drug use, abortion, self-mutilation, etc, abhorrent, we cannot as an enlightened society make criminals of people that want to do these things to themselves, so long as their actions don't compromise our rights. Because we find something distasteful is not justification enough for us to deem it criminal.

Sounds like a thoughtful, compassionate human being. Socially responsible.

 

[NewEra]

Moby Dick? INTJ.