Famous Living NFs

[Carebear]

No, actually. See my post above. Not novelists. SPs reign in that territory. Try fantasy, maybe.

Ok, I'll grudgingly have to admit that I read mostly fantasy, so even though I don't believe it to be the case, you just might have a point.

Really? Most NFs I know (myself included) care a great deal about helping people.

Well, I guess I and my NF friends care more about people and helping them than other people do, but in the end, we're still more interested in helping ourselves and making ourselves feel good, so if we got to choose between writing a new Harry Potter or a new "Yet another way to live a good life", I think we'd all go with the most profitable and fun. (Apart from my INFJ wife.)

Of course. They just don't prefer that approach to life and thus, don't get as good at it as Sensors.

Not as good as living it perhaps, but conveying it with words and knowing how those words will be experienced and translate back to the reader is another matter entirely imo.

Yep me too. But it would be a very conscious chose, and not my natural style.

I always make very conscious choices when I write, as do many of the best authors, so what the "natural style" is doesn't really matter.

As for the rest of what you're writing, you seem to base yourself largely on Keirsey and the four temperaments, but in a discussion about Depp being INFP or ISFP, Keirsey doesn't really work. He focuses mostly on strengths and forgets to mention the typical weaknesses, and more importantly: INFPs and ISFPs have more in common with each other than they do with NFs and SPs respectively. Their shared Fi coupled with an extraverted percieving function makes them very artsy and creative and neither resembles an ESTP or an ENFJ much. Therefore it's better to use MBTI type observations and a dash of intuition rather than using Keirsey imo.

But you don't have time for this and the world won't fall apart if we can't agree on Johnny Depp's type, so feel free to continue believing he's a classical ISFP. We won't know for sure before he takes the test and tells us his results.

 

[Alesia]

Not as good as living it perhaps, but conveying it with words and knowing how those words will be experienced and translate back to the reader is another matter entirely imo.

I agree.

I always make very conscious choices when I write, as do many of the best authors, so what the "natural style" is doesn't really matter.

Well...I write mostly poetry. And the books I have keep talking about finding your true "voice". And I've also read that it's a great idea to mimick other writers for a time, (this is even in writing novels, or fantasy), but that you would do best to find your own true "voice". It always seemed to be an end goal that a writer should focus on. And I would like to establish that, myself. I see what they mean, and the value in it. Yes, you make conscious choices, but some are easier than others. I find it rather difficult to read through long passages of novels that go on and on about "painting the picture". And I would not write a whole lot in terms of "painting the picture" myself. Not concrete, real world stuff. Fantasy creatures, yes.

As for the rest of what you're writing, you seem to base yourself largely on Keirsey and the four temperaments, but in a discussion about Depp being INFP or ISFP, Keirsey doesn't really work. He focuses mostly on strengths and forgets to mention the typical weaknesses, and more importantly: INFPs and ISFPs have more in common with each other than they do with NFs and SPs respectively. Their shared Fi coupled with an extraverted percieving function makes them very artsy and creative and neither resembles an ESTP or an ENFJ much. Therefore it's better to use MBTI type observations and a dash of intuition rather than using Keirsey imo.

Yeah, I base myself on Keirsey and all of the other MBTI books I've read. I also know two confirmed ISFPs. And I swear my male cousin ISFP is so like Johnny Depp, or seems to be.

And yes, I stated that INFPs and ISFPs have much in common. I'm glad you added that they have more in common with each other than they do with NFs and SPs respectively. I agree. Which makes trying to determine whether Johnny boy is ISFP or INFP very, very difficult. Maybe he could just be IXFP.

But you don't have time for this and the world won't fall apart if we can't agree on Johnny Depp's type, so feel free to continue believing he's a classical ISFP. We won't know for sure before he takes the test and tells us his results.

Yep. The world will go on, and Johnny will just be who he is. In these matters I just give up thinking of a person as a type, just put them in the general ballpark, like IXFP, and just enjoy them. Whatever their type. And I do so enjoy his acting. He's great.

But Josh Groban is even greater!!!!

 

[The Ü™]

I always thought Steven Spielberg was an ENFP. I really disagree with Keirsey categorizing him as an ISFP.

And with that being said, I don't understand why ISFPs are considered the "Artists," since art is a more abstract iNtuitive field.

And one of Spielberg's quotes was: "I dream for a living." Definitely an NF quote.

 

[Totenkindly]

Did anyone consider George Lucas yet?

I would consider him probably an NF, based on the interviews I've seen with him, his extreme focus on concepts (combined with a weakness of not implementing them well ), the focus on the John Campbell mythological hero, the culmination of the original Star Wars trilogy (i.e., Jedi "faith" and finding/confronting oneself, Luke wins Dad over with the "I believe in you, Dad" repetitive argument... shudder), focus on great spatial imagery.

I could give more details, bur has anyone else thought much about this? If he's not NF, he's some sort of SFP, probably.

 

[The Ü™]

George is definitely either INTJ or INFJ.

I'm leaning toward INTJ because he does seem to be more interested in the technological aspect of his films rather than the "human" part.

 

[Carebear]

I've thought of Lucas as INxP, leaning towards F, but wouldn't put money on it.

 

[Totenkindly]

I am just bothered by Lucas' lack of "sensible logic."

His movies are visually beautiful and coherent... but his characterizations and dialogue is pathetic -- in terms of articulating his ideas, he's about on the level of a sixth grader. For an INTP or similar type, function begets appearance: The movie would be put together a certain way, in order to serve a purpose. Instead, in his movies, visual style wins out over everything else. Usually an NT has a much more coherent vision (note the INTJ-like detachment of Kubrick or someone in that vein).

For comparison, M. Night Shamalyan is probably INFP -- there is an "emotional" plotline, rather than an impersonally logical/coherent plotline in the majority of his movies. And all of his movies deal with the interpersonal relationships and internal growth of the characters... which the outer details (such as in Signs) are cheesy and not typical of NTs, who tend to get caught in the external consistencies and making sure everything "is logical / makes sense" and the characterization is just one element of the movie.

 

[The Ü™]

Yes. M. Night Shyamalan is definitely INFP.

And Kubrick was definitely an INTJ. David Lynch probably is, as well.

I think Hitchcock was an ENTP.

Some sites like MyPersonality.info - Personality Types, Multiple Intelligences and Spiritual Gifts Tests & Information list Tim Burton as an ENFP. I always thought he was an INxJ.

Robert Rodriguez, though, is most likely an ENxP.

Peter Jackson, probably INFP.

It seems, though, that movies that are made with a certain shock value are in the domain of NT types, probably putting Tarantino, Eli Roth, and George Romero with them, too.

The way Please Understand Me II stereotypes Sensing and iNtuitive types -- putting both types into their radical functioning domains -- I just do not see how anyone could possibly place filmmaking in an xSxP spectrum. I stand by when I say that the movie making profession is (stereotypically) in the xNxP spectrum.

 

[proteanmix]

I know this isn't a real person, but if anyone has seen The Shape of Things, I think Rachel Weisz's character is an ENFJ. Also Jody Foster's character from Inside Man is ENxJ, I think. It's really hard to find ENFJs on film.

Agree/disagree?

 

[The Ü™]

In every Jodie Foster movie I've seen, she's an xNTJ. "Contact," "The Silence of the Lambs," "Flightplan," "Panic Room," etc. And she was an ENTJ in "Inside Man" -- you could tell she was all business behind her sociable demeanor.

Clive Owen's character in that movie was an INTJ, and Denzel was probably an ESTP.

 

[LadyInWaiting]

I am just bothered by Lucas' lack of "sensible logic."

His movies are visually beautiful and coherent... but his characterizations and dialogue is pathetic -- in terms of articulating his ideas, he's about on the level of a sixth grader. For an INTP or similar type, function begets appearance: The movie would be put together a certain way, in order to serve a purpose. Instead, in his movies, visual style wins out over everything else. Usually an NT has a much more coherent vision (note the INTJ-like detachment of Kubrick or someone in that vein).

I think George Lucas is an ISTP, for some of the reasons you mentioned. I think he is more concerned with visual impact and technical prowess than with any abstract vision. When he was younger, he was all about fast cars and he's a big time risk-taker, in the SP vein. Because risk feels good or may have a cool impact, not for any larger ideal. For SPs it's all about impact, not competency (I agree, an NT director wouldn't pay so little heed to any part of his project, i.e. writing). He likes shiny, new techniques but technique and variety are also high values for SPs. His creations are highly detailed visually, and often a lot is crammed into one shot. It's not just Star Wars. THX 1138 was also a lot of technique but weak in so many other areas. According to him, American Graffiti is about life as he knew it in his small town. Not N looking toward the future or creating different interpretations, but a faithful retelling. Lucas is a great storyteller in terms of sensory impact as SPs often are.

 

[The Ü™]

Keirsey is full of shit half of the time when he's describing temperament. The way he describes the SP temperament is more like Extraverted.

Wanting to make an impact is Extraversion, not Sensing or Perceiving.

Sensors would probably more likely make an impact in physical performance. iNtuitives make impact by expression of ideas. George Lucas is an iNtuitive.

Risk-taking is due to a Perceiving preference, nothing to do with Sensing.

 

[LadyInWaiting]

Wasn't thinking of Keirseyan temperament theory, but Berens temperament theory. According to Berens temperament theory, the core values of SPs are freedom to act and ability to make an impact. The core values of NTs are mastery and self-control, and knowledge and competence.

He takes the ideas of others and creates compelling, sometimes beautiful film...that is physical performance. His main focus is on mechanical technique, looks and sound, making an immediate impact...that's all Extraverted Sensing. His "ideas" fall apart, he even includes story elements just so he can show them on screen. What logic there is to the Star Wars story is basic, rather unimaginative, and it is sometimes discarded at will. When he was a kid, he loved serial comics because of their visual impact, not the themes.

His big risks aren't iNtuitive ones, they're concrete and action-oriented. The chances he takes are physical chances. His passion is camerawork, editing and effects. He thinks of himself as a filmmaker, not a director. He's more into camera tricks, According to a biography I saw of him, he wanted to be a race car driver until he almost killed himself.

Looking over his wikipedia entry, how he got into filmmaking and what kind of filmmaking inspired him: the non-narrative elements of Film Form like color, light, movement, space, and time...emphasizing the unique dynamic quality of movement and kinetic energy inherent in moving film images....

Where is the extraverted iNtuiting I assume you're seeing?

 

[The Ü™]

iNtuition is coming up with possibilities from perceptions. It's the foundation of imagination, which is formed from a combination of ideas (whether visual or verbal, conscious or subconscious). Everything is inspired from something. It is not possible to imagine from nothingness, but only from external sources of experience, some of which may be unconscious. To imagine what is described in a book, for example, one must know what things look at -- they must have at least the basic concrete data first.

Inspiration is an iNtuitive function. Fantasy is an iNtuitive function. What Lucas did in Star Wars was clearly not from direct experience, but from a variety of different sources.

Sensing function sees the details as they are or were.

It does not matter whether or not it's an image or a word. What is concrete to the viewer is an abstraction to the creator. New ideas are simply a collection of old ideas.

 

[Usehername]

I'm not reading through it all, so forgive me if these have been mentioned. But famous NFs?

-Lauren Graham (Gilmore Girls; ENFP; everyone claims, and she herself vouches, that her personality is essentially that of the character Lorelai.... who is ENFP, I am near certain)

-Sandra Bullock -ENFX
In That movie with Ben Affleck (suspect ENFJ, btw?) Forces of Nature, her character is ENFP and she herself is certainly ENFX.

 

[Totenkindly]

-Sandra Bullock -ENFX
In That movie with Ben Affleck (suspect ENFJ, btw?) Forces of Nature, her character is ENFP and she herself is certainly ENFX.

I never got the impression that Sandra was an N. She always seemed to be a tangible, hands-on, practical, easy-going gal. Not much "etherealness" about her. I'm not sure I agree with the "E" either, unless she is a very low-key E. I think I's with an FP factor can seem extroverted sometimes because they are casually comfortable with and enjoy other people.

 

[The Ü™]

This site labels Sandra Bullock as an ENFP.

Robin Williams is also listed as an ENFP. And I can go with this; from what I read about his childhood, he was rather unpopular and started developing imaginary playmates, as many NFs tend to.

Stan Lee is probably an ENxP, too.

Alice Cooper: ENFP

Marilyn Manson: ENFJ

Stephen King: INxJ

Bill Watterson: INFJ

Martin Scorsese: ENFJ

Joss Whedon: INxP

 

[Usehername]

I never got the impression that Sandra was an N. She always seemed to be a tangible, hands-on, practical, easy-going gal. Not much "etherealness" about her. I'm not sure I agree with the "E" either, unless she is a very low-key E. I think I's with an FP factor can seem extroverted sometimes because they are casually comfortable with and enjoy other people.

“If you went to go see 'While You Were Sleeping' or anything else, you wouldn't necessarily think that's me. Those who know me personally would say (Sarah) is me. 'Cause that is more me”
-Sandra

I found this quote here Sandra Bullock quotes
(Note: "Sarah" I think is the ENFP I referenced.)

(And this quote screams "P" "I'm ballsy on first instinct. In retrospect, I'm, Why did you do that?")


I haven't in about half a decade, but when I was 15 I used to read all of her interviews; I was a huge fan.
I definitely am still confident about her being an NF.

Although you may have an argument with the E/I thing... especially since she's an actress. I'm not certain; I still think E though.

 

[Economica]

Marilyn Manson: ENFJ

I was just talking about his type with friends the other day. We were debating INFJ/ENFJ. What makes you think he is extroverted? In the interviews I've seen, he strikes me as an introvert (somewhat shy and reserved, quiet and monotone speech, pauses to think before answering), but I'm open to arguments.

(Incidentally, don't worry, NFJs - no matter what, he's not going on my list due to criterion 2, part 2 in the OP. )

Edit: Check out this interview for instance. Do Es mumble and fade like that? I know he's on drugs *insert Ozzy joke* but still?

 

[Totenkindly]

What makes you think he is extroverted? In the interviews I've seen, he strikes me as an introvert (somewhat shy and reserved, quiet and monotone speech, pauses to think before answering), but I'm open to arguments.

Yes. The stage presentation is just that -- a presentation. In RL, he seems to be much as you describe here.

The INFJ "actors" I know personally enjoy playing roles other than themselves on stage. I hate it, I have trouble "being someone else," and feel very conspicuous and vulnerable; but it is like they feel safe because they're pretending to be someone else in public, it's fun to play the role and they can invest wildly in it, sometimes playing over-the-top characters. I don't think INFJ is a bad guess for him.