Again, perhaps
?
Christopher Columbus
Again, perhaps
Jew.
BTW, why no "What's my Type?" thread?
Please don't tell me you just used 'Jew' as a derogatory term. That's the height of poor imagination. It's also something a fuckwit would say.
It was moved, and rightly so. I made a mistake.
Fuckwit, I'm Jewish.Originally Posted by Ezra
http://www.fortunecity.com/millenium...bus_jewish.htm
Don't call me a fuckwit. I made a valid assumption based on the extremely limited amount of words you gave me.Fuckwit, I'm Jewish.
So calling someone a Jew is automatically assumed to be an insult in the UK?Don't call me a fuckwit. I made a valid assumption based on the extremely limited amount of words you gave me.Fuckwit, I'm Jewish.
There is no reliable contemporary painting of Columbus, by the way.
As for his type, based on a broad-brush impression of him, I would guess ENFj.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
No.
So calling someone a Jew is automatically assumed to be an insult in the UK?
I don't find it particularly insulting as such, but if someone said to me 'you fucking Jew' after I'd said something they disagreed with, it would be basically saying that there is something wrong with being a Jew. We have a variety of others, here in Britain. Here's another: "you sweaty Arab". Using my logic, I could only assume that it's based on European superiority - the fact that we are more civilised and more technologically advanced than those that reside in Saudi Arabia.So calling someone a Jew is automatically assumed to be an insult in the UK?
Wouldn't his overpowering desire to discover a new continent suggest Ne as a leading function?
He wasn't even thinking about that. He died without realizing he had discovered a new continent. Columbus was the luckiest fool in history.
What I see in him - again, from a broad-brush perspective - is more
I didn't say that. :/ I was just saying something that was even easier to believe than ANY conclusion about his personality. If you're gonna type dead people, it'd be best to stick to the ones who lived at least within 200 years or so.I don't find it particularly insulting as such, but if someone said to me 'you fucking Jew'So calling someone a Jew is automatically assumed to be an insult in the UK?
That's totally arbitrary. What matters is the amount of evidence available, not the time.
Not a firm cut off, but people who lived 250, 400, 2000 years ago... there's usually not much to go on.That's totally arbitrary. What matters is the amount of evidence available, not the time.
I knew you'd come back with that. I never claimed you did so, I was merely expressing a sentiment which was relevant to your aforementioned statement.
I see. You were being witty. Sorry, I missed that.I was just saying something that was even easier to believe than ANY conclusion about his personality.
Why? Afraid of the challenge of uncertainty and speculation?If you're gonna type dead people, it'd be best to stick to the ones who lived at least within 200 years or so.
Not "afraid"; I wouldn't call it a "challenge" any more then trying to shoot a bulls-eye while blind-folded and dizzy.
I agree with Rocky to this extent: If you have evidence about someone - written by people who actually knew that person, and enough of that - then it's reasonable to think you can accurately type them. But after 400 years or so there might be very little of that kind of evidence. You might have lots of books written about someone a long time after he/she died, but that information is filtered through both the author and whomever the author read/heard it from. I think it becomes more questionable in most cases the longer it's been. Of course some historical figures had lots written about them at the time they lived by people who knew them, and those cases would be exceptions.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
What, so in 1000 years time, when we attempt to type Tony Blair, it will get more and more obscure?
Whose gonna give a fuck about Tony Blair in 1000 years?
But to answer you, yes, of course.
You both disagree on whether or not there is sufficient information to type Columus. Ezra, I doubt Rocky is going to respond to your attempts to provoke him into making a guess just so you can try to "prove" him wrong. So move on with your life.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
+2 (although I'm a bit leery of this new Rocky version 2.0Whose gonna give a fuck about Tony Blair in 1000 years?)
As I said, I think ENFj is a good guess. We know what he did, his obsessions, his m.o., there are letters.
I wasn't trying to say I thought there was no info; I was just commenting on their interaction.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
On Columbus, we do know this:
- he pursued energically, relentlessly, one single idea, over a long period of time, consistently, no matter the odds. Extrovert.
- he pursued one constant vision, one constant idea, rather than try different things. Obsessed with wealth and status, pursuing that again relentlessly. Ni-Se rather than Ne-Si.
- he ignored the facts that were presented to him, which were the state of the knowledge - the size of the Earth, known for thousands of years - in favor of his own absurd notion that the Earh was much smaller, no matter what everyone else was saying. He died thinking that the islands off the American continent were close to Asia. Ti>Te, and reinforcing Ni>Ne.
- his reports on those islands were an incredible load of bullshit and rhetoric, and wild exaggeration. Low Te.
So, so far we have Beta extravert.
His approach to facts and to external evidence seems more like Te role than Te as 8th function.
ENFj makes sense.
That's a good bit of analysis that is, Expat.
Based solely on what I read on wikipedia, ENFj.
Something else to consider. Kristiina once said that she saw herself as either "winning big or losing big". That is often the "good side" and the "bad side" of ENFjs.
Despite what some historical "conspiracy theorists" say, as far as I know there is no evidence that Columbus even suspected that there was something between Europe and Asia across the Atlantic and the Pacific. So the only thing that saved him and his expedition from self-destruction was the incredible luck that the American continent (and islands thereof, more to the point) "happened to exist".
Columbus was a visionary. His vision was totally flawed and had nothing to do with reality. He gambled his life - and that of others - on that flawed vision. Yet he succeeded, in a way totally unexpected and never understood by himself.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote