Skip to main content

How to Find Another Person's MBTI Type: Scope

While I have been reading the typing tutorial for my past blog article, I have noticed the scope being mentioned on two different places.

So while I am still not sure about it, I am going to try and write about it, to see if it will help my thinking. This is my putting the advice that writing help with thinking into practice.

So the two dichotomies that they divide themselves to are observation vs. action and specific vs. universal.

specific universal
information IP IJ
action EP EJ

Specific vs. universal here means whenever the person concentrates on one person or situation at the time, or are the the group of people and situation and they try to get the patterns from it. On the other hand, information vs. action refers to whenever there are specific people or situation to deal with, or an abstract one. So this one could also be described with different words and not MBTI letters.

specific universal
information Data Principles
action Motives Actions

The people with IP in their code are mostly concentrating on the specific situation and how theoretical people would react to it. The exploration of the situation is what makes it interesting to them. Whenever is my pathetic attempt in trying to predict people's reaction in a specific situation or my friend's attempt to try and find out how people should react in our current world. Or a person concentrating on one situation at the time, while attempting to enforce some (sometimes misguided) view of how people would react. Not that I think about it, it is mostly connected to the specific situation.

Unlike with the EP, where they are much more likely to first talk about the motivation and their view of particular person, and only when I ask them, they give specific situation to explain it. And even so, it is not the situation that is in the forthrun, but one person that is being discussed at the time. But it the amazing people that they met or somebody that did something unforgivable. They also use multiple situations, and it is like reading the pattern of the motivation in behavior from these situations.

The EJ are much more group oriented. Does the groups work well, do they all feel alright, are they efficient,... these are some of the questions that I have heard the EJ types ask. For them, the situation that they are in is a part of the patterns that the group of people is inside. It is always about how to work as a group, and sometimes, to a person of different scope than they are, it sounded like they want us all to be just a cogs in the machine. But I will admit that when it comes to making sure the group works, they are invaluable.

The last are the IJ. So there are supposed to care about where the world as the whole is going. Be it by asking about the things like the meaning of the dealing of the whole profession or even the nature of the free will, or not the other side, that values are respected and upheld and that we will continue to exist and will not destroy ourselves or our identity. Only from these principles do then they try to apply it to the specific situation. I have to say, that while I admire it, I don't really understand their thinking pattern.

So they are going from most detail-oriented to most pattern/universally oriented, where the IP are concentrating on situation, EP on the people, EJ on the groups and IJ on the world.

The Four Temperament: SJ, SP, NF, NT

The four temperaments idea had been present in our noosphere for a very long time. In the ancient Greece, there was the notion of four temperaments present in their medicine, where each temperament presented one of the human liquids and their balance and imbalance caused the person's personality: melancholic, choleric, sanguine and pragmatic.

Even in the scientific cycles the temperament idea showed a couple of time. Pavlov came up with the idea of the two dimensions, where different combinations bright forth four different personalities. He apparently found this out by observing dogs, but I am not sure, as the original citation is written in Russian and I don't read Russian.

Eysenck also originally proposed 4 personalities, divided based on the introversion and neuroticism. He later added another dimension, so he doubled the possible types.

Keirsey also created the temperament theory, but his was more aligned with the MBTI types. He divided types into SJ, SP, NT and NF temperaments.

The SJ are called traditionalists. Some other people call them logistic as well, and I think that the both description fit. I remembered once reading the comparisons that they are the people that make sure that all the necessary resources are where they need to be. They are actually people that make sure that everything is continuing as normal. Be it by making sure that bureaucracy and organizations are working as normal, or by making sure our social organism we call a society is going on as normal. SJ means that they are using Si function with either Te or Fe combination. So they are combining the subjective feeling about things with changing their outside world. For example, they would believe that family needs to be the most important thing, so they would change their system and society to adhere to this notion. Or you can subtract some other policies here, like life is secret, people have the right to free speech, climate change is important/useless and so no. They like the clear lines, which is why, considering that they have low openness (S) and high conscientiousness (J), they tend to vote conservative.

The SP are called the experinecers, or I also saw them called artists. These are the people that you want next to yourself in a pinch. They are really good at the reacting in the stressful situation, some more in a logical and detached way and some with the value based system. But they at least won't freeze when there is something to be done, but there is not clear order what to do next (something my sister claims that I do, and I am worse than her in this regard). They are the doers and they don't really appreciate the people's daydreaming. They are using the Se function with the combination of either Ti or Fi function. So they see and perceive their outside world, which do they apply the logical or value oriented rules to it. Their Se function allow them to be the people that enjoy the moment, the feeling of driving, the taste of a good food and so one. They can be just a bit impatient at the time, when things are going slowly.

The NT are called rationalist or conceptualizers. There are people are constantly try to go deeper and wider in their quest for knowledge. They are either coming up with the new ideas or cutting through all the unnecessary information to get to the mist important gist of the problem. Unlike the previous two temperaments, this one, along with the next one, is a lot less practical in their everyday life. A lot of people say, that this temperament is also striving for always higher competence (which is true), and because of that they have a great self-confidence (not necessary true). They are using either the Ni-Te or Ne-Ti combination, which means that they both look for ideas and apply logical models to it, but the difference is that the Ni-Te people use their internal ideas and intuition (Ni) that they try to then change the outer world in accordance to it (Te). In the other hand, the Ne-Ti combination looks for all the new ideas and possibilities in the outside world (Ne), and than applies the model to them in order to evaluate them (Ti). That is why they are usually a lot direct and truth-oriented.

The last one are NF, which are called idealists. These are people that are so concerned with the meaning and feelings, that this sometimes seems like their most predominant feature. Be it with the overall meaning of the world or just the potential of the people that they meet, there people can be a source of new insights. They are striving for a living and sometimes the world that works in accordance to their values or values of the people around them. Just like the previous one, here they are also two difference, they can either use the Ne-Fi combination or the Ni-Fe combination. So either they are using the eternal truth that they intuit is right and try to correct the outside world in this way, in the Ni-Fe combination. Or they are using the outside ideas to try and live the life in accordance to their values and make sure their values, and maybe also values of other people, are respected. I have the feeling that the people that want to safe the world, and really mean it, are most likely of this temperament.

So this are just short descriptions of my current limited and stereotypical view of the temperaments.

How to Find Another Person's MBTI Type: Letters (Tieger, Barron-Tieger)

While I have been reading the book The Art of Speedreading People, on the very beginning of the book, they dedicate some of their space to the questions that help people decide their type. Down below I am replicating the question for my notes:

  1. Extroversion/Introversion:

  2. What energizes me the most - interacting with other people or being by myself?

  3. Where do I like to focus my energy - in the outer world of people and things or in the inner world of ideas and thoughts?
  4. Which do I prefer more - to be around others or to spend time by myself?
  5. Would I rather work on several projects at the same time or focus my attention on one task at the time?
  6. Am I more comfortable acting first, then thinking about it or thinking things through before I act on them?
  7. Am I more of a 'public person' or more of a 'private person'?

  8. Sensing/Intuition

  9. Do I usually pay more attention to the facts and details or do I try to understand the connections, underlying meaning, and implications?

  10. Am I more down-to-earth and sensible person or an imaginative and creative one?
  11. Which do I trust more: my direct experience or my gut instinct?
  12. Am I more tuned into the here-and-now or do I often imagine how things will affect future events?

  13. Thinking/Feeling

  14. Do I make decisions more objectively, weighing the pros and cons, or based on how I feel about the issue, and how I and others will be affected by it?

  15. Which words describe me better: logical and analytical, or sensitive and empathetic?
  16. Is it more important to be truthful, even if it hurts someone's feelings or to be tactful, even if it means telling a little white lie?
  17. Which usually persuades me more? A good logical argument or strong emotioanl appeal?
  18. Which is the greater compliment: to be tough or to be tender?

  19. Judging/Perceiving

  20. Do I tend to make most decisions quickly and easily or does making decisions often make me anxious and unsure?

  21. Would I rather have things settled and decided or be able to leave my options open, just in case something unexpected comes up?
  22. Is it very important for me to be in control of most situations or am I often comfortable letting others call the shots?
  23. Am I very conscious of time and almost always punctual or do I frequently run late and find time has somehow slipped away?
  24. Which is more true of me: I'm generally very organized or I often have trouble finding things and keeping organized?
  25. Which is truer for me: I prefer to get my work and chores done before I relax or I can often find compelling reasons to put a task off until a later time?

How to Find Another Person's MBTI Type: The Little Bit of Personality Method

The next method that I am using is one based on the typing tutorial from the little bit of personality website. I can actually recommend this article if you need a quick system to type people. Their method can be boiled down to 4 questions, and when you answer these 4 questions, you have a type that you can use to try and predict and accommodate a different person. I mostly use it to check on the end of the typing whenever I was right in my type.

1. E/I: Does a person reacts to inside insights (I) or outside information (E)?

Here the question is if the person that you are typing prefers to turn inside in order to get ideas, or do they look for the ideas outside? A person that would go inside first, would ponder each action. When getting the new information, they would pause and only then they would make their decision. They would think about the reaction and because of that, they can sometimes seem like they need a moment between the stimulus and the response.

On the other hand, the extroverts would see the outside world and they react. They get motivated by what is happening in the outside world and they react to the outside stimulus. Because of that, when they get a new infomration, they can immediately react and change their course of actions. They look at the world and get their information based on the outside world.

The examples of people that would be introverts by this method would be: John Watson from BBC Sherlock, Bruce Banner from Avengers, Loki from Avengers, Mouri Ran from Detective Conan, Shiro from No Game No Life, James Wilson from House MD and Arsene Lupin from Arsene Lupin's books. The example of extroverts would be Lelouch Lamperuge from Code Geass, Tony Stark from Avengers, Sora from No Game No Life, Hattori Heiji from Detective Conan, Penny from The Big Bang Theory and Ron Wesley from Harry Potter books.

2. N/S: Does a person uses experience to explain the concepts (S) or use the concepts to explain to experience (N)?

Here the question is, which of the two: concepts and experience, is a person using first and which is a person using to explain the other. So people with S in their type would gain their insights and concepts from their experience. They would see the situation and they would this situation to explain something more general. People with N in their type do these things in reverse. They would start with the concepts, and then they would use these concepts to try and explain a different situation. One other way to think about it is that sensors go from unit to the general rule, and the intuitive go from the general rule to the unit.

A good way to see this difference is in the series House MD. House there is a person that goes from the experience to the concept. His diagnosis goes from specific symptoms to the more general insights. Also, he became the doctor, even though he hates people, because he once saw a person that everybody listened to, because he was right. Even Wilson, at the funeral of his father, says that House's disregard for the punctuality most likely stems from his father's strict punctuality.

On the other hand, Wilson goes from concept to the specific situation. When he wants House to admit to his addiction, he engineers the situation that causes him to admit it. Even when Amber died, he did not leave House because Amber died, but because he realized that him enabling House lead to this situation. Even his advice to people is usually worded a lot more like an applied concept than something specific that arose from that situation.

The other examples of people that have S in their type are: Kururugi Suzaku from Code Geass, Peggy Carter from Agent Carter, Stephany Dola from No Game No Life, Robert Chase from House MD, and Misa Ayame from Death Note. The other examples for people with N in their code are: Charles vi Britania from Code Geass, Yagami Light from Death Note, Leonard McCoy from Star Trek (2009 version), Harry Potter from Harry Potter books, and Moriarty from BBC Sherlock.

3. T/F: Does the person first sees the use (T) or a meaning (F) of something?

Here the question is between the use and the meaning, which the person is using first and which is derived from the other. People with F in their type first see the meaning of things, people and concepts that they experience or know. It is only from that meaning, that they can derive usefulness. It is useful to have a strong meaning. People with T in their type are the opposite, they first see the use of everything and it is only from that use that they can derive meaning. It is meaningful to be useful. If this is a bit abstract, just think about it, do you think for yourself that the point of life is to be useful, to be able to do things and this usefulness will bring positive change? Or, instead of usefulness, do you think that it is important to find the meaning of life and it is thought that meaning that human potential and positive change will happen?

I find this distinction pretty interesting, because in the personal development literature, a lot of time it is assumed that people want meaning (or happiness). As a person with T in the type, I was always a bit uncomfortable with this. I could never imagine how to get meaning without achieving something. It was about doing something, being 'useful' in this terminology to the world. Which is why I like the books like Deep Work from Cal Newport, because he even says is the book that deep work is something that is going to help become better professionally, and he is not that interested in why this is like that.

Some examples of the people with T in their type are: Lelouch Lamperuge from Code Geass, Greg House from House MD, Spock from Star Trek (2009 version), Yagami Light from Death Note, and Haibara Ai from Detective Conan. Example of people with F in their type are: James Wilson from House MD, Kururugi Suzaku from Code Geass, Toyama Kazuha from Detective Conan, Pain from Naruto, and Steve Rogers from Avengers.

4. J/P: Does a person prefer to take actions (J) or explore options (P)?

Here the question is whenever the person prefers to have a plan and take actions to reach a specific goal, or if they prefer the situations as they come, adapting as they come along. The person that would have a plan and take action first would normally always have a plan for everything. I actually remember asking one of my classmates about this. I assumed that they would not be in a stressful situation often, and they agreed, because they always try to predict in advance what is going to happen and if one thing goes wrong, they know that they have everything else in order. Or a fellow member of my former Toastmasters club. She is really good at taking something that works subpar and make it brilliant. But she said it herself to me, that she does not like it, when other people mess up her order. I really admire these people.

On the other hand, people that like to explore options are much more likely to get in the situations where their plans, if they even have them, go out of the window. But because of this, they are more adaptable, as with each change, they simply see what other options are. Be it the people that, when put in the stressful situation, they quickly see what needs to be done and adapt to the situation. Or people like me, when every new information or change in a situation makes me see other options. So, currently I screwed up something, and I am trying to repair it. But in my mind, I also have a couple of options of what I will do, if it does not work out.

The example of people that would be judgers by this method would be: Lelouch Lamperouge from Code Geass, Kudou Shinichi from Detective Conan, Sheldon from Big Bang Theory, and Aizen from Bleach. The example of people that would be perceivers by this method would be: James T. Kirk from Star Trek (2009 version), Leonard McCoy from Star Trek (2009 version), Akai Shuichi from Detective Conan and Luna from Harry Potter books.

This is another way to quickly type somebody and it is a good way to check if the type is correct or is there something that might need another look. It is also relatively quick, as long as you have a person or material like movie or book in front of you. I here tried to find the examples by comparing it to the memories of these characters, and I sometimes was not sure, but I would be, if I could check the material. But when you can check, it can be quite clear which type they are. Try it on some of your friends and see if it fits. :)

How to Find Another Person's MBTI Type: The Big Five

One method, that is a bit of the cheating is to get the MBTI type from the Big Five type of a person. The reason I am saying is that it is a cheat is, that in most cases, the person that you want to type is not going to tell you this results. Or, you might be lucky, and they will send you their Big Five results when asking for their MBTI type, as it happened to my in one case recently.

I have read two articles, Furnham (1996) and McCrae and Costa (1989), that had tried to make a connection between the MBTI and The Big Five. This is done with a group of people, where they all get both of the questionaries, the one for measuring The Big Five and the other one for measuring the MBTI.

The McCrae and Costa (1989) is especially interesting because they also include the tests in order to check how the MBTI questionnaire adheres to the Jung's theory. And their conclusion is that the questionnaire does not really reflect the Jung's theory, and it would be better to interpret it through The Big Five traits.

It is telling that they tested the MBTI questionnaire and not the MBTI theory, so I would not throw it out completely yet, but it is telling that questionnaire might not be the best way to get the Jung's personality type from them.

The both articles found some connections between the traits in The Big Five and MBTI letters types. Each of them had some additional ones, but there were a couple that were repeated through analysis. You can see these connections in the table below.

The Big Five MBTI
Extroversion Extroversion
Openness Intuition
Agreeableness Feeling
Consciencusness Judging

So people that are higher on extroversion have a letter E in their MBTI type, and people lower on extroversion have a letter I. With openness, the higher openness is indicated with an N, and the lower openness is indicated with an S. Higher agreeableness shows itself with the F in the MBTI type, while people with low agreeableness have T in their type. The last, the people with J in their type have more consciences ness, and the people with P in their type have less consciences ness.

I guess some of you noticed that there is no neuroticism. Neuroticism does not correlate well with any of MBTI letters, so it is not there.

If I try to change my usual results in my type, then I get the INTP, with very strong I and T and N, and a very weak P. Sometimes people used the X in their type to indicate that they have no preference or used the lower letters to indicate the weak preference. So my type in that notation would be INTp. But I am pretty sure that I am not using Ni or Te, but I am using Ti and Ne, so it is not like this would make me question my type, but it does indicate the problem that I mentioned a couple of paragraphs back - as one of the problems is that strength of the traits/letters does not translate neatly into the use of different cognitive functions.

But sometimes people are easier to identify with their Big Five traits than with their cognitive functions. Instead of long analysis of the people, this is a short way of how to identify people. And then the MBTI type can be used to quickly say about it. Because ISFP is a lot shorter than saying that a person has low extroversion, low openness, high agreeableness and low conscientiousness. Down here are some really quick ones (do keep in mind that MBTI type here is used as a shorthand for describing the Big Five, and not as an actual MBTI type):

People Series Type
Gregory House House MD ISTP
James Wilson House MD INFJ
Steven Strange Doctor Strange ESTJ
Tony Stark Iron Man ENTP
Steve Rogers Captain America INFJ
Loki Thor INFJ
Sherlock Holmes BBC Sherlock INTP
John Watson BBC Sherlock ISFJ
Lelouch Lamperuge Code Geass ENTP
Yagami Light Death Note ENTJ
L Death Note INTP
Kudou Shinichi Detective Conan ENTP
Mouri Ran Detective Conan ISFJ

I could go on and on, but because the Big Five came from the lexical hypothesis, it means that people that know how to use a language (which most people do), are already amateur typers. In the Jung's method, there is a lot more training involved, as it comes from the psychoanalytical tradition. So the Big Five can be the gateway in quickly typing a person and predicting how the person is going to react.

New Political Parties and Personality Types

There is one curious thing in the Slovenian politics. In the last couple of parliamentarian elections, there have been a new political party and came there, in a lot of cases also took a substantial amount of votes. The interesting thing is, that they tend to be left political parties and not old ones.

In Slovenia, there are some right leaning parties, but out of the ones that had come in the parliament in the recent decade, they were all incorporated in 2000 or before.

On the other side, on the last two parliamentary elections, the relative winners were the parties that were created on the year when the elections were talking place. And if the one before, as least the mayor of the capital was leading it, in the most recent election the person did not even have much experience with politics.

Which does show that the results of it were... let me be nice and call it underwhelming.

Also, there are a lot more left leaning parliamentary parties in Slovenia, then they are right leanings.

This has to do with the need for the firm borders and the need for stability that the people with the high conscientiousness have. They are much more likely to vote for the party that had already shown their results. And they traditionally vote right. Which is why, in the recent decade, there were only three right leaning parties in the parliament: SDS, NSi, and SLS.

On the other hand, people with high openness are creative and they want to try new things. Which is why, when people show these people a new face, they are much more likely to simply give it a choice. And there were a couple of new faces like that, from SMC in the 2014 elections, to PS in the 2011 elections. In both cases, they won.

Also people with high openness traditionally vote left. Well, they would not like the phrase that they do anything traditionally, but I don't care if they feel insulted. :) That is why there are, at least in Slovenia, so many different new parties on the left side each elections, that they actually achieve something. But the same can not be said for the right leaning parties. Even if some do appear, they don't seems to have much success.

And it is also through these things, that the personality of the people show. Not only do they differ in the preferred policies and ideology, but also in what will they accept from other people.

That is why, when people complain that they are all these 'new faces', I just smile. We would need to become a lot more right-leaning country for these new faces to become less prominent.

Which, arguably, I don't see happening in a near future, as the personality of the people don't change that quickly.

The Big Five and Political Spectrum

There is a political/personality division, that is quite strong. And this is how the traits of openness and conscientiousness are connected to the conservative and liberal thoughts.

The main idea is, that the higher the openness of the people, the more likely the are to hold liberal views and vote liberal. The higher the conscientiousness of people, the more likely the are to hold conservative views and vote conservative. So people that are high conscientiousness and low openness are the mainstream conservatives and the people that are low on the consciousnesses and high on openness are the mainstream liberal.

The people that are high or low on both of these dimensions, then it depends on the other factors as well, for example the importance of each trait in a person, the social environment and so on.

The trait conscientiousness can be divided into two traits: orderliness and industriousness. The first one causes them to want the clear line between the concepts, they want clear rules and they want a more stable environment. They are not very keen on the change. The second one cause them to value hard work and perseverance, so they are more likely to believe that everything can be achieved with hard work and people that are poor are there because of laziness.

The trait openness can also be divided into two traits: ascetics and intellect. The first one causes them to prefer things that are beautiful. The second one causes them to prefer the smart new solutions that will now solve all the problems, regardless of how the last smart new solution worked.

There was also a study that showed some of the other connections as well. Agreeable people are more likely to prefer liberal economics and conservative social policies. The people with high neuroticism prefer liberal, and the people with high extroversion prefer conservative. But all of these effects are smaller than the upper ones with conscientiousness and openness.

This is why it is hard to talk across political lines. I can see in the Slovenian politics, where there is hardly any talk across the political lines. It is like they are constantly talking across each other, with blaming each other why they can not see each other point of view.

But it is like how an extroverted and introverted person can have problems understand each other's position on the social interaction, so it is hard for the temperamentally different people to understand each other view. And in a democracy that is still very young (25 years) we had yet to develop a good way of holding dialog.

Maybe using the personality types, this dialog could be cast in a different light.

Individual vs. Group Evaluation: The Difference between the MBTI and The Big Five

There is one interesting difference between the MBTI and The Big Five system, which makes them more suitable for different applications. One of these differences is between individual and group evaluation.

In MBTI, the personal type depends on the evaluation of different aspects inside a person. I am an INTP, which means that I am using a lot more Ti and Ne functions that any other functions. Instead, an ISFP would be using an Se and Fi functions more than others.

But this doesn't tell anything about comparing against people. For example, the ISFP in question could still be a lot better in using Ti than I would be. There is nothing in the type that would tell me that. Or I could be better in using Se than he is.

The type only tells the relative strength inside a person.

The Big Five instead is evaluation each trait compared to a person. It is kind of like IQ, where a person's intelligence is compared to the intelligence of people with the same age. Here, in the Big Five, the traits are also compared to other people. So people high in agreeableness are more agreeable than other people on average.

But it does not tell which trait is the most important to a person. A highly disagreeable person could put this trait as a more important part of personality, even if the agreeableness score is actually low.

That is why, when it comes to the personal development, I prefer using MBTI, even though also The Big Five can be used. But when it comes to comparing people, for example in the recruitment process and so on, then The Big Five is a lot better choice.

The Big Five Personality Traits

The Big Five personality traits are currently the science preferred mode of studying personality traits. They came to these five traits through statistical analysis.

So, how does this work? It works based on the lexical hypothesis, which claims that any to-human important characteristic of the world in encoded in the human speech. So any important differences in the human personality would have a way to be expressed in the human language.

As somebody who also dabbles in the experimental phenomenology, I could context to this hypothesis, but I do believe that quite a lot of variation in human behavior is captured in the words that we use.

So, what the scientist did was to take all the words in the language that can describe a human's trait. So that would be words like nice, slovenly, hard-working, beautiful, intelligent,... In most case, because of the practical reasons, they only take the most frequent x words, where x is a number.

Then they give these words to people and tell them to rate themselves on the scale. So, foe example, I would rate myself high on intelligence, but low on social and so on. Then they used something called the factor analysis to see if there are some words that exhibit the same patter of change. One of that pattern would be, that people that describe themselves high on happy, will most likely also describe themselves high on smiling.

Usually, there are five patterns of words that come there:

First is extroversion. People that are high on extroversion are energetic, social, risk-taking, hedonistic, positive, assertive, dominant, uplifting and so on. There are the people that needs to be with other people and need to have something happening to them all the time.

The second is neuroticism. People that are high on neuroticism are negative, feel a lot of negative emotions, are fearful, nervous, sad, tense and anxious. These people see the danger in everything and want to be prepared for every eventual disaster.

The third is conscientiousness. People that are high on consciousnesses are hardworking, controlled, traditional, obedient, organized and so on. These people are usually these workaholics, that are miserable when they are stopped from doing the work.

The forth is agreeableness. People high in agreeableness are high in compassion, prosocial, altruistic, modest, prefer harmony, put other people in front of themselves and so on. These people are nice to talk to and they are the ones always willing to help in any way they can. They make people feel nice.

The fifth and last in openness. People high in openness are people that are original, com up with new ideas, question status quo, enjoy intellectual simulation and appreciate beauty.

Rearranging the first letters of these traits gives the acronym OCEAN.

People are then like the symphony of different notes that are the results of different traits. So, I am low on extroversion and agreeableness, so my song is going to not have extroverted and agreeableness notes, but will instead have introverted and disagreeable. In comparison, my openness is relatively high, so there are going to be a lot of openness notes in my music.

Other people would have different music. Some would be high extroversion and high agreeableness, or maybe all of the traits are middle ground, sometimes more expressed and sometimes less.

These traits also have a sub-traits, but while the five traits are quite accepted, there are a lot of different sub-traits divisions. Also, there are super-traits, where the extroversion, openness and neuroticism are grouped together and the agreeableness and conscientiousness are grouped together. Some people call them the plasticity and stability traits, but I have also seen them being called simply alpha and beta.

But these five traits can help with evaluation other people and are another useful tool for understanding people.

MBTI Typing: Robert Chase (House MD) - ISFJ

This one was one of the hardest one for me to type. In order to eliminate at least some types, I usually use different methods, some of them shown in this article series, to see what would be possible and what would be impossible. That way I can know where to look for. And usually there are patterns. For for Chase, the preliminary types were from INTP and ISTP to ESTJ and ISTJ. It did not help that some people on the internet think he is a Feeler type, the only things that seems to be more or less consistent about my preliminary evaluations. And thinking about it, they might be right, which made the whole problem even more moody. So, the last one in the series is Chase.

Robert Chase

So here I am also going to start with the temperament: so is he artistic (SP), logistic (SJ), idealistic (NF) or knowledgeable (NT) person. I think we can rule out the SP and the NF types, as he does not seem like it. So it ends up with either SJ or NT temperament.

So, comparing the function. So is he more judging, appraising and establishing values (Fi) or validating, affirming and relating (Fe)? In this case I would go with Fi, as he is much more likely to have his own set of values and he judges people based on this. His hatred for the nuns, the fat people and his father seems to be the indication of that. So it is Fi on this point. On the other hand, he is pretty lenient on the House and goes along with quite a lot of things, which could indicate both Fe and Fi. On the other hand, is he more likely to be regulating, planning and reinforcing (Te) or naming, defining and understanding (Ti)? Here I would go with the Te as well, thought it seems to me that Te would be a bit less seen that Fi. But for now, lets just say that he is either a xxTJ or xxFP, maybe xxFJ.

The next one on the list are perceiving functions. Is he more likely to be engaging experiencing and enjoying (Se) or implementing, verifying and accounting (Si)? Here I would go with the Si, one of the things is that he is connecting more things directly to his past, indicating Si. Also, in these things he is more similar to the Cameron and Foreman, than to House or Wilson. And then, he is, in my opinion, more likely to be entertaining, envisioning and enabling (Ne), than imagining, knowing and divining (Ni). He is pretty good with coming up with ideas, and he is much more likely to pursue different options than one, one thing that I noticed in the Vogler part of the first season. So that makes him either either xSxJ or xNxP.

So, combing this two together, he is either a xNFP, xSFJ or xSTJ. Together with the upper temperament information, he is more likely to be a xSTJ or xSFJ than xNFP.

Now, looking at the letters, he is much more concerned with the action than with options (J), and he is also more an inward person, thinking about it and not just reacting to outside information (I). Then there is a question about use and meaning. This one is a bit harder, but I would be a bit more leaning toward the meaning than use (F?). And then it is the concept vs. the concrete situation. Here, I would be leaning more toward the concept than to the concrete (N?). SO that would be INFJ. But he is not an INFJ.

Looking at his general actions, he seems to be more of an introvert than extrovert, so I read the descriptions of the ISTJ, ISFJ, INFP and INFJ type. In that way, I could quickly eliminate the INFP and INFJ types. So I was left with the ISxJ, which could be either ISFJ or ISTJ. So far, I am leaning more toward the ISFJ than ISTJ.

But looking at the description of the function, it is either affirming or planing. And he seems more like the planing than affirming guy, which would put him in the ISTJ camp.

Now there are differences in the function between the ISTJ and ISFJ camp.

type 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
ISTJ Si Te Fi Ne Se Ti Fe Ni
ISFJ Si Fe Ti Ne Se Fi Te Ni

This means that the difference between these is in how they relate to people and not the function that create their personal identity. At least according to the Beebe's theory. So, according to Beebe's theory, the second and six function is how people take care and stop other people, while the third (and seventh) is how they would like to be taken care of. This would make me think he is more of an ISFJ than ISTJ guy as well. He uses Fi to try and stop people, he seems to be most put down when his ideas are ignored (possible Ti) and he is more affirming to other people (Fe) than taking care of them with creating systems (Te).

So, for now I am going to say ISFJ, but his is one case I am certainly not sure of.