What do you guys think? Enfp?
Bruce Lee
What do you guys think? Enfp?
Last edited by silke; 05-30-2016 at 08:32 PM. Reason: updated links
Reminds me of an ENTp. But he's also rather... vague.
He also says that he's about expressing yourself totally and completely and honestly... Maybe he's a Fe type. Or maybe what he's saying is influenced by the Chinese culture. Or maybe...
Ti-ESTp.
How did you guys arrive to your conclusion... Just because he's a martial artist, he's Se? I've actually watched all the 3 parts... I'd be interested in hearing how you guys reached your conclusion...
No, that's too simplistic. Not all martial artists are Se eg. Jackie Chan. In addition to the videos listed, I have read up about him before.Originally Posted by Singularity
His philosophies seem rather Ti and Ni-seeking imo.:
"If I tell you I'm good, you would probably think I'm boasting, If I tell you I'm no good, You KNOW I'm lying.
Be Formless, shapeless like water. Now if you put water into a cup it becomes the cup, you put water into a bottle it becomes the bottle, you put it into a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash, be water my friend.
If there is a God, he is within. You don't ask God to give you things, you depend on God for your inner theme.
Before I practised the Way, A cloud was just a cloud and a mountain was just a mountain. After I'd studied the Way, a cloud was no longer a cloud, a mountain was no longer a mountain. Now that I understand the Way, A cloud is again just a cloud, a mountain is just a mountain. (The clouds and mountains are simply kicks and punches).
The mind is like a fertile garden in which anything that is planted, flowers or weeds, will grow.
Use only that which works, and take it from any place you can find it.
The more relaxed the muscles are, the more energy can flow through the body. Using muscular tensions to try to "do" the punch, or attempting to use brute force to knock someone over, will only work to opposite effect.
Mere technical knowledge is only the beginning of Kung Fu, to master it, one must enter into the spirit of it.
There are lots of guys around the world that are lazy. They have big fat guts. They talk about chi power and things they can do, but don't believe it.
I'm not a master, I'm a student-master, meaning that I have the knowledge of a master and the expertise of a master, but I'm still learning, So I'm a student-master. I don't believe in the word master, I consider the master as such when they close the casket.
Do not deny the classical approach, simply as a reaction, or you will have created another pattern and trapped yourself there.
Jeet Kune Do, It's just a name, don't fuss over it. There's no such thing as a style if you understand the roots of combat.
When I look around I always learn something, and that is to be yourself always, express yourself, and have faith in yourself. Do not go out and look for a successful personality and duplicate him. Now that seems to be the prevalent thing happening in Hong Kong, like they always copy mannerism, but they never start from the root of his being and that is, how can I be me?
Put every great teacher together in a room, and they'd agree about everything, put their disciples in there and they'd argue about everything.
By adopting a certain physical posture, a resonant chord is struck in spirit.
Wine may become so dilute that few will drink of it.
Eventually, you learn to read groups of words. Where a student will see three motions, the experienced man will see one, because he see's the overall energy path.
The void is no mere emptiness, but is real, free and existing. It is the source from which all things arise and return. It cannot be seen, touched or known, yet it exists and is freely used. It has no shape, size, colour or form, and yet all that we see, hear, feel and touch is "it". It is beyond intellectual knowing and cannot be grasped by the ordinary mind. When we suddenly awake to the realization that there is no barrier, and has never been seen, one realizes that one is all things, mountains, rivers, grasses, trees, sun, moon, stars, universe are all oneself. There is no longer a division or barrier between myself and others, no longer any feeling of alienation or fear. Realizing this, results in true compassion. Other people and things are not seen as apart from oneself, on the contrary, as one's own body."
More quotes from wikiquote: Bruce Lee - Wikiquote
But he's really vague! (And metaphorical). You'd think that if he was an ST, then he wouldn't be so vague? Vagueness = Feelings. But I guess... ENTps can also have strange thoughts sometimes.
Based on VI, he seems rather Ti and Se>Ne as well, even in his photos when he is not fighting:
Come on... VI? He still looks like an ENTp, though. I wouldn't rule out ESFp, but I don't know. I don't think that VIing is a good way of typing people. If I had to say... maybe ESFp would be right.
from the bits I know of him: SLI
I see no reason to question that as of yet
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" isand not
actually, considering his quotes again, I find it ridiculous that people can consider him an Se or Ti valuing type when he has said things that blatently devalue these elements.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Sure, but at the same time the belief set behind almost any martial art blatantly devalues Se.
Easy Day
Based solely on the evidence in this thread, I would go with Beta NF. Maybe EIE? He talks in generalities and focuses primarily on things beyond the physical -- Ni. Instead of logically categorizing his work (Ti), or discussing the technical aspects of fighting (Te), he discusses the emotional aspects, internal attitudes, etc. -- Fe. His focus is the spiritual and profound.
Contrast him with Chuck Norris (SLI), who is very practical, down-to-earth, and matter-of-fact about his martial arts, treating it more like a sport or a trade where you work hard and learn the skills involved and then go apply them.
Quaero Veritas.
maybe SLI. Otherwise, LSI. Not sure which.. same type as my dad either way.
You people never explain anything, do you...
Those were more or less my thoughts too...
that is the martial arts philosophy, not bruce lee's personality. Ni HA is enough to explain it.
Maybe. Do you have examples of him demonstrating strong Ti and strong Se? His focus on Ni and Fe seems fairly predominant to me, in this thread and in the general knowledge I've absorbed about him by cultural osmosis.
Quaero Veritas.
Well he actually seems pretty modest, he says that he's not a "superstar" and stuff like that. That seems more "F" than "T".
Watch the part 3 of the video:
Listen to some of the last bits of the video:
"Once the opening of China... it will bring more understanding... more things that are different... some new things will grow... so therefore it will be a very rich period to be in."
"Q: Do you think of yourself as a Chinese or a North American?
A: You know what I want to think of myself... as a human being. Under the sky, under the heaven there is but one family. It just happens that people are different."
Is that not F... or what. He is about bringing people together, more understanding, or whatever. He is about morally guiding people.
Bruce Lee has always seemed to have an overall Beta persona. I don't really have any strong opinions as to type other than not IEI. I guess I pretty much took Ti-SLE for granted but I can see a lot of ways how a beta rational might make sense. Overwhelmingly though I think how he projects himself has a lot to do with how I envision Ti and Ni meeting together, sort of like some strange cross between implicit meanings and bringing them into order.
As for martial arts being inherently for or against Se, now that's an interesting discussion.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
The first part sounds more like an Ni extrapolation about course the future is headed, actually. The latter does sound Ethical, but more specifically, NF.
What with all his yowling and intense facial expressions, he does seem to use a lot of Fe -- again contrast with Norris, who is more dry, unemotional, and pragmatic in his fight scenes.
Clearly he is very skilled in the arts martial, which is typically associated with strong Sensing. One difficulty in typing someone like Bruce Lee is that he strikes me as an individual with a very high level of personal development. He'd spent years trying to hone and perfect himself. The question, is therefore, "Is he a Beta ST with unusually expressive Ni and Fe, or a Beta NF with unusually capable Se and Ti?"
Like I said, I get more Fe and Ni from him than anything else when listening to him talk. The video Singularity posted seems pretty straightforwardly Beta NF to me.
Quaero Veritas.
Yeah, those are again more or less my thoughts. But it doesn't necessarily mean that Fe is always about yowling and making a lot of facial expressions. But yeah, I guess that's the basic gist of it.
I guess what I don't agree with is that people's natural association of physical skills with Se. I don't necessarily think that you need Se to have good physical skills like martial arts. I mean, obviously those things are achieved by training and practice (as well as your in-born talents) rather than having a certain function.
Well you know, it's just that T types tend to be more "objective" about that sort of thing. If they're good at something then they'll say that they're good at it, and if they're bad at something then they'll say that they're bad at it, you know? Playing modest seems somewhat uncharacteristic of T types. But I don't think that this applies to either types that are neurotic.
Because understanding and bringing people together and all that crap are what F types typically deal with.
Well actually T by definition is objective and F is subjective. That's just the basic definition of the functions.
And ****** brought together all the people of Germany, right? It just happens that he was also a racist.
ILE can be modest and people oriented - only to a degree of satisfying his Fe HA I'd think. For an ILE it just doesn't seem very genuine - an ILE does not genuinely understand people or relationships like an F type does. Well actually I'm pretty sure that any healthy person can be modest and people oriented... but... I don't know, it just seems unusual for a T type to "play modest".
Last edited by Singu; 05-14-2010 at 10:26 AM.
I thought he was ESFp.
.
Any reasons for thinking him an Ne type? ST is probably the club that is most attuned to a martial arts career. Diverging one function from that is still acceptable, but going all the way to the opposite side is dubious when the person performs legendarily at that kind of activity.He's an IEE in my opinion.
All I know about Bruce Lee is that I've been compared to him too many times, lol. First as a kid, and recently by my cousin who's into martial arts.
Last edited by Park; 05-14-2010 at 11:03 PM.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
What I meant to say is, when you look at what Lee naturally does well, it's hard to maintain that he had a poor grasp of both the "here and now" (S) and "technique" (T). Surely any person can have weaknesses in those areas and compensate for them somehow, but to say someone would be able to do this to the extent of raising to Lee's level of proficiency takes the whole thing a step too far.You have a strange set of rules for typing people. A bird is not an animal which flies.
And you're wrong, most people in martial arts are by far Intuitive, especially internal styles and westerners in traditional ones. Assuming that you understand these notions.
No... I'd disagree. Both "expressing yourself" AND wanting to express yourself are Fe things. Which types are the MOST likely to want to express themselves via poetry or songs or whatever? It's probably the Beta NFs. Which types the least? Well probably the Deltas in general. Fe is about expressing yourself and making yourself known to the rest of the world. Fi is probably the opposite of that.crazed: it is, imo. Not that "expressing oneself" is-Creative, but insisting on it, wanting it and seeing it as the absolute axis.
Since you have decided to reject an irreplacable fundament of the theory of socionics, I see no reason to consider anything further that you say to be anything more than senseless drivel.Intuitive types are not "here-and-now"
Well, I think that you are relating a lot of things that don't necessarily have to do with functions. A lot of people rebel against being restricted of doing things in a personal way - because well, they'd like to be independent and they'd like to keep their integrity. Now how is that related to Fi? You could say that in itself is Fi, but I don't agree. Or you are too extreme with your descriptions.
Pointless hairsplitting. Focus creates awareness. The two are so strongly linked it's redundant to even make the distinction.N/S doesn't deal with awareness but focus
You type Phaedrus as ENFp, yet he fanatically insisted on maintaining objectivity and correctness and eliminating subjective influences.- Fi types, especially Irrationals, oppose being enforced objective rules, to be restricted to facts, to correctness, being forbidden to use their creativity and subjective values.
Well first off, there's no need to be so condescending.
Second, are you seriously saying that non-Fi types have nothing to add "personally"... what? As far as I know, my impression of Fi was that it's about the "personals" or "subjectivity" of relationships, but not necessarily have to do with personal preferences or personal expressions or whatever. Perhaps your examples are not very clear... maybe you could add some personal anecdotes or examples...
He is talking about instinct. Watch the full interview. He talks about how skill is successfully merging natural inclinations with the ability to perform.crazed: it is, imo. Not that "expressing oneself" is
Then there's not "one thing" which makes it(eg. metaphors), but the overall style of communication.
He is not talking about instinct, but something else, because he used to talk about it in different contexts. He doesn't use (or just very little) other things like discipline, inner insight, and so on.
Overall I think you interpret what he says in your own way but it's not what he intended, just my opinion.
...Ok.
Well if you wear a hat because it expresses "who you are", then I'd have to say that's Fe. It can have any personal meanings attached to it, but it's still Fe to wear something to express oneself.
This is about practicality, it's all about practical concerns. You wear a helmet, so you don't get shot. You wear a helmet at a construction site so you don't get a wrench dropped on your head. There's no time for self-expression, that's Te. It's not about YOU, it's about the "objective environment", as well as just being practical. Why do you think that Deltas are so anal about rules and safety?
He was pretty open about the fact that his methods comprised taking the definitions of the four dichotomies seriously, equating the types in socionics with those in the MBTI and using type descriptions to get a general assessment of what a type is "like". There was nothing "secret" about those methods.his secret (?) evaluation methods
Retyped as ENFp by you alone, I assume?this is one of the main reasons why he was retyped as IEE
Notice that this is supported by my models when said of ENxps: in ENxps, the Static J function, which represents external facthood, is Limiting, which means it is singular and invariable.his insistence on non-relativism (which has no connection with personal/not personal view) and looking for external facts is caused by
What do you make of the fact that Rick types Phaedrus as ISTj? Is Rick so incompetent that he can not even identify an identical of his, to the point of typing one as a conflictor instead?
The bolded part is actually very much related to Fi - personal preferences. Personal preference is personal (introverted) judgment (rational) by subjective (internal) criteria.
Stereotypically, "I like it" is a Fi statement, while "This is great" is a Fe statement. All introverted functions are more "personal", in a way that they focus on the person's reactions and/or judgments in relation to objects - fields; while extraverted functions focus on and make statements about objects and not their relation to them. "I like it X" is your relation to X; "X is great" is a subjective judgment about X itself.
About xEE types being more expressive... I can kind of see that. Fe-base are way more expressive in the momentary, dramatic way - not necessarily expressing their deeper feelings, but often focusing on moods/emotions (strong, ignoring Fi). Fe-creative have stronger demonstrative Fi, but they're introverted. Fi-creative have demonstrative Fe and are extraverted, which makes their expression of themselves most noticeable. Fi-base are Fe-ignoring and introverted, their expression being far more restricted.
I don't even know if we're agreeing or disagreeing, because I have a hard time understanding what you're trying to explain (no offense). All I'm saying is that Fe is about expressing your emotions and your identity and all that (even your "style"). So do you agree or disagree with that? If not then please explain why that's wrong.You may think what you feel like, I disagree nevertheless and warn you that you have a flawed understanding. You confuse it withwhich means pleasant/unpleasant which indeed depends on someone's background and inclinations - the differences between people and even types we talked about earlier, but it is is absolute and doesn't depend on someone's history or attachment.
Rule of thumb (just that, nothing more):
-
-
So you're saying that Fi is about belonging to a tradition, but not to an army? o_ONone of the above has something to do with uniqueness, for example
How can that be practical when the guy isn't likely competent and end up getting killed, or be a burden? o_O Is concern for competency of a job not Te?Practicality in thesense would be something like flexible rules, just let's make anything possible to be fine in the end, for example using such guy in the kitchen. He can stay in the army, wear that crap and things are fine for everyone, anything just to get the job done.
But what about the case this guy can't cook and learn to?
Again, how can you say that safety and correctness are not practical concerns? It is totally practical to be safe and correct because it gets the job done surer and quicker.Though, we're not discussing all the possible cases here, but the principle. The fact was that the army has strict rules and that's because other reasons than practicality (that is "anything just get the job done"), but restrictions for consistency, safety and urgency. So are other things like constructions, vehicle design and so on, where no
I don't even know what to say to this. Army is a burden for the economy? No... not necessarily. Wartime can boost the economy. Protection gears are a burden? But how can you get the job done when you are injured? The law is useless? What? What are you trying to say? I don't know if there are anyone other than the Anarchists who agree that the law is useless. Funny then, that most Anarchists tend to be Alpha and Beta types. AFAIK the job of the Te-Fi is to uphold the society, and that requires the law.Army is itself a burden for the economy, protection gear is a burden and impediment for getting the job done, law is an useless hassle otherwise, but mandatory for different reasons which are anything but practical.
This is where you actually had to have understood the differences betweenand
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but I'm not too sure. Your explanations are rather unclear imo.Both
-
-
Why do you keep on saying that only Fi types have personal opinions? I don't think that's true at all. For example as a Fe type I can have a million personal opinions on why I should not wear a helmet.Obviously, only
(I like this, just to annoy a bit Gammas and Deltas)
I didn't say that you did, I'm saying that they do based on my observation and experience. Is this something that you disagree with? If so explain why.Where did I said this, that Deltas are anal about safety? Quote, please.
Last edited by Singu; 05-15-2010 at 10:36 PM.
God... you are so annoying. You are literally incapable of seeing any kind of errors or flaws in your ways. Now I'm not necessarily saying that I'm right, but this is just ridiculous. All I got was some overly convoluted crap that went off in a million little directions. I'm not sure if you actually know what the crap you're talking about, or you're just making all this shit up to cover up your own lack of Socionics knowledge. I'm not saying that I know a lot about Socionics, but this is just ridiculous. I also wouldn't necessarily disagree with everything you say, but come on... actually know your stuff before presenting them as if you've figured it all out.
Every fucking person has a sense of personal identity, as well as a sense of personal integrity - if they don't, then they are neurotic. What, did you really think that Fe types were empty hollow of shells? Stereotype more please.I disagree.
Then don't confuse
Then you should learn a thing or two about economics. God... you are an idiot. This is why you are so full of crap - even with Socionics. You have no idea what the crap you're talking about yet you go on acting like as if you do.How can you say that? Were armed forces or law institutions created to make money and make the economy flourish? Lol, ok dude, thanks for letting me know your opinion, you made me regret that I even answered you.
Last edited by Singu; 05-16-2010 at 05:06 AM.
Don't feel bad, Singularity, Pinocchio is impervious to mere reason and logic. He wears his opponents down with sheer belligerence, then finishes them off with a barrage of non-sequiturs. He seems to think this is the same thing as proving the validity of his arguments.
Quaero Veritas.
ISTp
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
