Blake's 7

[Jonathan]

I wanted to comment on this interesting thread, but the title doesn't highlight that it's about Blake's 7:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...9-INTp-vs-INTj

I think it provides some good insights into the characters. Looks as if Blake's 7 was a really good show...I don't know why I never heard about it before. It's like an "anti StarTrek." Although a lot of plot details are illogical, the characters are great. (Most episodes seem to be available on youtube or twitvid.com.)

The analysis in the above thread seems good but lacking in detail....In what way is Blake unable to connect in an Fe manner? How does he use Ti to compensate?

Curious what type people think Servalan is, or what to make of her ambiguous relationship with Avon. (Despite her cold-bloodedness, SEE was my first guess; the fact that she's the villain may distort her personality, as compared to a real person.)

For convenience, I'll copy what was said below:

I don't know if anyone has seen Blake's 7. But it has a really good portrayal of LII and ILI.

I thought I would post this because I just realized it's a really good representation of ILI vs LII that shows why profiles and dichotomies are mostly a suggestion. Please excuse the dramatic music.

Here's a short example.
YouTube - "Blake's 7" - The Story of Avon & Blake

Blake has all the fittings of a standard ILI.

His serious intuition (Ni) plays everything as it comes in the moment while trying to fulfill a vision of morality of the world represented through a moral code of Fi. His whole motivation in the series is to fight the injustice of the federation. Even when he has the opportunity to escape it all and live a comfortable life, he doesn't even consider doing so. I would also say that his Ni-base is created at the beginning of the series due to the events that unfolded regarding himself and the federation.

His Te then naturally becomes his tool to help him achieve all this. It's truly his creative function.

But the downside for him in seeing everything in terms of Te supporting leaves him unable to interact with the world in an Fe manner. Since he constantly seeks Te to accomplish his goals (and achieves them, reinforcing his Te), the value of Fe becomes meaningless for him. Instead he is left to use his demonstrative function Ti to demonstrate any emotional connections he may wish to convey. By explaining the internal logical motivations of his Te (backed by Fi) he is able to express what his PoLR is unable to.

And Avon has the standard workings of an LII.

We can start to see this by first examining his Ti+Fe functions. His first method of interaction with the world and everyone around him is to fit everything into some kind of non-contradictory logical system. This is the natural function or constitution of what Ti really is. And rather it's the fact that human nature is often contradictory that leads to his often humorous comments regarding the other members. He expresses such things with his Fe which is almost always of a weak nature. In fact, for him, it's just a tool for amusement and nothing else which from what I've witnessed and read is the common basic definition for Fe in an LII.

Also, we can see that he takes an Ne-creative stance in how he decides to feed his Ti function, preferring to look at the likely possible consequences of what might happen before taking action. He's often seen being very negative about anything that the other crew wants to do, often reminding them of the high likelihood of being wrong or failing to reach their goals the way they desire. Because of this he is almost always reluctant to take any action. Se naturally becomes his weak point and one he never appreciates Blake constantly giving him.

And from this Se-PoLR that he has we become aware of the Ni-demonstrative that results from carefully considering the likely consequences (Ne) that will result in a situation. He is at one point remarked at as saying "Don't you ever get tired of being right?" and he says something along the lines of "No, but I do get tired of everyone being wrong."

It can also be seen that due to the nature of everything above, Avon also inevitably expresses Si of a nature that considers it of most value when he sees the high likelihood of failure given a certain action in a situation. He often fantasizes briefly about riches and comfort he could have if he stole certain technologies or abandoned Blake. He never does though. Maybe this would be best described as the Fi role function that sees benefit in not betraying friends, as if to logically imply that basic morals have their own logical benefit. This would go along with what I said about the role function being something someone uses as long as it is seen as useful and beneficial to that person. In this case, I would say it is considered beneficial to him since Blake helped him escape ending up in a prison and does provide some kind of security of friendship.

Anyway, for anyone that's seen this show, what do you think? What would you add or change?

I also want to add that the demonstrative function can be well understood in this case as something that evolves unconsciously from the creative function, more naturally in response to the PoLR. It's not really supposed to be something that the person is aware of. And I know some of you will most likely disagree with the following given the difficulty of catering to and expressing the different semantics of how this function can be interpreted, but...

For ILI it's more of a need to express the logical/moral motivations and consistency of their actions to justify the means with the end, rather than design logical constructs. For them, it's supposed to happen while haphazardly gathering data in response to the Ni (Fi envisioned) base filter.

For LII it's more of a need to show the illogical/immoral motivations and consistency of their actions to redesign an appropriate logical construct and follow actions that make the most sense, justifying the end with the means, rather than the means with the end.

[Jonathan]

(actually, maybe I should have put this in the "Famous People's" thread? I forgot where fictional characters go....)

[Radio]

Off-topic:

I hear this song playing in my head every time I read/hear someone say "Blake":

[krieger]

i don't see Avon being the most typical INTj; he's too openly confrontation seeking for that. it's not unlikely for INTjs to have passive-aggressive stance like his, but they wouldn't voice their negative thoughts the way he does. i think he is more likely some Beta NF type.

of course the usual disclaimer of "it's just fiction" also applies here.

[InkStrider]

Is Avon LII? He does seem rather LSI-ish in that one vid. The impression I got was that he had strong rather than weak Se.

[Jonathan]

i don't see Avon being the most typical INTj; he's to openly confrontation seeking for that. it's not unlikely for INTjs to have passive-aggressive stance like his, but they wouldn't voice their negative thoughts the way he does. i think he is more likely some Beta NF type.

of course the usual disclaimer of "it's just fiction" also applies here.

Yeah, he's not typical. That's what makes him interesting. But neither was Robespierre typical. These are somewhat demented characters. But I still think LII seems correct for him, largely for his focused, controlled, Ij stance. I can't see him as either IEI or EIE. The writers use his character to make a lot of wise cracks, but they still seem to be coming from the mouth of an LII.

EIE seems possible for Servalan. I've only seen a little bit, so I'm not sure about her type.

[Jonathan]

Is Avon LII? He does seem rather LSI-ish in that one vid. The impression I got was that he had strong rather than weak Se.

Well he certainly tends to take control a lot. I guess there's a question about whether that's strong Se or not. Not sure what Kramer had in mind when saying Avon has weak Se, but perhaps the idea is that his aggressiveness comes more out of a sort of paranoia rather than a sense of confidence about what's going on around him.

[krieger]

explain to me how you can suspend disbelief to the point of having a Se-PoLR character be pointedly confrontational and verbally forward, yet dismiss two beta NF types out of hand without even inventing a justification.

[InkStrider]

Well he certainly tends to take control a lot. I guess there's a question about whether that's strong Se or not. Not sure what Kramer had in mind when saying Avon has weak Se, but perhaps the idea is that his aggressiveness comes more out of a sort of paranoia rather than a sense of confidence about what's going on around him.

I honestly do not see weak Se. He would be what I would call a good example of an Se-LSI. He comes off as ambitious, cut-throat, cool, calculated and steady. As if he had every Ne possibility taken care of, and that all there remains is one certain course of action.

What Kramer said:

Also, we can see that he takes an Ne-creative stance in how he decides to feed his Ti function, preferring to look at the likely possible consequences of what might happen before taking action. He's often seen being very negative about anything that the other crew wants to do, often reminding them of the high likelihood of being wrong or failing to reach their goals the way they desire. Because of this he is almost always reluctant to take any action. Se naturally becomes his weak point and one he never appreciates Blake constantly giving him.

"Looking at the likely possible consequences of what might happen before taking action" does not an Ne ego make. It is a common misconception that Ne polr = close-mindedness and the inability to consider alternative courses of actions, when they have simply ticked off the improbable ones to focus on the most probable scenario to make happen.

And from this Se-PoLR that he has we become aware of the Ni-demonstrative that results from carefully considering the likely consequences (Ne) that will result in a situation. He is at one point remarked at as saying "Don't you ever get tired of being right?" and he says something along the lines of "No, but I do get tired of everyone being wrong."

As we see here, Kramer made a good observation, but have attributed it to the wrong function. Ne isn't likely consequence, that would fall under the realm of Ni. As for the latter quote, that could be said of both Ti leading types.

Not too certain about Blake either, as he seems to be rather too softly ethical to be ILI. EII is a good possibility.

[Jonathan]

explain to me how you can suspend disbelief to the point of having a Se-PoLR character be pointedly confrontational and verbally forward, yet dismiss two beta NF types out of hand without even inventing a justification.

The justification I gave is temperament. You can't have an Ij Beta NF. There's something very tightly wound, precise, and controlled about him. He doesn't come off as a soft, dreamy, IEI sort of person. He seems too detail-oriented and anti-social to be EIE. I can see someone being a psychopathic EIE, but someone who would rather ignore the "people" issues and focus on computers and logic is harder to see as that type.

Another reason to rule out Fe-ego types for him is that he doesn't solve his problems with Fe. He doesn't manipulate or try to influence people with Fe; mostly his wise cracks are for the audience's benefit. He thinks of a plan that he thinks will work, and he tends to prefer to leave other people out of it. He may exude some Fe, but that doesn't seem to be his principle means of accomplishing an objective.

LII is Kramer's typing for him. I can't answer for Kramer, but as I said, I suspect the justification there was that the confrontational nature comes from a sense of paranoia.

This is a common issue of debate: How can certain people who have been typed as possibly LII be confrontational? ....This leads to the question of whether Robespierre was LSI. Similarly, there were some threads that maybe Ganin is LSI rather than LII. I'm not sure whether being confrontational means the person is Se, but it's possible.

I can see LSI as a possibility. Beta NF is harder. Actually, if the case against LII is that his being confrontational means strong Se, then that would tend to rule out IEI and EIE also. One would need to see evidence of "Se seeking" for those types.

[krieger]

it's valued Ni/Se, not strong Se. LSI is basically a worse typing than INTj. you two are both making the idiot mistake of thinking having Se in one's ego block makes one a kind of super-person when in reality there are major downsides. what Avon does, throughout the series, is indicative of strong N, not strong S. it's all about expressing himself with refinement, imagining out of all the possible things to say the most psychologically undermining and devising cunning plans that take time to come to fruition. all things LSIs are legendarily bad at.

here's a better fictional representation of ISxJ in science fiction...



the complete opposite in every respect i just mentioned. and you guys are saying the characters depict the same type. how much more obvious an inconsistency does it take to knock you to your senses?

...

[krieger]

btw, can any of you actually point me at an instance where the guy actually USES Se rather than just goading people into what would potentially become a confrontation? can you show me an instance where he actually stands his ground and defends himself rather than tap dancing around a fight? of course not. because the guy isn't about direct confrontation. he snipes people from afar through his words. it's not Se. there's a difference.

[InkStrider]

it's all about expressing himself with refinement, imagining out of all the possible things to say the most psychologically undermining and devising cunning plans that take time to come to fruition. all things LSIs are legendarily bad at.

btw, can any of you actually point me at an instance where the guy actually USES Se rather than just goading people into what would potentially become a confrontation? can you show me an instance where he actually stands his ground and defends himself rather than tap dancing around a fight? of course not. because the guy isn't about direct confrontation. he snipes people from afar through his words. it's not Se. there's a difference.

That's interesting. I've not seen the entire series, only the little in that one video. What would you type Avon as?

[krieger]

something with Ni.

[Jonathan]

you two are both making the idiot mistake of thinking having Se in one's ego block makes one a kind of super-person when in reality there are major downsides.

Well, to be fair, I said I thought he's LII, but that LSI is possible. I would never say that an Se-ego-block person is a kind of super-person.

btw, can any of you actually point me at an instance where the guy actually USES Se rather than just goading people into what would potentially become a confrontation?

Possibly when he shoots people or points a gun at them and tells them what to do...or when he threatens to kill people if they don't comply with his wishes. I assumed that was the confrontational side of his personality that people thought was Se. I'm not saying it is, but that's the confrontational side of him.

I haven't seen many episodes, so I haven't seen him goad other people into confrontation, except for some arguing with Blake, or making a deadpan comment about the situation at hand.

[Jonathan]

A typical example of Avon's behavior is when they're stranded on Terminal, and that friendly guy comes and saves his friends, and then he has the guy at gun-point all the way, because he wants to be absolutely sure he's in control. He's not trying to goad anyone into anything; he just is too afraid of what people might do to let them act freely. He wise-cracks "no good deed goes unpunished," but I don't see that as necessarily Fe.

[Jonathan]

Maybe part of the difficulty in typing Avon (or any film character), is that you have three things influencing type:
* The actor's type / VI
* The concept of the character in the story
* The writer's type

Perhaps the actor and the concept of the character as this reclusive, obsessive, controlling computer hacker point more toward IxTj, whereas some of the clever remarks may point elsewhere based on the writers' types.

[InkStrider]

Maybe part of the difficulty in typing Avon (or any film character), is that you have three things influencing type:
* The actor's type / VI
* The concept of the character in the story
* The writer's type

Perhaps the actor and the concept of the character as this reclusive, obsessive, controlling computer hacker point more toward IxTj, whereas some of the clever remarks may point elsewhere based on the writers' types.

Regardless of these, it is the overall gist and quadra values that is to be taken into account- What the writer and actor is attempting to portray. One could come up with various typings according to different intentions/statements/actions made, but that isn't the point.

I can't answer for Kramer, but as I said, I suspect the justification there was that the confrontational nature comes from a sense of paranoia.

Paranoia or not, he is unafraid of confrontation and welcomes it rather. Which points away from Ne creative.

btw, can any of you actually point me at an instance where the guy actually USES Se rather than just goading people into what would potentially become a confrontation? can you show me an instance where he actually stands his ground and defends himself rather than tap dancing around a fight?

Actually, there are scenes of him physically fighting. In anycase, I think that the idea of Se types as physically confrontational is overrated.

[Absurd]

Soup

You watch a lot of baby programmes. Are you a baby?

[Jonathan]

Paranoia or not, he is unafraid of confrontation and welcomes it rather. Which points away from Ne creative.

Well this is one of the everlasting questions in Socionics...whether confrontation is Se and welcoming it is Se-valuing. ...or if Se has more to do with a concrete awareness of the external environment.

Interestingly, the Russian Socionists tend to agree that Robespierre was LII, yet he seemed rather confrontational in the extreme.

[InkStrider]

Well this is one of the everlasting questions in Socionics...whether confrontation is Se and welcoming it is Se-valuing. ...or if Se has more to do with a concrete awareness of the external environment.

Interestingly, the Russian Socionists tend to agree that Robespierre was LII, yet he seemed rather confrontational in the extreme.

You do have a point. It wouldn't make sense that all LIIs are afraid of confrontation. Physical confrontation, perhaps. Intellectual confrontation, not so much. Then again, it really depends on the LII. If he has a black belt in martial arts, he would be unlikely to be afraid of physical aggression. If he isn't well-versed in theoretical physics, he is unlikely to aggressively push his opinions as to that either.

That said, my own observation of Se egos is that they do possess a certain physicality/immediateness to their actions, which does stand out in comparison to a person with weak Se. It doesn't necessarily have to result in aggressiveness, but does manifest as speed of reactivity/impulsiveness when it comes to Se leading types, and a certain.. deliberateness/sharpness where Se creatives are concerned.

[Crispy]

INFj PoLR (-Se): Finds it difficult to attack others. (Confrontation)
INTj PoLR (+Se): Finds it difficult to defend self/others and gaining allies (Networking).

The power sensing (F):
Positive (+Se): the maintenance of balance, the desire for a strong, seeking an ally, defending. Maximization of power.
negative (-Se): the opposing force, confrontational, attacking, threatening. Minimization of weakness.

The power sensing (F):
Proactive (+Se) = maneuvering
reactive (-Se) = suppression.

Se Base:
5. FR - FL:
Better politician (SEE) defends, eliminates the tension between the conflicting sides (+ F). Marshal (SLE) rather attacks, acts on the vulnerabilities that removes weak (-F).

Source: http://translate.googleusercontent.c...iGVm2VrAAd5OyA

Both bad at both, but only one strikes conscious fear into each.

[Jonathan]

INFj PoLR (-Se): Finds it difficult to attack others. (Confrontation)
INTj PoLR (+Se): Finds it difficult to defend self/others and gaining allies (Networking).

Going on those Gulenko-version definitions at least, LII is still possible for Avon, based on the few episodes I saw. It appears that his leadership is based on his intelligence, not networking ability. He relies a lot on having a gun to keep things together.

[strangeling]

After having read about a reboot of this, thought I'd see what people thought about the old show.

Agree that Avon was pretty Ti. He's always critical about doing anything and only wants to get involved, if he gets something out of it. Always clashes with Blake that does things because he feels it's the right thing to do. It's kind of a funny theatrical look at how Fi and Ti clash, at least on a purely philosophical level.