INTJoe
11-27-2007, 09:33 PM
So I'm watching "Casino Royale" last night and some thoughts occured to me.
Obviously, nobody close to James Bond actually exists in real life. I think we can all agree on that. He makes for a great character in movies, but it is purely fantastical. He is inhuman. I started trying to prove this theory to myself via MBTI deduction and a few things occured to me. I found the "holes" in his character.
He is both "E" and "I". And I don't mean he's a centrist. I mean he swings from extreme I to extreme E. A man who has no problem chilling alone and contemplating things. At the flip of a switch, he can thrust himself into a packed room and schmooze and charm the pants off people.
He is both "N" and "S". He is superbly intuitive, but he also understands small details and facts. He can operate high-tech stuff or a bulldozer at the drop of a pin. He definitely can see both the "big picture" and the small details simultaneously. He does lean more "N" when it comes to being obedient, as he is pretty much very disobedient. But he's also very S.
He is both "J" and "P". He can strategize the most delicate and risky of tasks and yet when his environment changes right before him, he can make split-decision judgements and manipulate his plan on the fly. I'd assume he leans more "J" more often than "P". He definitely likes closure, and does not allow himself to become distracted. Even by the most beautiful woman.
The only thing I think is consistent about him is that he's definitely a "T" rather than an "F". His decisions are all made to satisfy logic or a plan of some sort. Never does he make a decision based on the people around him. He's a cold, calculating killer.
Anybody have any other thoughts on this or examples?
Obviously, nobody close to James Bond actually exists in real life. I think we can all agree on that. He makes for a great character in movies, but it is purely fantastical. He is inhuman. I started trying to prove this theory to myself via MBTI deduction and a few things occured to me. I found the "holes" in his character.
He is both "E" and "I". And I don't mean he's a centrist. I mean he swings from extreme I to extreme E. A man who has no problem chilling alone and contemplating things. At the flip of a switch, he can thrust himself into a packed room and schmooze and charm the pants off people.
He is both "N" and "S". He is superbly intuitive, but he also understands small details and facts. He can operate high-tech stuff or a bulldozer at the drop of a pin. He definitely can see both the "big picture" and the small details simultaneously. He does lean more "N" when it comes to being obedient, as he is pretty much very disobedient. But he's also very S.
He is both "J" and "P". He can strategize the most delicate and risky of tasks and yet when his environment changes right before him, he can make split-decision judgements and manipulate his plan on the fly. I'd assume he leans more "J" more often than "P". He definitely likes closure, and does not allow himself to become distracted. Even by the most beautiful woman.
The only thing I think is consistent about him is that he's definitely a "T" rather than an "F". His decisions are all made to satisfy logic or a plan of some sort. Never does he make a decision based on the people around him. He's a cold, calculating killer.
Anybody have any other thoughts on this or examples?