General David Petraeus

[glam]

yup, that's petraeus, not phaedrus.

I think he's intuitive, logical, and rational

LII or LIE? or something else?









video

http://youtube.com/watch?v=n40pjtEtIp0

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nKTD-gjpAN8

[Park]

Lie > Lii

^ wtf? I write all caps and it comes out like this. ^

[implied]

Lie > Lii

i agree. looks a little like timoshenko in the 2nd pic.

[machintruc]

+1

[Expat]

I saw the two videos, and to me he's LSE>>LIE.

His arguments are all Te, but it's Si>Ni. Especially in the second interview, she asks questions from a Ni perspective, which he either answers with Si and Te, or basically shrugs. His inclination is to get into detailed physical descriptions of markets, etc.

[Park]

I was going to say LIE > LSE > LII, but I wasn't sure and I didn't see the second video.

[Expat]

There's a point when she asks him for an evaluation of how things are proceeding, how long does he think it's going to take, etc. He answers with something like "well all we can do is concentrate on the task at hand". That's a LSE giveaway.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

There's a point when she asks him for an evaluation of how things are proceeding, how long does he think it's going to take, etc. He answers with something like "well all we can do is concentrate on the task at hand". That's a LSE giveaway.

Just out of curiosity, would you tend to say LSE rather than SLI because he tends to use more Te than Si rather than other way round?

[Park]

Yeah, I just saw the 2nd one. I see what you mean, he does sort of skip the point of the last questions which is either due to weak Ni or he doesn't have an answer.

[Expat]

Just out of curiosity, would you tend to say LSE rather than SLI because he tends to use more Te than Si rather than other way round?

SLI isn't impossible, but he seems more EJ than IP to me, and rational rather than irrational. Also, I think a SLI would be inclined to at least say something more about his views of the trends (Ni role), rather than more or less shrug it off (Ni PoLR).

[Expat]

Yeah, I just saw the 2nd one. I see what you mean, he does sort of skip the point of the last questions which is either due to weak Ni or he doesn't have an answer.

Yeah, but in my opinion a Ni type would answer it differently, rather than say "all we can do is to concentrate on the task at hand", even without knowing the answer (unless, of course, that was an "official" ready-made answer, in which case type analyses lose their value).

[Park]

Yeah, but in my opinion a Ni type would answer it differently, rather than say "all we can do is to concentrate on the task at hand", even without knowing the answer

You are probably right.

[aestrivex]

yup, that's petraeus, not phaedrus.

phaedrus is ISTp ron jeremy subtype ashton says so discuss