Introverted, Se valuing
Most people type him IEI from what I saw searching the forum, but I think he might have been Fi>Fe. Maybe ILI-Te.
A lot of people type him as a Beta (you'll encounter LSI), which is the default (and lazy) typing for political strongmen.
Although this isn't a common typing, I'm fairly confident that he was LII (Robespierre). He was foremost an idealistic and aloof intellectual who spent his time studying religion and philosophy. As for IEI, his demeanor is way too robotic and serious for that.
The "strongman" characterization is itself more like a caricature that is routinely applied to third world autocrats, both on typology forums and in the wider world. And it conjures up images of some bellicose military leader like Idi Amin or Saddam Hussein, not a detached and bookish intellectual. There is a lot of intellectual background to Islam in general (and the Iranian revolution, in particular) that gets glossed over by lazy Western observers, who don't seem to have very much curiosity about the topic, and who obviously lack the needed erudition to relay even a cursory description. Khomeini himself studied Greek philosophy, and the Iranian revolution has been variously compared to Plato's Republic, with the Shia priesthood taking on the role of "Philosopher Kings".
I'll add (because why not) that the commonalities between Islam and Christianity are more striking than the differences, and that Islam holds up a mirror to Christianity as a parallel civilization (both Abrahamic and Hellenistic) that had a different history imposed on it.
Isn't this just as descriptive of an ILI? Given that ILI is a more common typing, why do you prefer LII to ILI? And IIRC, Plato's depiction of Socrates is usually typed ILI as well, so if you see a parallel that would seem to be another indication toward ILI.
Personally I can't see him as Fe-valuing, even Fe-suggestive.
Last edited by FreelancePoliceman; 12-01-2021 at 11:37 PM.
In my opinion, he VIs ILI. I think I see Te, not Ti.
I believe that a lot of clerics are LII, but Khomeini seems to be fully integrated into the Gamma Dark Side, not the Alpha Happy Endings side of things.
And while I'm on the subject of the "Dark Side", wasn't this concept popularized by an Alpha by the name of George Lucas?
I'm not 100% confident; I suppose that he could be. I prefer LII because that is the archetype of someone (Robespierre) who constructs an ideological belief system from first principles (I could be reading too much into this here, I'll admit).
I also find it hard to believe that an ILI (an Ni-dom.) could successfully lead a revolution.
According to his daughter, he was unreasonably organized and punctual, down to the minute. That doesn't sound like any irrational type. (OTOH, could he have had autism? I don't know.)
It's also not really the case that ILI's are unsociable. They may appear standoffish, but they are also informal and quite adept at making sarcastic observations. Many standup comedians are ILI.
ILI-Te . If not, EIE-Ni.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
Why? And what would make an LII better suited to the task?
That sounds exactly like an ILI to me. Stratiyevskaya agrees:According to his daughter, he was unreasonably organized and punctual, down to the minute. That doesn't sound like any irrational type. (OTOH, could he have had autism? I don't know.)
The INTp (ILI) lives according to the principle “hurry unhurriedly” and does not like it when other people try to assign him any other pace. One can only envy ILI’s manner to not hurry anywhere and yet rarely be late for anything (even intentionally he cannot make himself be late). Traffic jams on the roads similarly in no way complicate his life: despite everything, he still arrives on time.Why do you say this -- because you think Khomeini was unsociable? If so, OK, there are ILIs that aren't unsociable (however you'd like to define that), but I don't grasp the logic "Khomeini was unsociable -> ILIs aren't unsociable -> therefore Khomeini was LII."It's also not really the case that ILI's are unsociable. They may appear standoffish, but they are also informal and quite adept at making sarcastic observations. Many standup comedians are ILI.
I don't see a lethargic person being able to lead a revolution.
But that doesn't sound like the Khomeini his daughter described. Khomeini didn't hurry because he was inclined towards routine and self-discipline. The person described by Stratiyevskaya, OTOH, doesn't hurry because he doesn't like to be prodded, and because he's capable of being adaptable. To use the traffic jam analogy: Khomeini would be late because he wouldn't adapt to the unexpected situation (he would insist on driving in the same way as before).That sounds exactly like an ILI to me. Stratiyevskaya agrees:
The INTp (ILI) lives according to the principle “hurry unhurriedly” and does not like it when other people try to assign him any other pace. One can only envy ILI’s manner to not hurry anywhere and yet rarely be late for anything (even intentionally he cannot make himself be late). Traffic jams on the roads similarly in no way complicate his life: despite everything, he still arrives on time.