DN's Director Type List

[OrangeAppled]

perhaps you linked your quotations in another thread? you are telling me jung and "mb experts" say something, but providing very little information. yet, you are right that, ultimately, if i disagree with them, i disagree with them. i am interested in thinking about what they have to say, but i do not feel as if they have necessarily perfected human psychology. they're a sketch, upon which a revision will be made, upon which another revision, etc. the way this picture fits into other pictures always pulls apart our understandings, which then have to be put back together. which is to say that the information supplied by jung would be helpful if it clarifies, but "expertise" or citation does very little to sway me by default. like you, i think keirsey is a crock of shit. i don't like beebe nor do i follow the 8-function model. berens is ok, but ultimately i think all temperament theory is more misleading than cognitive functions approaches.

regardless, this is all extraneous. you don't like my explanation of Fi in this thread (perhaps elsewhere as well). i do. you feel an implicit critique in my thread, as if Fi must be an exclusive generator of its own content, but i think nothing exclusively generates its own content. Fi logs it, organizes it, weighs it, stamps it, metabolizes it, etc. this is judgment. it is an absolutely necessary aspect of human cognition, without which would have no structure whatsoever, nothing consistent, no purpose, no form, no stability, no expectation, no communication, etc. experience is made up of both perception and judgment.

i don't know what the difference between "holds" and "forms" is in your mind. if it is that i don't think you have recognizable ideas in pure introversion that correspond to nothing and are articulated in nothing, we might be getting to the root of this conflict. i can "sense" in pure Ni something is there, but i don't get to it unless i sketch it out, speak it out, etc. just like you can feel something, but if you don't have it exemplified in Pe percept, you just fuzz along without any ability to articulate, communicate, locate, materialize, view, revise, etc.

it is easier to clarify if you object in a way that shows me what you think, rather than going for claims about my credibility. if you think we need to revise the way in which we speak of "ideas" in terms of cognitive functions, i would be more than open to that. ie an idea is part of a larger communicative process that requires both perception and judgment (so is not "merely" N, or F, or S, or T.

with your edit it seems as if we are not in conflict?

the quotation says that holism is more difficult to communicate than linearity, that implicit thinking is more difficult to communicate than explicit thinking?

i think the "vision" is very much rooted in what makes a function introverted. there is a kind of inner awareness. for me too this is highly visual, in so much as my only ways of possibly beginning to describe this inner experience, this introverted process, would rely on time and space, shapes, colors, etc. i think of Ni as a weird dream-like assemblage space. Fi, i assume, would feel imprints, but this is the part that i cannot know without science, subjective experience, and communicative feedback. (like you, i am trying to separate what is not me from what is).

i do know that all types use their actual bodies to experience mental/cognitive processes, events, etc. so you can feel the weights and pulleys moving even if you cannot literally sense the actual perceptual stuff, there is still this shadowy phantom process, place-held information, formal encoding, etc even if the actual sensory shit isn't firing 100% live bullets.

I didn't link anything because I am using a copy of Psychological Types that is sitting on my desk. The cognitive function quote is from the cognitiveprocesses.com site.

I feel Jung's quote does clarify, which is why I posted it (apparently it did, based on your new post). I like to support my thought with outside views for the very reason that I can easily pull shit out of the sky that has no basis in reality. I'd rather not fall into that trap, which I set for myself.

Of course you don't have to agree with any experts or me, but I am telling you I take their word over yours, and yes, it explains my mind much better than you are doing. I have repeatedly explained my viewpoint, much more so than knocking your credibility (you seem to be accusing me for exactly what you are doing to me, questioning my sources, asking about links, etc, which is fine, but it ignores my points). I'm not sure what you are not understanding about my viewpoint, or if we just plain disagree. I think it's a little of both.

Of course no function does anything exclusively, and it can be hard to separate each function from the whole type. I said in my last post that Fi needs an outlet, and that's just what my block quote from Jung is saying. I think we can agree there, but we'll have to disagree that Fi is not a source for original ideas, however broad or fuzzy they may be. Although, now you seem to see that it does have a visionary aspect.

Holds = contains, stores, organizes what already exists...it's not creative
Forms = shapes, makes, etc...it's creative
An idea is a view, belief, conception, etc.

I agree it takes more than one function to fully form an idea, but I think ideas may be linked to an internal or external source. I think that many Fi-doms have ideas that are internally sourced (which words like vision and phrases like primordial images support), which indicated they are born from Fi, even if Ne nourishes and pushes it out. There is that little Fi egg there to begin with, waiting for something to provoke it so that it forms into something recognizable that can stand alone externally. Sometimes ideas come from outside also, but a Fi-dom is usually more concerned with their internal self. Is there a whole lot of evaluating that goes on? Yes, and that's why Fi is called rational and Pi is not. I found Jung's description of Ni very interesting, but I do not relate to it for that very reason (it doesn't evaluate so much).

Yeah, Orange, I get what you're saying about NF and NT directors; I was thinking about all of this on my walk, and you are right. We all have our way of approaching things, our motivations, and we find our own unique way of accomplishing them. And then I started to think, hmm, maybe I am an INFP, because I have movie-like thoughts, etc. That's actually how I write; I see it as a movie. It has to do with being a visual person, I think, not to mention having been a film major, not with typology.

But then I read these last few posts, and it's further confirmation that I'm an ISFP. (No offense, I'm kind of making fun of myself, or making an observation, at least. I have no idea how you two do it...)

I think it's pretty apparent both to Orange and myself (and to all the INFPs and ISFPs I've known over the course of my life) that we have buckets in common. The Se vs Ne thing can almost seem superfluous at times, in all honesty. This leads me to believe that Fi is more than a 'system of organization' as you say. Every ISFP and INFP I have known has been extremely creative and introspective and insightful. The fact that Fi provides this capability of "putting yourself in someone else's shoes" allows for much in the way of, as Orange termed it, 'hypothetical musings' or imaginings or altered impressions of things.

Definitely. I went back and forth for my step-dad being INFP or ISFP, because I relate to him a lot, and we understand feelings the other holds readily. However, I'm so much more theoretical and he's so much more in touch with what is real. I wouldn't exactly call ISFPs realistic, but I think you know what I mean.

-----

"Primordial image" references:

It [Fi] is continually seeking an image which has no existence in reality, but which it has seen in a kind of vision. It glides unheedingly over all objects that do not fit with its aim. It strives after inner intensity, for which the objects serve at most as stimulus.

The primordial images are, of course, just as much ideas as feelings. Fundamental ideas, ideas like God, freedom, and immortality, are just as much feeling-values as they are significant ideas.

I can quote from the definition part of what primordial image is referring to, but I'd have to type it out and I don't feel like it right now.

 

[the state i am in]

brainheart, i grit my teeth when i read your posts just as you do when you read mine. you can perform your exasperation with words, but it's not helpful nor is it interesting.

orangeappled, we have a different view. mine is that ideas originate in the activity of the world. we appreciate different aspects of jung, i have weeded out most of his archetypes, primordial images, and mythicisms. i think these things emerge as an attempt to describe relationships, experience, ideas, etc, and that practical conditions are the origin of all things (ie evolution). it's just a basic problem of input and output, and, as i said, introverted functions have a different element of learning in that they store their experiences in a way they can access them later, that prepare their interior for future external situations. i feel like you are not being consistent with what i know, and you feel like i am not being consistent with what you know. i don't think this is going anywhere at this point.

 

[VagrantFarce]

so...is wes anderson isfp or not?

 

[brainheart]

so...is wes anderson isfp or not?

Only Wes would know.

 

[brainheart]

brainheart, i grit my teeth when i read your posts just as you do when you read mine. you can perform your exasperation with words, but it's not helpful nor is it interesting.

Yes, I know, children should be seen and not heard... :hi:

I guess I didn't get the memo that you were the m.c. of typologycentral...
I was just trying to offer some constructive criticism. Maybe you should work on that Fe a little bit...

FYI, I haven't found one word you've uttered helpful or enlightening. But you go ahead and keep plugging away and have fun!

Sayonara, Sweetie! I won't interact with your holy sepulchre of a self again.

 

[BlackCat]

Hmm. I read the entire exchange between state, brainheart, and orangeappled. I am not sure of why Fi comes up with ideas... that's usually a perception function. I agree with state on this one though. That Ji is a system of judgments that we gather over time (we are Ps, we gather information over time about subjects). And that Pe (when in tandem with Ji) is what we associate these judgments with and how we synthesize them and associate them with reality.

You guys were messing up each other's arguments and misreading constantly.

Otherwise the entire exchange was complete horse shit, and nothing got accomplished. It totally blew over my head. You basically sat there and said the same stuff for three pages.

This is just a mass miscommunication fueled by emotion IMO.

 

[brainheart]

You guys were messing up each other's arguments and misreading constantly.

Otherwise the entire exchange was complete horse shit, and nothing got accomplished. It totally blew over my head. You basically sat there and said the same stuff for three pages.

This is just a mass miscommunication fueled by emotion IMO.

Yes, of course you are right.

But there it is. As far as it goes for me, I just have to steer clear of hypothetical typings because there is no way of knowing for sure, so I'm going to be frustrated no matter what.

I think Orange and I were trying to explain the similar desire to be creative that both ISFPs and INFPs feel, but who knows...

 

[BlackCat]

Yes, of course you are right.

But there it is. As far as it goes for me, I just have to steer clear of hypothetical typings because there is no way of knowing for sure, so I'm going to be frustrated no matter what.

I think Orange and I were trying to explain the similar desire to be creative that both ISFPs and INFPs feel, but who knows...

But that's the thing. Most I_FPs are enneagram 4. 4's desire to be creative. People who just study MBTI see this, and think that all I_FPs are creative. That desire is an enneagram 4 trait, not an I_FP trait. I think that this is in part what State was trying to communicate.

I am a 9w8, and I have literally no desire to create. I am awful at art, I am not artistic, and I am not interested in looking at any sort of art. It bores me to tears because it's not useful to me and I feel like it's a waste of time.

There is no need to be angry at state. He's a social last 5w4. And an INJ. He will be particularly sensitive when people can't see his side of things, and it appeared that you two weren't wanting to understand his side. 5 leads to 8 when they are confident in their logic, so he was being aggressive to try to get you to understand his perspective even more.

 

[brainheart]

But that's the thing. Most I_FPs are enneagram 4. 4's desire to be creative. People who just study MBTI see this, and think that all I_FPs are creative. That desire is an enneagram 4 trait, not an I_FP trait. I think that this is in part what State was trying to communicate.

I am a 9w8, and I have literally no desire to create. I am awful at art, I am not artistic, and I am not interested in looking at any sort of art. It bores me to tears because it's not useful to me and I feel like it's a waste of time.

There is no need to be angry at state. He's a social last 5w4. And an INJ. He will be particularly sensitive when people can't see his side of things, and it appeared that you two weren't wanting to understand his side. 5 leads to 8 when they are confident in their logic, so he was being aggressive to try to get you to understand his perspective even more.

Thanks for pointing all of this out to me.

 

[the state i am in]

But that's the thing. Most I_FPs are enneagram 4. 4's desire to be creative. People who just study MBTI see this, and think that all I_FPs are creative. That desire is an enneagram 4 trait, not an I_FP trait. I think that this is in part what State was trying to communicate.

I am a 9w8, and I have literally no desire to create. I am awful at art, I am not artistic, and I am not interested in looking at any sort of art. It bores me to tears because it's not useful to me and I feel like it's a waste of time.

There is no need to be angry at state. He's a social last 5w4. And an INJ. He will be particularly sensitive when people can't see his side of things, and it appeared that you two weren't wanting to understand his side. 5 leads to 8 when they are confident in their logic, so he was being aggressive to try to get you to understand his perspective even more.

i think the 5 integrates to 8 thing is much more relevant than i ever realized and something to watch out for. i've been feeling bossy, and i think it's partly bc i've felt so focused on just like blowing up understanding of how mb and enneagram map onto each other and perfecting it, synthesizing it, etc. without the ew4 balance, i lose sight of many of the values that make me worth talking to in the first place, something other/more human than a collector of knowledge. i get super chart-the-course and obstacles and frustrations become like intp inferior Fe e5 maddeningly frustrating _____. the whole total impatience for other opinions and wanting to fast-track everything, he wants what he wants when he wants it, etc.

reading over the thread again, switching from a discussion on Fi to YOU do this and YOU do that makes me realize how off-balance i was throughout most of this discussion. and if there's anything i've realized about myself (and part of what i try to espouse frequently), its that without both extroverted and introverted functions balancing each other, it's easy to lose all accuracy, get no feedback to check and revise ideas, and pretty much rely on individual premonitions that mean nothing to anyone else. i think 5 does tend to eventually say, "i'm right bc i research my knowledge more thoroughly," and 4 tends to say "i'm right bc i know myself better than anyone else knows me so they don't know what they're talking about" which eventually shuts down communication. not that communication always works or is even helpful, but i have no use in being e5 unhealth, and i do want to figure out wes/the psychology of different creative processes and how they produce different kinds of works (tho knowing full well that skills overlap, there are many ways to go about making something and a work alone could be made in many ways in most cases)

(ie a Ti technician could have the painstaking attention to detail, to decision-making, to fine-tuning that an Se would have in craftsmanship, awareness of objects, and making something look sound feel exactly the right way. look at michel gondry if you want to see a great example of Ti working with its own hands, which is probably one of the ways that Ne and Se are most similar, the natural tangibility of their perceptions, merging with their perceptions, recognizing meaning in material, etc).

 

[OrangeAppled]

Hmm. I read the entire exchange between state, brainheart, and orangeappled. I am not sure of why Fi comes up with ideas... that's usually a perception function. I agree with state on this one though. That Ji is a system of judgments that we gather over time (we are Ps, we gather information over time about subjects). And that Pe (when in tandem with Ji) is what we associate these judgments with and how we synthesize them and associate them with reality.

You guys were messing up each other's arguments and misreading constantly.

Otherwise the entire exchange was complete horse shit, and nothing got accomplished. It totally blew over my head. You basically sat there and said the same stuff for three pages.

This is just a mass miscommunication fueled by emotion IMO.

I think I made a good point, and I stand by it all.

 

[VagrantFarce]

I dunno

NT | Rational


INTP
Woody Allen
Paul Thomas Anderson
Michael Crichton
Ethan Coen
Stephen Frears
Paul Greengrass
Charlie Kaufman
Christopher Nolan
George A. Romero
Ridley Scott
Paul Verhoeven

ENTP
JJ Abrams
Walt Disney
Jean-Luc Godard
Michel Gondry
Alfred Hitchcock
Trey Parker
Quentin Tarantino
Orson Welles
Billy Wilder

INTJ
Joel Coen
Stanley Kubrick

ENTJ
James Cameron
Howard Hughes


NF | Idealist


INFP
Ingmar Bergman
Tim Burton
Cameron Crowe
Alfonzo Cuaron
Lee Daniels
Frank Darabont
Terry Gilliam
Peter Jackson
George Lucas
Sam Raimi
Tim Robbins
Gus Van Sant
M. Night Shyamalan

ENFP
Richard Attenborough
Danny Boyle
Mel Brooks
Francis Ford Coppola
John Landis
Baz Luhrmann
Micheal Moore
Roman Polanski
Jason Reitman
Brett Ratner
Oliver Stone
Ed Wood

INFJ
Frank Capra
David Lynch
Guillermo del Toro
Andrei Tarkovsky
Lars Von Trier

ENFJ
Martin Scorsese
Werner Herzog


SP | Artisan


ISTP
Darren Aronofsky
Kathryn Bigelow
John Carpenter
David Cronenberg
Andrew Dominik
Clint Eastwood
Roland Emmerich
David Fincher
Sergio Leone
Michael Mann
Tony Scott
Don Siegel
Bryan Singer
James Wan
Rob Zombie

ESTP
Paul WS Anderson
Roger Avary
George Clooney
Kevin Costner
Robert Rodriguez
Eli Roth

ISFP
Robert Altman
Wes Anderson
Sofia Coppola
Spike Jonze
Richard Kelly
Terrence Malick
Fernando Meirelles
Sam Mendes
Steven Spielberg

ESFP
Judd Apatow
Drew Barrymore
Jackie Chan


SJ | Guardian


ISFJ
Chris Colombus
Andy Warhol

ESFJ
George Cukor
Ron Howard

ESTJ
Michael Bay
John Milius

ISTJ
John Ford

 

[2XtremeENFP]

Apatow is no ESFP.
ENTP or ENTJ yeah.. ENTP

 

[Killjoy]

I dunno

NT | Rational


INTP
Woody Allen
Paul Thomas Anderson
Michael Crichton
Ethan Coen
Stephen Frears
Paul Greengrass
Charlie Kaufman
Christopher Nolan
George A. Romero
Ridley Scott
Paul Verhoeven

ENTP
JJ Abrams
Walt Disney
Jean-Luc Godard
Michel Gondry
Alfred Hitchcock
Trey Parker
Quentin Tarantino
Orson Welles
Billy Wilder

INTJ
Joel Coen
Stanley Kubrick

ENTJ
James Cameron
Howard Hughes


NF | Idealist


INFP
Ingmar Bergman
Tim Burton
Cameron Crowe
Alfonzo Cuaron
Lee Daniels
Frank Darabont
Terry Gilliam
Peter Jackson
George Lucas
Sam Raimi
Tim Robbins
Gus Van Sant
M. Night Shyamalan

ENFP
Richard Attenborough
Danny Boyle
Mel Brooks
Francis Ford Coppola
John Landis
Baz Luhrmann
Micheal Moore
Roman Polanski
Jason Reitman
Brett Ratner
Oliver Stone
Ed Wood

INFJ
Frank Capra
David Lynch
Guillermo del Toro
Andrei Tarkovsky
Lars Von Trier

ENFJ
Martin Scorsese
Werner Herzog


SP | Artisan


ISTP
Darren Aronofsky
Kathryn Bigelow
John Carpenter
David Cronenberg
Andrew Dominik
Clint Eastwood
Roland Emmerich
David Fincher
Sergio Leone
Michael Mann
Tony Scott
Don Siegel
Bryan Singer
James Wan
Rob Zombie

ESTP
Paul WS Anderson
Roger Avary
George Clooney
Kevin Costner
Robert Rodriguez
Eli Roth

ISFP
Robert Altman
Wes Anderson
Sofia Coppola
Spike Jonze
Richard Kelly
Terrence Malick
Fernando Meirelles
Sam Mendes
Steven Spielberg

ESFP
Judd Apatow
Drew Barrymore
Jackie Chan


SJ | Guardian


ISFJ
Chris Colombus
Andy Warhol

ESFJ
George Cukor
Ron Howard

ESTJ
Michael Bay
John Milius

ISTJ
John Ford

Aronofsky an ISTP now? Really?

Leone was certainly xNTJ.

Malick's films may be ISFP - but Terrence Malick, The Rhode's Scholar who translated Heidegger and left Oxford over a thesis he wanted to write on Wittgenstein and Kierkegaard, is an INFP.

 

[Space_Oddity]

NF | Idealist

INFJ
Frank Capra
David Lynch
Guillermo del Toro
Andrei Tarkovsky
Lars Von Trier

[/size]

Guillermo del Torro is much more likely an INFP. I find him very easily comparable to Peter Jackson, Terry Gilliam and Alfonso Cuaron. He's all about bursts of imagination, sometimes almost uncontrolable. Besides, Pan's Labyrinth feels like a "personified introverted feeling" to me. Lynch and Trier's style is pretty different, it's more precise and one always gets the feeling there's "more" behind it, even if it's often utterly bizzare.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Aronofsky an ISTP now? Really?

/shrug

I based that decision mainly on this series of interviews. It's easy to say he's an intuitive because of The Fountain, but I'm trying not to base these decisions on their films

 

[Valuable_Money]

I dunno


ESTJ
Michael Bay
John Milius

ISTJ
John Ford[/size]

lol ESTJs suck at making movies

 

[Venom]

Could someone make a more detailed case for why Ridley Scott is INTP?

 

[VagrantFarce]

Could someone make a more detailed case for why Ridley Scott is INTP?

It's a real toss-up between the two ITPs - on the one hand he seems very absent-minded and scatter-brained, but on the other has a very direct way of talking and interacting. Definately a Ti-dominant though.

 

[neptunesnet]

What about Spike Lee?

EnTP?

ENFP?