As usual, Alex is dominating this thread! Keep up the good work, buddy!
re: rarity of ESTPs
It is my belief that xxTPs in general are made, and not born. This isn't necessarily a good thing, either - talk to one of us, and you'll likely find that a life circumstance forced us to become hard in certain ways. Much of the time, it may be that for various reasons (in my case, neurological), connecting with people had been difficult growing up. So, our energy goes toward connecting the pieces of the non-human world, seeing how those fit together, and trying to apply that to human relations. IMO, this is where Dom/Aux Ti originates from. In the end, though, we all seek the love and stability of a family that understands us, one that in many circumstances, will never be the one we were born to.
If an INTP drew her education from the natural world, she will likely resemble her ISTP brother in many ways, including an earthy sensibility about things that grounds even the most abstract of conversations. Of course, the earlier the access to human knowledge, the earlier the two types' interests begin to diverge.
ESTPs and ENTPs aren't necessarily like that. In fact, upon first glance, you'd likely not notice any significant differences between the types. In an informal context, both dress comfortably, have little regard for social rules and conventions, and have a wide range of interests that they would freely discuss without judgment. Both develop into real people-persons, and are witty and charming in their interactions. Both express a core optimism about the world. Both are incredibly competitive, always seeking to win in some way (or develop a situation into a win-win. This can drive Te nuts: we don't accept that there has to be a loser if there is a winner). Both love their toilet humor (oh lawd, do we ever). In fact, I'd estimate that 75% of self-described ENTPs are actually ESTPs. It's just that there's no way to distinguish between Se and Ne as a dominant function from one's own perspective.
The key means of distinguishing the two, in my experience, has been this: when an ESTP communicates, she is effortlessly clear, concise, practical and comprehensible. An ENTP, on the other hand, will communicate well when the conversation involves basic socializing, but when trying to explain an idea, begins to stumble over direct explanations. Instead, she will search for an analogy or other means of relating the idea, rather than explaining it and making it clear. The ESTPs I have known do not normally speak in analogies, preferring to communicate in a straightforward, effective manner. Now, this manner may involve all kinds of ornate and interesting language and figures of speech, but it does not involve conveying the idea that the essence of something is the same as something else. Meanwhile, the latter is the ENTP's preferred method of relating ideas, since the idea likely does not exist in the tangible world.
So, here's a list of people/characters commonly listed as ENTPs but whom I believe are actually ESTPs.
- Theodore Roosevelt: the man defined "the value is in the doing."
- Capt. Jack Sparrow: clever, witty, and utterly in the moment
- Julia Child: her calling in life involved the sensory experience of taste. She explained how to cook with effortless clarity. A case of "ESTPs are all pretty" bias
- Jon Stewart: witty and hilarious. However, his humor arises from pointing out absurdities in the world. Compare to George Carlin, who reveled in and ravished those absurdities.