Originally Posted by
Disturbed
He favored Delta values over Gamma ones. I don't see how he could've been Gamma NT, like people often say he is.
Everything I read about him points to a very violent, dangerous, and disturbing (to me anyway) IEE-Ne with a very hard exterior.
It's kind of disturbing how violent and authoritarian and long-term powerful IEE-Ne can be.
Can anyone really point to anything about Alexander Hamilton that seemed Democratic rather than Aristocratic or anything that points to him favoring making decisions based upon logic of actions? I don't see how he could've had Te in his ego block; there are so many logical fallacies in his writings that seem indicative of Ne combined with Te valuing.
He also seemed Infantile rather than Victim.
He seemed constantly concerned with hidden motivations (like he asserted if Aaron Burr became president then it would be for power and his accusation of Thomas Jefferson trying to "trick the President") like an IEE-Ne would.
And despite how confrontational he was at times, he seemed kind of Se-devaluing.
The way he confronted James Monroe and willingness to fight a dual seemed more like an IEE-Ne losing control of themselves more than an LIE.
He didn't really fit in and actually couldn't stand the Beta atmosphere that seemed everywhere in America in the 1780s. And the Betas who dominated America in the 1780s didn't like him either which points towards Delta.
John Adams was a Gamma NT and hated him. ILI often can't stand IEE.
And he seemed to have more a relationship of supervision over George Washington, not a dual relationship.
He had the IEE-Ne tendency to try to present himself as an intellectual.
Anyway, I guess people can tell that I don't like Extraverted NFs much, but I've always loathed Alexander Hamilton; he was definitely the most bitter, authoritarian, illogical, and envious of all the Founding Fathers and one of the least creative. I worry about meeting him in an afterlife.