Burn Notice

[redacted]

I agree that he's either ISTP or INTJ. Those are the two best descriptions out of the 16 types. I just think ISTP describes him much better.

I clearly am not going to convince you, though.

 

[Aleksei]

I can be convinced Mikey's ISTP. I was just nitpicking your methodology, because it is crappy.

 

[SecondBest]

I don't see much Ne coming out of Michael at all. Do you ever see him brainstorming seemingly random possibilities? He's an Se and Ni type -- and I think everyone here agrees on that. The real argument is on whether he's a Ti versus Te type.

The idea that a good soldier must have Se is incorrect, though. Si abilities (concretely, focusing on details in front of you to check whether they match previous experience) are just as good -- if not better. The vast majority of soldiers are Si types, and many sportsmen are as well.

Fair enough on the Si/Se comment.

As for Ne, I see it coming out plenty. You see him constantly in situations where he must improvise on the spot and you can see his brain scanning for all sorts of possibilities. He chooses one and acts on it.

The Ti/Te debate is no question to me. If he were Te, I very seriously doubt he'd be helping all those people if they weren't of some use to himself - and in many if not all cases, they aren't.

 

[Aleksei]

As for Ne, I see it coming out plenty. You see him constantly in situations where he must improvise on the spot and you can see his brain scanning for all sorts of possibilities.

That isn't Ne though -- he doesn't scan possibilities, he scans his environment for cues as to what to do next. That's Se.

The Ti/Te debate is no question to me. If he were Te, I very seriously doubt he'd be helping all those people if they weren't of some use to himself - and in many if not all cases, they aren't.

I don't think Te types are this selfish by default -- even if they are so more often than not. I prefer to focus on his standard mode of operation -- does he instinctively know how to segment, organize and mobilize resources to get his goal done, or does he analyze the data he has for deductions and figure out what to do from there?

 

[MacGuffin]

Foresight? What foresight? Michael makes up a tactical plan based on the information he has and then is usually forced to improvise when it all goes to hell. Those plans are almost always modified from past situations he's been in. There is little strategic (long-term) planning, it's all focused on what's happening now (not the 80s TV show).

He's painfully ISTP.

 

[redacted]

^ Yeah that's a good way of putting it.

He actually doesn't have much foresight at all. Fairly often, he just finds himself in some lose/lose situation and tries to make the best of it. He knows there will be consequences later, but just assumes he'll deal with that at some other point. He doesn't waste his time on a million contingency plans. He just acts (not to say he doesn't strategize, he just thinks pretty short term).

He's really not much of a long term planner. He narrows his strategizing scope to the issue at hand and calls everything else irrelevant.

I'm quite sure of ISTP as well...at least as sure as I can be about a fictional character.

 

[SecondBest]

^ Yeah that's a good way of putting it.

He actually doesn't have much foresight at all. Fairly often, he just finds himself in some lose/lose situation and tries to make the best of it. He knows there will be consequences later, but just assumes he'll deal with that at some other point. He doesn't waste his time on a million contingency plans. He just acts (not to say he doesn't strategize, he just thinks pretty short term).

He's really not much of a long term planner. He narrows his strategizing scope to the issue at hand and calls everything else irrelevant.

I'm quite sure of ISTP as well...at least as sure as I can be about a fictional character.

Hmmm, it seems I'm misunderstanding and have misunderstood the difference between Se and Ne. You bring up good points about his process in dealing with certain situations. It seemed to me that being able to come up with solutions on the fly with limited resources was a result of that Ne function, but now I can very easily see that as just a part of his training. But you're right now that I think about it - he doesn't use much foresight at all. He's very much in the moment - even when it comes to improvising solutions to problems. I think it's this difference between searching for cues (as Aleksei said) vs. seeing possibilities that I got tripped up.

That isn't Ne though -- he doesn't scan possibilities, he scans his environment for cues as to what to do next. That's Se.


I don't think Te types are this selfish by default -- even if they are so more often than not. I prefer to focus on his standard mode of operation -- does he instinctively know how to segment, organize and mobilize resources to get his goal done, or does he analyze the data he has for deductions and figure out what to do from there?

Again, I'm reassessing the way I understand these cognitive functions now. If Te function is indicative of your first question (instinctively knowing how to segment, organize, and mobilize resources), then yeah I would agree there, too. My previous understanding of the Te function, I think, got mixed up with the Ti function - as I think the Ti function is more prone only interact with the environment in a way that's useful to him/her. Te, it seems now, is about segment and organizing the world around him into workable components. That makes a lot more sense in Michael's case.

I stand corrected. I'm going with the ISTP as well.

 

[Aleksei]

Hmm... I think we were all wrong. Michael is some sort of STJ. Listen closely to his internal dialogue; it's all "When X happens, spies do A, B, and C. If the tools for C are not available, then substitute by tying a squirrel to a microphone*." Basically, everything he does he does it on basis of something that's happened to him on the job, combined with a little McGyvering to make up for lacking resources (which would be more Ne). And everything he says or thinks is extremely structured, in the way a Te user would say so. None of the scatterbrained rambling of Ti, nor the Se/Ni perspective of thinking from the present onward (as opposed to from the present back, as Ne/Si does).

So, revised types:

Michael- ISTJ
Fiona- ESTP
Sam- ESTP

 

[MacGuffin]

Listen closely to his internal dialogue; it's all "When X happens, spies do A, B, and C. If the tools for C are not available, then substitute by tying a squirrel to a microphone*." Basically, everything he does he does it on basis of something that's happened to him on the job, combined with a little McGyvering to make up for lacking resources

You just described a chart-the-course ISTP.

ISTPs have a Chart-the-Course Interaction Style, which goes with a desire to enter a situation with some sort of course of action in mind. It doesn't have to be a detailed plan and ISTPs often seem planful as they analyze a situation in anticipation of what is likely to happen. ISTPs and INTJs share this Interaction Style and so would look alike in that way.

 

[Aleksei]

The problem is he's not analyzing on basis of what is likely to happen based on present observations (Se), he's analyzing on basis of having connected what's happening to something that already happened (Si).

I would question the validity of the Berens type guide in any case. based on it I'm supposed to be ENTJ, which is not even close to accurate.

 

[MacGuffin]

The problem is he's not analyzing on basis of what is likely to happen based on present observations (Se), he's analyzing on basis of having connected what's happening to something that already happened (Si).

You mean he's relying on experience.... like a Sensor? Or are only certain Sensors allowed to rely on experience? Do ISTPs really have the memory of a goldfish? Do they have to tattoo pertinent information on themselves like Memento?

 

[Valiant]

Michael - INTJ
Sam - ENTP
Fiona - INFJ? She's got that whole weird thing going on, for sure.
Madeline - ESFJ

 

[Valiant]

Why Michael is an INTJ.

He is an incredible strategist and tactician in a way that nobody can forge.
The entire personality is so much like my own, plus more intelligence than I can take credit for and with an even worse childhood.

What he is talented in besides strategy and tactics is being good at many things.
Which is exactly what I and my particular subtype of INTJ is.
That one being the one that is out there in the real world as well as learning.
No P-type could ever be as hyper-meticulous all the time as is required by spies.
Maybe for a while, but the attention to detail would fade in and out unpredictably.
Besides, when have you ever seen an ENTP exhibit self-discipline?
Sam is an ENTP, Michael is at the very least a *huge* J.
E-types would probably talk to someone about it. Sharing, you know. That is ultimately freaking bad for you.
INTJs and ISTJs probably make the best field ops.
INTJs the best because of the outside-the-box thinking that comes so natural to the type.
Most things have, however, already happened at least a few times. As such, a very well-read ISTJ would probably be able to be close to ideal, even if few new solutions to problems are ever conjured.

Spies deal in secrets, and most of what they do is either to blend in or is of a secret nature.
If you ever want someone to keep a secret, don't tell it to an ExxP. Even if it isn't meant to harm you, the person will manage to slip it into the endless stream of words emitted from their chaotic brains

I'm not completely serious, but somewhat.

 

[MacGuffin]

ISTP: The Psycho Vigilante

ISTPs are quiet, unassuming people, who tend to be mechanically gifted but withdrawn and reserved. ISTPs often need a great deal of personal space and "alone time," which may give others the impression that they are aloof; in reality, this time is necessary to hide their secret identities.

The typical ISTP leads a dual life; his outward reserve and quiet masks an inward seething rage at the injustice of life--often, the death of a loved one at the hands of a criminal. In this secret life, the ISTP uses his mechanical gifts to create a terrifying arsenal of bizarre weapons with which to strike fear into the heart of evil. Sometimes, ISTPs may become evil themselves, either slowly over a long period of time or in response to a perceived rejection from the very people they are trying to save.

RECREATION: ISTPs are happiest when they are building and constructing--either new weapons to smite their enemies, or new plots to destroy those who oppose them. They have a very industrial sense of aesthetics, and can spend hours absorbed in the appreciation of works of art such as a 1969 Hemi Cuda retrofitted with missile launchers and ejection seats.

COMPATIBILITY: ISTPs don't often get along well with their extroverted cousins, Evil Overlords and Mad Scientists. Instead, they prefer the company of INTPs, or perhaps their pets. Romantic relationships with ISTPs tend to be drawn-out, tragic affairs, filled with bitterness, longing, and teenage angst. The sex is usually pretty good, however.

Famous ISTPs include Spider-Man and Q.

Michael is a walking ISTP archetype, like James Bond.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Those are hardly accurate type descriptions and are mostly just jokes. I don't know this character you're talking about, but I wouldn't make a judgement based on those.

 

[Aleksei]

You mean he's relying on experience.... like a Sensor? Or are only certain Sensors allowed to rely on experience? Do ISTPs really have the memory of a goldfish?

Quote from a certain ESTP you and I both know:

yeah... I usually fail at recall of previously used responses when on the spot and have to improvise... something about people staring at me causes total Si failure

It's not that SPs have no memory, it's that they don't prefer to rely on it -- or it just slips when the heat is on. Si is a preference for relying on accumulated sensory data, whereas Se is a preference for relying on present sensory data. On what your gut and cues from your environment tell you.

 

[MacGuffin]

SPs crack under pressure? What good are they then?

 

[Aleksei]

SPs crack under pressure?

Fuck no. SPs thrive under pressure, but thet're by default best at improvising, not at applying previous knowledge. SJs on the other hand tend to kinda suck at improvising. myself I generally star stuttering if I'm put on the spot on a subject I know nothing about, or start pulling random shit out of thin air (which would be Ne).

It seems to me that you have some trouble differentiating between Se and Si.

 

[MacGuffin]

Fuck no. SPs thrive under pressure, but thet're by default best at improvising, not at applying previous knowledge. SJs on the other hand tend to kinda suck at improvising. myself I generally star stuttering if I'm put on the spot on a subject I know nothing about, or start pulling random shit out of thin air (which would be Ne).

It seems to me that you have some trouble differentiating between Se and Si.

But Michael always has to improvise, his plans almost never work.

 

[Illmatic]

Damn i wsih i was liek Michael. In a perfect life.