Prince Harry, Prince William and Kate Middleton

[Subteigh]

What type are these two?

I think ENTj for Harry, though ISTp is possible. William is probably ESTp, but I tend to find it difficult to tell ESTps apart from INFps sometimes.


Harry




William

[Suz]

My thoughts:

Prince William -- LIE just because he reminds me a lot of a guy i know who I think is LIE

Kate Middleton -- not sure.


Any thoughts?

Discuss.

[Subteigh]

Previously I had considered SLE for William and LIE for Harry, but then later, I couldn't for the life of me think why I had done that...it almost felt like I had got them mixed up.

Regardless, your suggestion seems like a good one. I don't know a lot about it him apart from that he seems like quite a careful, shy, sort of person (and not really like Harry).

[Suz]

Previously I had considered SLE for William and LIE for Harry, but then later, I couldn't for the life of me think why I had done that...it almost felt like I had got them mixed up.

Regardless, your suggestion seems like a good one. I don't know a lot about it him apart from that he seems like quite a careful, shy, sort of person (and not really like Harry).

Yeah very true--the little bit i know about Harry, he's the one who strikes me as SLE. Definitely a merry type (Harry I mean).

Prince William has always been more of a serious type even when younger, imo.

my understanding of socionics has evolved quite a bit as well (and is still evolving!) since i started. Probably true for you as well.

[1981slater]

Prince William: LIE Ni
Kate Middleton: ESI Se

They are duals, IMO

Prince Harry: SLE Ti
Sarah Ferguson: SEE
Diana: IEI
Prince Charles: LII
Camilla: ESE
Queen Elizabeth II: ESI
Prince Phillip: LIE

[eunice]

Prince William - Si-ESTj
Kate Middleton - Ne-INFj

They also seem more Delta to me, as compared to Gamma.

[Marie84]

Prince William: LIE Ni
Kate Middleton: ESI Se

They are duals, IMO

Prince Harry: SLE Ti
Sarah Ferguson: SEE
Diana: IEI
Prince Charles: LII
Camilla: ESE
Queen Elizabeth II: ESI
Prince Phillip: LIE

except for Sarah, who I'm not sure about and Philip who I think is more ILIish, and possibly SEI for Diana but Fe creative at the very least

btw, I was watching the recent interview of Kate and William on Yahoo news and it seemed strikingly obvious to me that Kate is the more dominant one of the two

[Suz]

Prince William - Si-ESTj
Kate Middleton - Ne-INFj

They also seem more Delta to me, as compared to Gamma.

How so?

[Suz]

Just watched a documentary on William and Kate's love story. I'm convinced they are LIE/ESI. Their brief break-up was handled in a very Fi sort of way, especially by Kate. And she is DEFINITELY a sensor.


Oh yeah, and I agree on Princess Diana having been an Fe-valuer.

[eunice]

How so?

They don't seem Se/Ni to me?

[0987harts]

or ex gf (chelsy davy) and fiance (kate middleton)? anyone know their types?

[Marie84]

My observation of them has been limited but from what I've seen I would guess ESI for Kate, LIE for William and SLE for Harry; I don't know anything about Chelsy

[1981slater]

My observation of them has been limited but from what I've seen I would guess ESI for Kate, LIE for William and SLE for Harry; I don't know anything about Chelsy

I agree

Chelsy Davy: SEE?

[Drommel]

I'm bumping this. Anyone disagree with LIE/ESI duality?

[Suz]

I'm bumping this. Anyone disagree with LIE/ESI duality?

Everything that i've seen so far has only confirmed it for me.

[pianosinger]

Just watched a documentary on William and Kate's love story. I'm convinced they are LIE/ESI. Their brief break-up was handled in a very Fi sort of way, especially by Kate. And she is DEFINITELY a sensor.

Do you have a link to this documentary? Is it on Netflix, by chance?

I think my Mom and Dad are ESI and LIE, so seeing this documentary you speak of might help me confirm (or ultimately) reject the typing of my parents.

[krieger]

i'm getting more of an ESTp vibe from the pics of the William dude.

[Suz]

Do you have a link to this documentary? Is it on Netflix, by chance?

I think my Mom and Dad are ESI and LIE, so seeing this documentary you speak of might help me confirm (or ultimately) reject the typing of my parents.

The one i saw was on TV, like one of the news shows (Dateline maybe?)

[Suz]

Me.

Substantiate???

you'd agreed on the typings in the past...

[Suz]

i'm getting more of an ESTp vibe from the pics of the William dude.

I dont see ANYTHING Fi-POLR about the dude. I'd sooner agree with Eunice's typings of ESTj (William) and INFj (Catherine).

[krieger]

I dont see ANYTHING Si-POLR about the dude.

[krieger]

no similarity at all, nooooooo...

who the fuck do you people think you're kidding.

that leer of his is typically ESTp. socioniko.net has a whole gallery of ESTps making just that face.

i hope i can access it again... (english section down)

here:

[Suz]

no similarity at all, nooooooo...

who the fuck do you people think you're kidding.

that leer of his is typically ESTp. socioniko.net has a whole gallery of ESTps making just that face.

i hope i can access it again... (english section down)

here:

The photos on socioniko have a lot of quasi-mistypings, imo. There is more to socionics than VI, btw. And I can make that come hither "leer" too, if I pose just so. He doesn't always look like that. And he looks NOTHING like the scary dude you posted above him.

I'll buy ESTj for William, though.

[golden]

William does not give me the vibe of ESTp in any way, shape, or form. Merely showing a photo where he is seen at a particular angle means about zero. Looking at him here:



his eyes, in terms of how they move, do not show any Se qualities. He entirely lacks the kind of attentive physical presence and immediacy I associate with Se leading. On the contrary, he seems more Si-valuing. That is, his frame could be EJ (not sure yet), but his presence is soft. I will say re temperament, he doesn't have that might-go-all-over-the-place quality I see with EP temperament.

And in that video, although of course he is asked some mundane questions, his answers are just strictly mundane to me. That is, perceiving him through my own bias for Ni, I find everything he says, with its focus on the concrete operational details of proposing marriage, about as interesting as the description of a brick. At least some Ni-valuers, if you ask them a boring question, will begin offering feedback and ideas that are more interpretive or philosophical. He's quite content to delve into a narrative of "then ... then ... then ... then ..."

My first thought for him would be Delta. And there's a moment in that video when Kate seems very infantile to me. But not sure at this point.

[Korpsy Knievel]

that leer of his is typically ESTp. socioniko.net has a whole gallery of ESTps making just that face.

3:12 ≠ all

The English page is still there but many of the site's links are borked, so I find what I'm looking for there with google. Enjoy the yin sanpaku faces. Note, too, the caveats on socionioko.net's photo gallery:

These portraits have been photographed by Yekaterina S. Filatova, a socionist from St. Petersburg, since 1991. She gave us her permission to place some of her pictures at our site. She did not use any “visual identification” methods – she is rather much critical towards such methods, and never wants to “type” pictures which some people send to her. On the contrary, she first determined the type of the person (by interviewing, in course of long contacts, etc.) and only then, when this person expressed his/her agreement with the type description and his/her permission for being photographed, she made his/her pictures in several standard perspectives (which allowed comparing pictures of different people with each other). In addition, she often received feedback from these people and kept contacts with them, since many of them were her former students, colleague professors or even practicing socionists. If anybody later expressed his doubts about the correctness of his/her type identification, then his/her pictures were removed from the collection to a separate folder marked “dubious” for future verification. The total number of portraits made by her exceeds several thousands, and the most reliable of them have been published in her books.

Later she compared her pictures, and discovered so-called “quasi-twin” series within each of the 16 types. However, they were similar not as much by facial traits (form of nose, lips etc.) as by their characteristic mimicry (facial expressions). For this reason, we strongly disagree with the approach of Sergei Ganin, the owner of www.socionics.com, who determines types of celebrities using the method 'he/she facially reminds me a person whose type is XYZ". As a part of psychology, socionics should use scientific approach of studying people characters, instead of physiognomics and other pseudo-sciences.

[Suz]

3:12 ≠ all

The English page is still there but many of the site's links are borked, so I find what I'm looking for there with google. Enjoy the yin sanpaku faces. Note, too, the caveats on socionioko.net's photo gallery:

I strongly disagree with the approach of Sergei Ganin too. Pretty much everything on www.socionics.com is rubbish (with the exception of Gulenko's descriptions).

[Suz]

William does not give me the vibe of ESTp in any way, shape, or form. Merely showing a photo where he is seen at a particular angle means about zero. Looking at him here:

YouTube - Prince William And Kate's First Interview Since Getting Engaged

his eyes, in terms of how they move, do not show any Se qualities. He entirely lacks the kind of attentive physical presence and immediacy I associate with Se leading. On the contrary, he seems more Si-valuing. That is, his frame could be EJ (not sure yet), but his presence is soft. I will say re temperament, he doesn't have that might-go-all-over-the-place quality I see with EP temperament.

And in that video, although of course he is asked some mundane questions, his answers are just strictly mundane to me. That is, perceiving him through my own bias for Ni, I find everything he says, with its focus on the concrete operational details of proposing marriage, about as interesting as the description of a brick. At least some Ni-valuers, if you ask them a boring question, will begin offering feedback and ideas that are more interpretive or philosophical. He's quite content to delve into a narrative of "then ... then ... then ... then ..."

My first thought for him would be Delta. And there's a moment in that video when Kate seems very infantile to me. But not sure at this point.

What you are saying makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks Golden!

[golden]

Mmm, one other thing, and I know it may be irrelevant, but I am really stuck on the fact that he gave her Diana's famed engagement ring. A lot of people have found it a bit creepy, and although I do think it's an amazing, iconic statement of a ring, I also think it's resonant with a marriage gone horribly wrong.

Somehow I think that the choice of ring might be more the Delta version of Fi-valuing, but I will leave that for Fi folks to disagree with. I say this because as I watch Deltas more carefully, they seem to make their decisions of right and wrong differently than I do, on a level that is more internally and situationally evaluative than I would.

That is, I wouldn't want to wear or give an engagement ring from a famously awful marriage. First, it's just the principle of the thing. Ring from shitty marriage = no. Also, there is so much history in the ring, and on a personal level it would remind me of a mother lost, of things gone wrong. Also, I would know that the public would associate this ring with Diana and Charles and make it a subject of discussion, something to avoid.

But if I put myself in William's place, he probably has particular private feelings about his mother with which that ring resonates, in terms of his connection to her. And that overrides any other kinds of concerns for him, I'd guess, and Kate, knowing how it is important to him, probably was honored by his choice.

/ TOTAL SPECULATION

[Crispy]

Note, too, the caveats on socionioko.net's photo gallery:

Those caveats make it clear that the typings of the photos were thoroughly checked, but the tendency for types to make the same facial expressions is rampant throughout all the photo listings. VI doesn't have to be the basis for the project for the phenomenon to exist at all. Chances are if the photos are correctly typed and you know a double of one of them their types will be identical.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Those caveats make it clear that the typings of the photos were thoroughly checked, but the tendency for types to make the same facial expressions is rampant throughout all the photo listings. VI doesn't have to be the basis for the project for the phenomenon to exist at all. Chances are if the photos are correctly typed and you know a double of one of them their types will be identical.

What's also rampant is a tendency to type others according their personal attraction/repulsion, much like choosing a president/PM to lead your country by saying "I'd like to drink a beer with this guy." I just brought it up to de-emphasize VI in determining mental makeup, most especially the phrenological comparison of facial features over facial expressions. It shouldn't be thrown out entirely but it shouldn't take precedence over interviews, conversation, books/music/other works, known history, etc.

[golden]

So that's actor Clancy Brown?

If I were going to make a case for him as ESTp, using this video:



I would say, see how his eyes occasionally go flick-flick, flick-flick, these fast movements? Still, still, still, still ... flick-flick. I would say, see how his physical presence is expansive and somewhat disorganized-looking? That is, not all parts are moving in harmony, tightly coordinated from head to toe. That looks EP to me. He's not really composed--he could just go any direction in any moment, if I try to model in my mind how he will be moving and behaving in 2 minutes, 5 minutes, etc. Slightly unpredictable. It looks different from one EP to the next, but I see it in him.

I would say, did you see that goofy face he pulled briefly at the camera? It was unexpectedly there, and it was instantly gone. That's a classic SLE moment.

He's showing those odd mixtures I'm always trying to figure out how to articulate in SLE: a laid-back and loose framework holding an intense here-and-now way of processing the world? A dry, pragmatic approach to things punctuated by total goofiness?

His way of speaking? Very direct, somewhat concise, each word is impactful, but he also has an offhand quality in speaking. It's like that old Broadway actors' axiom that goes something like, "It's better to be strong and wrong than right and weak." He's sorta like, "I'll say this thing, but I'm not invested in it, but if I'm going to say it, I'll say it strongly."

Now, I'm not saying for sure he's SLE, b/c I watched this video very briefly, but that's how I'd make a case for it. Those are things I look for if I'm considering SLE as someone's type. And I don't see any of it in William.

[Krig the Viking]

The vibe I get from William and Kate is LIE and ESI, respectively. I haven't studied them closely though, so it's not much more than a vibe.

[discojoe]

I think she could be LSI... And I think William is whatever type John Travolta is... IEI?

EDIT: Take back IEI. Not sure now.

[Jinxi]

I think she could be LSI... And I think William is whatever type John Travolta is... IEI?

How tall are you?

[Suz]

Mmm, one other thing, and I know it may be irrelevant, but I am really stuck on the fact that he gave her Diana's famed engagement ring. A lot of people have found it a bit creepy, and although I do think it's an amazing, iconic statement of a ring, I also think it's resonant with a marriage gone horribly wrong.

Somehow I think that the choice of ring might be more the Delta version of Fi-valuing, but I will leave that for Fi folks to disagree with. I say this because as I watch Deltas more carefully, they seem to make their decisions of right and wrong differently than I do, on a level that is more internally and situationally evaluative than I would.

That is, I wouldn't want to wear or give an engagement ring from a famously awful marriage. First, it's just the principle of the thing. Ring from shitty marriage = no. Also, there is so much history in the ring, and on a personal level it would remind me of a mother lost, of things gone wrong. Also, I would know that the public would associate this ring with Diana and Charles and make it a subject of discussion, something to avoid.

But if I put myself in William's place, he probably has particular private feelings about his mother with which that ring resonates, in terms of his connection to her. And that overrides any other kinds of concerns for him, I'd guess, and Kate, knowing how it is important to him, probably was honored by his choice.

/ TOTAL SPECULATION

Yeah actually u have a point there. The way I saw it was it was a touching way William includes his mother in his life for posterity.

[discojoe]

How tall are you?

6'3"

[pianosinger]

What about ILI (him) and SEE (her)?

[FDG]

U CANT TYPE ROYALS THEY ARE ABOVE MERE HUMANSss

[krieger]

I would say, see how his eyes occasionally go flick-flick, flick-flick, these fast movements? Still, still, still, still ... flick-flick. I would say, see how his physical presence is expansive and somewhat disorganized-looking? That is, not all parts are moving in harmony, tightly coordinated from head to toe. That looks EP to me. He's not really composed--he could just go any direction in any moment, if I try to model in my mind how he will be moving and behaving in 2 minutes, 5 minutes, etc. Slightly unpredictable. It looks different from one EP to the next, but I see it in him.

I would say, did you see that goofy face he pulled briefly at the camera? It was unexpectedly there, and it was instantly gone. That's a classic SLE moment.

He's showing those odd mixtures I'm always trying to figure out how to articulate in SLE: a laid-back and loose framework holding an intense here-and-now way of processing the world? A dry, pragmatic approach to things punctuated by total goofiness?

His way of speaking? Very direct, somewhat concise, each word is impactful, but he also has an offhand quality in speaking. It's like that old Broadway actors' axiom that goes something like, "It's better to be strong and wrong than right and weak." He's sorta like, "I'll say this thing, but I'm not invested in it, but if I'm going to say it, I'll say it strongly."

Now, I'm not saying for sure he's SLE, b/c I watched this video very briefly, but that's how I'd make a case for it. Those are things I look for if I'm considering SLE as someone's type. And I don't see any of it in William.

compare this to footage of William in a similarly relaxed, free and unmonitored state. you won't find it. there is no such thing for royalty.

my point is: you're going to see a major element of routine, politeness, "boringness" and rigidity in his behavior no matter what his type is. it's part of the deal where being a prince is concerned.

ESTjs and ENTjs are normally not any less "fidgety" than that (in fact, they are worse; greatly so; Dynamic extroverts are much "lighter" and less inert in their behavior than even EP types often are; people in this thread are way underestimating this), so your argument doesn't help the case for these either.

[golden]

compare this to footage of William in a similarly relaxed, free and unmonitored state. you won't find it. there is no such thing for royalty.

my point is: you're going to see a major element of routine, politeness, "boringness" and rigidity in his behavior no matter what his type is. it's part of the deal where being a prince is concerned.

ESTjs and ENTjs are normally not any less "fidgety" than that (in fact, they are worse; greatly so; Dynamic extroverts are much "lighter" and less inert in their behavior than even EP types often are; people in this thread are way underestimating this), so your argument doesn't help the case for these either.

I considered the fact that he's a royal and has to hold up a certain type of comportment and stick to non-controversial answers. But I'm not really talking about that stuff, imo. It's the whole structure of how he talks--as I said, "then ... then ... then ... then." There is no way to me this guy is SLE--I looked at a couple of other videos and see nothing like SLE. And this is not because I dislike the guy or am all like "not in my quadra." I just don't see HOW. I don't see any evidence of it at all. I mean, I have seen SLEs in polite mode--but they are still SLE in the sense of how their eyes move, their basic presence, the way they structure their communication, their gestures.

And I was not talking about anyone being fidgety. Both of these men did fidget in their respective videos, now that you mention it, but they did not fidget in the same ways. William's fidgeting remained in his hands, of what was visible; the actor's movements were all over the place.