Erwin Rommel

[Ezra]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel

I sense some Se.

[Expat]

Perhaps LSI.

[Ezra]

The introductory section is worth a read; gives some basic insight into him. Admirable person. The rest is all fact-based and simply elaborates on the first section using said facts, and so would provide no opinion of him, more just what he's done, where he's gone, who he's been around etc.

[Creepy-bg]

was he the nazi that liked playing with tanks?

[munenori2]

was he the nazi that liked playing with tanks?

In giant sandboxes, yes.

[Ezra]

He wasn't a Nazi. He wasn't even a fascist. Just a fantastic military commander.

[discojoe]

It would have been more admirable for him to not wage war on behalf of Germany.

[Logos]

It would have been more admirable for him to not wage war on behalf of Germany.

It would have been more admirable if there was not a war to fight in at all and when we do not have a choice as to where we are born, good people find themselves seemingly arbitrarily assigned to opposing sides. Virtue or admiration should not be devalued or valued by the side, but by the man and the life.

[Dioklecian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel

I sense some Se.

Esfj was my decision last time I tried to type him. I will try again.

[implied]

Esfj was my decision last time I tried to type him. I will try again.

try again.

[munenori2]

ST, Beta > Delta. Thinking ISTj. Unfortunate way to go.

[Dioklecian]

try again.

I am happy actually. It's either INTJ or ESFJ, ESFJ is it I think.

[Ezra]

Alpha? Why Alpha? I thought excellent military commanders were, by definition, Se valuing.

[XoX]

Alpha? Why Alpha? I thought excellent military commanders were, by definition, Se valuing.

No.

[Expat]

Alpha? Why Alpha? I thought excellent military commanders were, by definition, Se valuing.

I think strong Se types of Alpha and Delta can also be excellent military commanders. For instance, I think Dwight Eisenhower was LSE (how "excellent" he was is another discussion) and I'm convinced that Ulysses Grant was SLI.

[Ezra]

No.

Explain yourself then. Otherwise your contribution is pointless.

For instance, I think Dwight Eisenhower was LSE[...].

He's another example of an MBTT INTJ typed as an LSE (Schwarzenegger being the other). Perhaps there's something fruitful in this idea.

[XoX]

Explain yourself then. Otherwise your contribution is pointless.

There is no more point in saying that all excellent military commanders are by definition Se valuing than saying all intelligent people are by definition NT types. For example ESTjs would easily be excellent commanders. As do ESFjs. Even if they don't value Se. Any type can make an excellent military commander. Their style of leadership would just be very different. And their motivations for becoming a military commander would be different. E.g. an INTj wouldn't likely be a military commander because they want to conquer people for fun but for some deeper ideological reason.

[discojoe]

It would have been more admirable if there was not a war to fight in at all and when we do not have a choice as to where we are born, good people find themselves seemingly arbitrarily assigned to opposing sides. Virtue or admiration should not be devalued or valued by the side, but by the man and the life.

Or the things he did, like wage war on behalf of Germany.

[Logos]

Or the things he did, like wage war on behalf of Germany.

So what would you propose he do? To what standards are you holding him here? Yes, he fought on behalf of Germany in World War 2, but war is war and I do not see why he should be vilified for fighting for the Germans anymore than Patton should somehow be praised for fighting for the Americans, although he had no real control over his nationality of birth or where the leaders of his nation points the guns of the military.

[discojoe]

So what would you propose he do?

Well, I don't know what was really going on through his head. If anywhere in the back of his mind he was having doubts about his actions and the path that Germany was taking, but went along with it out of a stoic sense of duty, then he was a murderer and should have either defected or killed himself (which he did, for other reasons). But if he actually believed he was doing the right thing, then he didn't do anything wrong.

[Logos]

Well, I don't know what was really going on through his head. If anywhere in the back of his mind he was having doubts about his actions and the path that Germany was taking, but went along with it out of a stoic sense of duty, then he was a murderer and should have either defected or killed himself (which he did, for other reasons). But if he actually believed he was doing the right thing, then he didn't do anything wrong.

Why is the second point permissible but not the first?

[discojoe]

Why is the second point permissible but not the first?

Because the first instance he knows he is doing something wrong, and only goes along with it out of a sense of duty, and in the second one he has no reservations at all and is totally convinced has the moral high ground.

[Logos]

Because the first instance he knows he is doing something wrong, and only goes along with it out of a sense of duty, and in the second one he has no reservations at all and is totally convinced has the moral high ground.

Is that not just as morally reprehensible?

[discojoe]

Is that not just as morally reprehensible?

What goes on in his head determines the reprehensibility of his actions.

[Logos]

What goes on in his head determines the reprehensibility of his actions.

But can a distinction of moral hierarchy of thought be as so basic as you make it out to be? Can or would there not be other factors to consider?

[meatburger]

I just read the Wiki Article. Im getting all my information on him according to the wiki

He seemed like a man with honour. He wasn't a Nazi just a german. It states that he refused ******s orders to murder the jews and he treated his POW's very well. He also had respect for his adversaries and tried to wage a "war without hate". He buried one of the allied commanders with full millitary honours etc.

Im not very good at typing him though. Seems to possess Se i think. He seemed to be a very very agressive commander, and his sheer agressiveness supprised the hell out of the Allies and won him many victories. I felt quite sad reading about him,and that they left him to kill himself. When they came back and he was sobbing in the car. I can just imagine him sitting there.

Hilter considered him one of his most favourite generals until he was suspected to be plotting ******s death (probablly unlikely). Many people seem to think ****** was ENFj so i suppose ISTj would make some sense. He looks like an ISTj to me. I just talked to my ISTj dad about him and he has respect for him

[discojoe]

But can a distinction of moral hierarchy of thought be as so basic as you make it out to be? Can or would there not be other factors to consider?

Yeah, it can be multi-faceted, but I just have a hard time seeing the gray areas when it comes to fighting for ******.

[Logos]

Yeah, it can be multi-faceted, but I just have a hard time seeing the gray areas when it comes to fighting for ******.

But was he fighting for ****** or for Germany?

[discojoe]

But was he fighting for ****** or for Germany?

No idea, but consciously trying to separate the two in that instance seems pretty immoral to me.

[Logos]

No idea, but consciously trying to separate the two in that instance seems pretty immoral to me.

Any more immoral than separating the moral action "Because the first instance he knows he is doing something wrong, and only goes along with it out of a sense of duty, and in the second one he has no reservations at all and is totally convinced has the moral high ground"? And if you read in this authoritative biography HERE () about Rommel, you can see that his deeds in the war and "fighting for Germany/******" is not as clear cut of a distinction as seem to be trying to make.

[munenori2]

But if he actually believed he was doing the right thing, then he didn't do anything wrong.

Are all certain people moral?

It seems like under this light, ****** would be ok, so long as he thought he was doing right, but Rommel if he harbored doubts but opposed the pervading moral transgresses would not be. This seems backwards to me.

[Ezra]

I just started reading his biography. I'm pretty sure he is an SLE.

[Ezra]

Oh, and if anyone is interested, I think he is an 8w7 sp/sx or sx/sp. (Oh look, how convenient, Ezra is typing a brilliant commander as the same as him...)

[Warlord]

I just started reading his biography. I'm pretty sure he is an SLE.

I agree.

[strrrng]

Yeah. SLE works. And the enneagram proposal seems right, as well (maybe even 8w9?).

[Creepy-male]

A big issue in typing an military commander is whether they excelled with strategy or tactics.

Strategy is concerned with long term plans, campaigns, and goals. Strategic warfare is concerned with having victories that lead a person closer to the plan, campaign objective, or goal. Sometimes a "Strategic Victory" is not always a "Tactical Victory". An example of this is a commander who can capture an weapons plant, helping secure a valuable strategic asset, but in the process he loses alot of men and weaponry himself, making it a tactical loss. Strategic warfare is the forte' of MBTI xNTx, especially xNTj types - or Kiersey "Rationals" or "Coordinator Rationals", this is why they type Eisenhower as an INTj because he masterplanned the entire normandy invasion and developed many far-out creative ideas to keep a solid supply line immediately after the invasion.

Tactics are more concerned with dealing the present situation in such a way to come out on top. Tactical warfare takes place on "the line" and is concerned with winning victories in the most immediate sense. It require less strict planning and more skill at practical adaptation. For this reason most MBTI and Kiersey people type brilliant tacticians as "xSTp" types or "Artisan" or more specifically "Operator Artisans" because of there good awarness/senses and their ability to adapt well to the present situation.

xSTj types or "Guardians" excell in logistics and training.

xNFx types are rare in the military and usually play a more "morale" based role.


---------------------

k so why I bothered to go through all of this is because I think rommel is an ISTp/j, at least in MBTI terms because he apparently excelled at tactics rather than strategy, plus he trained by the german military which at the time was heavily ISTj-valuing.

[strangeling]

Self-restraint, even chivalry... distinguished the combatants on both sides throughout the North Africa campaign... The leading exemplar of this code was Rommel himself. When orders from *h-i-t-l-e-r mandated the execution of captured British commandos, Rommel tossed the document in the trash. He insisted that the Allied prisoners receive the same rations he was given. He even wrote a book about the conflict called Krieg ohne Hass (War Without Hate). Memoirs of the North Africa campaign attest that, fierce and brutal as much of the fighting was, relations between individual enemies retained a quality of forbearance that seems, today, almost impossible to imagine.

*The forum is filtering this word in the text, so it is written differently so people know who is being talked about.

Courage which goes against military expediency is stupidity, or, if it is insisted upon by a commander, irresponsibility.
-----
One must not judge everyone in the world by his qualities as a soldier: otherwise we should have no civilization.

Be an example to your men in your duty and in private life. Never spare yourself, and let the troops see that you don't in your endurance of fatigue and privation. Always be tactful and well-mannered, and teach your subordinates to be the same. Avoid excessive sharpness or harshness of voice, which usually indicates the man who has shortcomings of his own to hide.

This quote was interesting to me because it sounded like something someone with repressed Te would say. He's representing an ideal of how people should be, but perfection is a hard thing to live up to; I can relate this to how I thought when I was younger.

I really like this dude.

[mu4]

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel

I think he's SLE but subtype and not typical of his type. He was very well developed in his super-ego imo.

[Cyrano]

Famous SLI. Eschews the limelight, ultimate tactican, defies authority, leads by example, adaptable.

[DaftPunk]

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel

I think he's SLE but subtype and not typical of his type. He was very well developed in his super-ego imo.

Famous SLI. Eschews the limelight, ultimate tactican, defies authority, leads by example, adaptable.

XSTp makes sense after reading your link. It seems Se>Si what make you guys think Ti>Te?

I kind of like the Idea that he was ******'s conflictor though it says nothing about his type

EDIT: LOL ******