Paul McCartney: SEI > gamma sf
Lennon: Alpha NT (probably ILE-Ti subtype)
Ringo Star: SEI-Fe
George Harrison: ILI or IEI (Ni subt of either type)
Paul McCartney: SEI > gamma sf
Lennon: Alpha NT (probably ILE-Ti subtype)
Ringo Star: SEI-Fe
George Harrison: ILI or IEI (Ni subt of either type)
Lennon: ILE sp/so
George Harrison: LII 9w8
Lennon seems like an ILI to me.
I could see:
Lenon as ILE
MCartney as ESE
Harrison as EII
Starr... unsure
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
George Harrison a Ni lead? Or LII?
I think Harrison might be SLI... that or very si-SEI Harmonsizer which strengthens Te
Lennon: LIE contacting
McCartney: SEE distancing
Harrison: SLI distancing
Ringo: ESE distancing
Paul McCartney - SEI?
@Sol
If John Lennon is SLI, what about the other Beatles?
Lennon EIE
Paul IEE
Ringo SLI
Harrison LSI
Ringo Starr looks exactly like a SEE-Fi guy I know. He could very well be his twin brother, for all I know.
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=...LrjEQvVXon79M:
The suggestion that all Beatles' were married to their Duals is quite funny. But of course it's almost impossible, as we know Duality is rare, imagine happening to the 4 of them.
Harrison is the easiest to type. Introverted, sensitive, disconnected from reality and his emotions flow inwardly (Fi > Fe). He was INFj, Fi subtype.
Paul is by far the toughest to type. Despite his obvious emotionality and expressiveness (strong Fe), and apparent introversion (low energy), he looks quite imaginative, which can also lead to the impression of intuition. But my conclusion tells me he is neither introverted nor intuitive. He is Extraverted and Sensing. Very expressive in his interviews, very open about things, and a clear and inquestionable leader - he wrote most of the Beatles' songs, of course by forcing his way out of things. He is a soft subtype of the ESFp, the Fi variation. I thought for a while he was SEI and an argument could be made in favour of Dumas for him, but his strenght and my VI experience lead me to choose SEE for him. Even after the Beatles, Paul's seeking for success, ambition and amplifying growth is typical of Se Ego and SEEs specially.
Lennon was obviously an intuitive and an extravert (abstract, imaginative and high energy, erratic, leader). However, he was not a Fe Base type as some suggested. He was very little emotionally expressive in his facial muscles which is the most characteristic trait of Fe Egos. They very openly express their emotions even unintentionally. Lennon was not like that. He was guarded, his emotions were flowing more inwardly - which suggests Fi. ILEs can resemble Fi types sometimes because of their repressed emotions, but ILEs have strong lines in their faces, along with cold, scientist-like eyes, as a rule. Lennon had gentle facial lines along with somewhat sentimental eyes. This combined with his lack of vivid expressiveness (Fi > Fe) and his marriage to Yoko (ISFj, probably Se subtype) indicates he was ENFp. I believe Lennon was the Fi subtype. "Artistic, impatient, extravagant, unpredictable" (Meged, subtypes)
Ringo I don't know, never took the time to figure out his type, but looks Fi Base, I'd bet on EII but latter I'll take a look.
Either way, Beatles were Fi. SEE, IEE, EII. Lennon-McCartney was a Business relationship.
Last edited by Realistic Socionist; 04-08-2020 at 04:54 AM.
Lennon EIE
Harrison LSI
Paul McCartney - ISTP - Gabin
George Harrison - ENFJ - Hamlet
khcs those are impressively bad typings
For me, Harrison is easiest at LSI, and then Ringo as ESI.
Lennon and McCartney are harder. I've thought that Lennon could be LII or EIE (WTF, right? Although his cold, analytical eyes point more towards LII), while McCartney seems an Alpha Feeler. Unfortunately, I don't know any male SEI's to compare him to, so he's just ???.
These forums mesmerize me sometimes.
Harrison LSI? EIE? Are you serious guys? Boy had zero aggression, totally un-aggressive. A totally weak and schizoid individual. Logical? Guy couldn't even formulate a sentence in interviews. EII.
Lennon was 100% skeptical about mysticism and supernatural things. A very abstract, idealistic, creative person. Ne Base / Ni Ignoring / weak Se sounds familiar?
Paul as SEE and not SEI is more complicated cause he is a low-key, soft subtype of SEE - I explained it in my previous post. His SEE-ness is specially visible in his drive and leadership.
Taken from Albert Goldman's book about John Lennon. Does this read like an SLI, @Sol?
But what he's done for most of his adult life is starve himself
to perfection. Far from being a bread baker or even a hearty eater, John Lennon is a hunger artist. The onset of his anorexia can be traced back to the year 1965, when some fool described him in print as the "fat Beatle." That phrase struck such a blow to his fragile ego that the wound has never healed. Now, at thirty-nine, his supreme goal in life is to recover the body image he presented at nineteen. Volumes could be filled with the history of his punishing diets, dangerous fasts, and self-lacerating attacks of guilt over that extra cup of coffee or slice of toast.
--
Because the only things that John could see distinctly were those that lay under his nose - which he elevated instinctively to obtain a slightly clearerimage (a mannerism that earned him the reputation for being stuck up!)-hedrifted into the dangerous habit of ignoring everything he couldn't see.Thus, the lonely, self-involved boy sank even deeper into his solitude andsolipsism.
--
The performing-flea side of Lennon's personality was no less conspicuousthan his introversion. In fact, the two seemingly disparate characters were atbottom closely connected, for the discomfort that John Lennon felt invirtually any social situation compelled him to seize control of the momentby making himself the sole focus of attention.
--
His other strategy for dealing with others was to play the bully. John Lennon was notorious as the school bully. "We were all a little bit frightened of him," recalled aformer pupil, adding: "The mothers had their eyes on him, as if to say: 'Keep away from that one!'"
--
A witness to these sessions was Meg Dogherty, then Meg Drinkwater, wholived near Mendips and attended Calderstones, the girls' school adjacent toQuarry Bank. Meg described John's manner at thirteen as "arrogant, veryarrogant and very self-assured." She also recalled his cruelty. "He was keenon discovering any cause for shame - a split home, your father away, yourmother ill. If there was something that wasn't a hundred percent normal, hewould go out of his way to find it out and play on it.
--
"A very romantic boy, extremely romantic" is how Barbara Baker
remembered John Lennon. "He wrote pages and pages of poetry to me.Love – absolute romance! 'Here,' he would say, 'I've written you a letter, a poem, read it!' ...
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
I agree with Harrison being an EII and I think Lennon was an EIE. haven't thought much about the other members.
It's possibly to say anything. To know real behavior, its contexts and enough of it for whole understanding is important for correct typing. VI has more of the needed than any words.
When typing by common behavior is very useful to know that human good! And when other people describe someone, even when they know that human good (what is not always), - those public descriptions have additional distortions.
The approach to type by texts is alike you'd type someone by a test where could to fill only a minor part of the needed questions and unpredictable part of those answers was incorrect.
What people do in some situations (what can be rather limited behavior and the context of what may be not known good), what they say in public sources, what is said about them there - means so much lesser than VI that I have no interest to that related to famouses.
Generally, the best way to type famouses is their nonverbal, and not the said about them by other people. When results of VI contradict to public descriptions - VI has more weight.
I sometimes change opinions, so to doubt is acceptable. When you want to understand better why I think so - use VI approach.
Last edited by Sol; 11-24-2020 at 09:33 PM.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
@Rusal
About typing by fragmented behavior of not well known people. Descriptions of a behavior by other people have additional distortions.
VI have no these problems - you see the behavior yourself and it's rather whole behavior for typing. If you significantly type by VI IRL and notice good match of common behavior to type's impressions goten by VI - you may trust to your VI skills.
For famouses - VI is the primary and the only trusty approach, when it gives assured impressions.
Besides data quality problem, the other is high speculativity of today methods which allow multiple interpretations of the same data. It's the other reason for low interest to discussions and arguments about what type is. Both sides may think their arguments as weighty and generally there is no objective basis to change the opinions. The main sense to exchange by those opinions as this arises the chance an opinion will be accepted in case the other side will doubt in own opinion sometimes. And it's easier to get doubts from novices who do not trust to own opinions highly.
Take into account that the speculativity stays and an opinion has significant chance to be incorrect, despite how many people have agreed with it. Having generally high typing conformism (due to muddy methods, lack of data and that most are noobs) the number of people who share same opinion means even lesser.
If you notice that opinion of more experienced in typing differs, the more reasonable approach is not to try to convince by noobish arguing, but to try understand why other opinion can be possible. As often your current opinion will be incorrect.
There is Trump thread. I'm sure his type is EIE. The majority thinks as S*E. I mainly typed by VI. They use probably public texts and words of a politician and about him. Just an example to explain the value of texts and noobs' opinions.
Paul is SEI, that's all I know.
I now think all 4 of them are IEI. they broke up because they got bored of each other.
Lennon - EIE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OQl10ZlfqU
the part from 5:30-7:02 is worth watching
John - ILI
Yoko - ESI
Joko is an IEI as well. they were two poets completely absorbed in art. I don't see any extroversion or sensing here.
this song criticises america's gamma values from a Te PolR perspective