US Presidents Celebrity MBTI: Dwight Eisenhower - ISFP

Continuing our exploration of the Novichkov method applied to celebrities, we now come to the third President in our series - Dwight Eisenhower (for profiles of Roosevelt, see here, Truman, see here).

Judger or Perceiver, j or p? 

Let's compare the Novichkov diagrams for Judging and Perceiving types with side shots of Eisenhower.

My conclusion: Eisenhower is a Judger. One thing that can be observed in these photos is that the line of a Judger's spinal column seems to run up through to the center of the head, and as a result, one can't see much in the way of space between the jaw and the throat.

So, for the four letter Socionics code for Eisenhower's type, we find so far: xxxj.

Feeler or Thinker, F or T? 

Juxtaposing pictures of politicians Donald Rumsfeld and Lindsay Graham, we see examples of a Thinker (Rumsfeld) and a Feeler (Graham).

The juxtaposition of Bill Clinton and a young Jeff Sessions provides us with two more examples: Clinton is a Thinker, Sessions a Feeler.

Which of these does Eisenhower resemble the most - Rumsfeld or Graham, Clinton or Sessions? Clearly, Graham and Sessions: Eisenhower is a Feeler. When we compare the Feeler's face to the Thinker's, we see that the Feeler has an expressive lower half of the face and an inexpressive upper half, shallow eye-sockets, a pug nose and a gently rounded bridge of the nose. The bones behind the eyebrows don't protrude.

So far, in the four-letter Socionics code, we have xxFj.

Sensor or Intuitive, S or N? 

Below we have John Kerry and John McCain: Kerry is an Intuitive, McCain a Sensor. Notice the difference in the body types of these two men: McCain is stocky, and of the type which is inclined to put on weight, whereas Kerry is skinny, and probably couldn't put on weight if he tried.

Intuitives tend to sprawl when sitting or lying down, whereas Sensors keep themselves in a tight enclosed space and tend to be rather stiff and rigid. See the picture of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan below. Romney is the Sensor, Ryan the Intuitive:

I classify Eisenhower as a Sensor. His build, and his posture when sitting, reminds much more of Romney and McCain than Kerry and Ryan:

So far in our four-letter code we have: xSFj.

Introverted or Extraverted Sensing, Se or Si? 

The gaze of the Introverted Sensor seems bleary, out of focus - more perceiving shapes and contours of objects, not of the object directly. Take Roosevelt as a case in point:

Whereas the gaze of the Extraverted Sensor tends to be watchful and observant. The Extraverted Sensor keeps a close on the object and studies it intently:

Introvert or Extravert, I or E? 

The Extravert feels at home in the world, whereas the Introvert withdraws himself from it. This is shown by their respective facial expressions. Here we see a Nixon thoroughly swept up in his environment, revelling in it, in fact, whereas Eisenhower seems sheepish - and absent. He doesn't look as though he wants to be there, whereas Nixon does.

The Extravert's face always seems tense and engaged, the Introvert's, unflustered and unengaged.

In Conclusion

Judger + Feeler + Sensor + Introvert = ISFj in Socionics, ISFP in MBTI.

Mark Hootsen, signing off.

US Presidents Celebrity MBTI: Harry Truman - ISTJ

We come to part two of our series, which aims at typing all the US presidents from Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Donald Trump using the Rod Novichkov visual identification method. For a detailed exposition of Novichkov's method, see here; for an application of that method to Roosevelt, see here.

Judger or Perceiver, j or p? 

Let's look at the diagrams of the Judging ('Conceiving', as Novichkov calls them) and Perceiving types, from left and right sides of the head:

Now, finding a good profile shot of a celebrity and lining it up with the above diagrams can be tough. But I've found a few side shots of Truman, and I make him out to be a Perceiver:

Feeler or Thinker, F or T? 

Let's compare two middle-aged American politicians, one Lindsey Graham, who Novichkov would type as a Feeler, and Donald Rumsfeld, who he would type as a Thinker:

Now, who does Truman resemble more - Rumsfeld or Graham? Rumsfeld, obviously.

So far, we have typed Truman as a Perceiver and a Thinker: xxTp. Two letters to go...

Sensor or Intuitive, S or N?  

Again, here's a compare and contrast photo of an Intuitive and a Sensor: gangly, skinny, long and knuckled fingered John Kerry, and stocky, square-fingered and square-handed John McCain. Kerry flops and lolls in his chair, while McCain seems somewhat more stiff and centrally placed. Kerry would be typed as an Intuitive by Novichkov, McCain as a Sensor.

Is Truman a Kerry or a McCain? McCain, of course, and so we can classify Truman as a Sensor.

Which raises the question: was Truman an extraverted or introverted Sensor? The extraverted Sensor's gaze watches you, scans you; the introverted Sensor's gaze, on the other hand, is blurry and unfocussed, and hardly looks at you directly - it perceives the outlines and shapes of objects rather than the details.

Here we have two celebrities who are Sensors, Jean-Claude Van Damme and Richard Burton. From the foregoing description, we can tell which of the two has the extraverted and the introverted gazes.

Is Truman a Van Damme or a Burton? Clearly a Burton: Truman's eyes, in nearly all the photos, hardly ever seem to be focused at the camera. They look around it, not at it.

Introvert or Extravert, I or E? 

In my post on Roosevelt, I used photos of Truman and Roosevelt together as an example of an Introvert and an Extravert together. While Roosevelt always looks absorbed in his immediate environment, Truman seems detached from it; Roosevelt has a tense, weathered facial expression, Truman a withdrawn, sheepish and melancholy one.

We could also compare Truman to another dashing Extravert president, John Fitzgerald Kennedy:

The verdict

Letters p + T + S + I give us ISTp in socionics or ISTJ in MBTI. The ISTJ type tends to be quiet and reserved, lingers in the background, and goes about his business without drawing attention to himself: The type's dominant function, introverted Sensing Si, gives an impression of comfort and homeliness, while the secondary function, extraverted Thinking Te , lends itself to organisation and efficiency. The ISTJ type description fits what we know of Truman like a glove.

As we shall see, two other presidents after Truman could be typed as ISTJs using the Novichkov method. The ISTJ belongs to the category of types Paul Keirsey calls the 'Guardians', and is extremely common - in everyday life and in celebrity-land.

Mark Hootsen signing off.

US Presidents Celebrity MBTI: Franklin Delano Roosevelt - ESTJ

The November 2016 election has inspired me to write a series on typing the US presidents, from Franklin Delano Roosevelt onwards, using the methods of Rod Novichkov. Though not accepted in the Socionics community, the method has proven to be (in my experience) nearly a 100% effective. Just look at the MBTI channels on YouTube and you'll see that those who claim to be certain types (INFJ is the most common common) match the visual descriptions given by Novichkov.

Novichkov and Varabyova in their book How to find yourself and your best match (2007) type US presidents Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43. Even though Novichkov and Varabyova have done my work for me there, I'll be including the profiles of those three presidents in my series so as to illustrate how the method works.

Let's start with the Judger / Perceiver, or as Novichkov calls it, the Conceiver / Perceiver dichotomy. Looking at Novichkov's diagram

will tell us if Roosevelt is a Judger or Perceiver. We need to find a side profile shot of Roosevelt, something which is (for many celebrities) quite difficult. I've turned up these photos:

The Judger's neck seems to go right through towards the middle of the head. Generally the back of the neck seems flat and much less space exists between the throat and the jawline, especially the chin. In contrast, the Perceiver's neck doesn't go through the middle - the head seems to dangle, or hang off, the neck. The back of the head often appears more rounded, and the throat tends to incline away from the jawline. Take, for instance, this picture of Elvis Presley, who Novichkov types as a Perceiver (an ESFP, in fact): 

Compare and contrast Elvis with these two men, both of whom have Judger's necks:

Although Roosevelt's shirt collar, and the jowls around his neck, don't give us as clear a side view as we'd like, I say that Roosevelt is a Judger.

Next comes the Thinker / Feeler dichotomy. Generally, Thinkers look like Donald Rumsfeld: expressive forehead, inexpressive lower face; pronounced superciliary arches (i.e., the bones behind the eyebrows); deep eye sockets; an aquiline nose which gives him a sharp profile; a deep-set bridge of nose which looks as though someone has knocked a chunk out of it with a chisel.

The Feeler, on the hand, looks like the reverse of Rumsfeld. Take TV soap actor Scott Clifton: expressive lower half of the face; inexpressive (and usually quite low) forehead; flat superciliary arches; shallow eye sockets; a shallow bridge of nose which is rounded and sticks out; a pug nose which gives him a rounded profile.

We may ask: who does Roosevelt resemble more - Rumsfeld or Clifton? The question answers itself: Rumsfeld.

So we can classify Roosevelt as a Thinker and a Judger, or Tj.

Is Roosevelt a Sensor or an Intuitive? Sensors tend to have thick, stocky and smooth hands, and they put on weight easily and tend to have stocky builds. They also sit, and position their bodies, in a rigid and conventional way. Look at John McCain below:

The photo gives a good contrast with John Kerry, who here sits in an angular, off-kilter manner - he seems to loll in the chair almost like a caterpillar. We also notice Kerry's long, knuckled fingers and his skinny frame. All this shows him to be an Intuitive.

Looking at Roosevelt's weight, the stockiness of his hands, and the general rigidity (or 'ordinariness') of his posture when either sitting or standing, we should classify Roosevelt as a Sensor. He looks more like McCain than Kerry:

Roosevelt so far appears to be a sensing, thinking and judging type - in Socionics letters, an STj. But, you may ask: is Roosevelt an introverted or extraverted Sensor? We can tell the two apart by their gaze. Extraverted Sensors look at you and through you, introverted Sensors, at you and around you. Extraverted Sensors possess a sharp, watchful and highly focused gaze, introverted Sensors, a unfocused and somewhat bleary one. Introverted Sensors seem to perceive outlines and fields, extraverted Sensors, details.

These two men give us an example of the extraverted Sensor's gaze:

Roosevelt, on the other hands, always appears to have a distracted, not-quite-there gaze.

So far we have Roosevelt as (in Socionics letters) an STj.

Finally we arrive at the Extravert / Introvert dichotomy. Extraverts tend always to be tense and animated, and absorbed in their exterior environment. If nothing in their immediate environment interests them, then their faces assume a deflated look. Generally, they appear relaxed and comfortable, and find it easy to smile.

Introverts, on the other hand, tend to appear withdrawn, vacant, and even somewhat melancholy. It's as though someone switched the lights off. Introverts who are Thinking types don't appear comfortable on camera and don't smile easily.

Look at Roosevelt, and compare him to Truman:

To go by their facial expressions alone: Roosevelt seems tense and preoccupied with his environment, Truman, withdrawn from it and preoccupied with his own cogitations. The genial and friendly Roosevelt appears the more animated of the two. Truman gives the impression of being a sheepish man who would rather not be there.

I assess Roosevelt as being an Extravert. So, putting the Socionics letters together, we have E + S + T + j, meaning that Roosevelt is an ESTj, or in MBTI, ESTJ.

In the list of typed celebrities in the back of Novichkov's book, we find a large, disproportionate number of ESTjs. They turn up a lot - in politics and in entertainment. As we shall see, three of the US presidents who came after Roosevelt were ESTjs.

Mark Hootsen signing off.

Celebrity Socionics: Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton - Conflicting Relations

I.

Do Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton like each other? Do they get along? Socionics says no, and that they wouldn't be compatible - in any sense - even if they weren't competing against one another in what has been one of the most bitter and acrimonious presidential election campaigns in US history.

In an earlier post, Donald Trump is typed as an ISTJ, Clinton an ENFJ, using Rod Novichkov's visual identification method. Typing Trump as an ISTJ, and an introvert, may surprise some - I've seen him most typed as an extravert with extraverted sensing Se as a dominant function (that is, as an ESFP or ESTP). But statistics show that the ISTJ is one of your more typical types, and Novichkov's book types many celebrities - including ones who strike us as extraverted and outgoing, such as Robin Williams, John Travolta and Paris Hilton - as ISTJs.

We are, in our lives, more likely to bump into the types who belong to what Keirsey calls the 'Guardians': types who have Si as either a dominant or secondary function, and Fe or Te as dominant and secondary functions. These Guardian types - the ISTJs, the ESFJs, the ISFJs, the ESTJs - show up a lot in Novichkov's list of celebrities. On the other hand, ENFJs don't turn up a lot in Novichkov; Keirsey's 'Idealists' - the NF types, who have either Ni or Ne and Fe or Fi as dominant and secondary functions - there are few and far between. Novichkov claims that his samples of celebrity types reflect statistical reality, and I'm inclined to agree. I encounter plenty of 'Guardians' and few 'Idealists'. So it stands to reason that a billionaire real estate developer turned reality TV celebrity and presidential aspirant would be a 'Guardian' and not, for instance, one of the rarer, 'Idealist' types - e.g., an INFJ or INFP.

Socionics differs from MBTI in a number of respects. One of these is that it emphasises intertype relationships: each of the 16 types has a unique relationship with another which can be determined in advance. Some of these don't bode well for either friendship, romance, work, while others almost guarantee smooth and harmonious relations in any of those fields.

Trump the ISTJ and Clinton the ENFJ stand in a Conflicting relationship with one another. What does this mean? If look at the traditional Jungian dichotomies - Introvert or Extravert, Sensor or Intuitive, Thinker or Feeler, Perceiver or Judger - in the Conflicting pair Hilary and Donald, we find that these are diametrically opposed. Hilary's dominant function is a Judging or Rational one, Donald's is Perceiving or Irrational; Hilary is a Feeler, Donald a Thinker; Hilary is an Extravert, Donald an Introvert; Hilary is an Intuitive, Donald a Sensor.

Secondly, each of the other's leading function in a Conflicting pair - Si in Donald, Fe in Hilary - constitutes the vulnerable function of the other. While MBTI considers only four functions in a type, socionics works with all eight possible functions, and looks at the four functions in MBTI as 'valued' (that is, ones that a type will prize) and the four functions left out of MBTI as 'subdued' (that is, ones that a type will generally not value and not see the use for). The vulnerable function, which occupies the fourth slot in a type, is classified as 'subdued' and therefore not valued; in fact, a type will generally feel uncomfortable and distressed when that function appears in himself or others. In other words, use that function around him, and you will cause him irritation.

Sociotype.com gives a good description of Si in the ENFJ type. I think that it applies to Hilary, or at least what we know about her health and her habit of mislaying emails:

The EIE [ENFJ] is more likely to measure the comfortableness of conversation than other more physiological signs. Still, they are quite attuned to the physical sensations others are experiencing and use the information to raise and lower the emotional conditions that those individuals are experiencing. In any case however, EIEs are prone to making errors in daily routine. This can include having little or no idea of where they put an object, allowing neglected responsibilities to pile up, or failing to remember important tasks given to them; excessive procrastination is common in EIEs. The EIE has little respect for people who seem to be too concerned with their health and comfort and who avoid straining themselves. The EIE feels that people who focus too much on caring for themselves will have no time to achieve anything worthwhile.

The account of Fe as a vulnerable function in the ISTJ gives a perfect picture of Trump:

SLIs [ISTJs] are minimally aware of others' emotional responses and tend to speak in straightforward language. Sometimes they can appear aggressive and respond critically on issues in which they hold strong opinions. This can lead to the perception of SLIs as hostile and, on occasion, arrogant or uncompromising. Often, however, SLIs do not act in such a fashion; such aggressiveness is usually limited to issues in which SLIs are very opinionated -- these can include events in which their lifestyle has been threatened, or if something they require is functioning improperly in a way they do not fully understand.

Fe means, if anything, groupthink and paying attention to the emotional atmosphere and the morals and standards of one's particular group - or society in general. A type with Fe as a vulnerable function falls down in that regard.

Given the above, we can't expect Conflicting types to get along. Here's what sociotype.com has to say:

At a distance, conflictors may find each other interesting, but as they become closer are sure to notice a fundamental difference in their motives and point of view. They can only sidestep this by limiting their relationship to the most formal and superficial interaction possible in a given situation (the most natural psychological distance for this relationship is very long). When interaction is unavoidable, uncomfortable misunderstandings or, most often, a sense of awkwardness and ambiguity usually result, even when both partners have the best of intentions. When actual conflict occurs, conflictors tend to repeat themselves over and over without ever making themselves understood; thus, they are often not even sure why the conflict exists in the first place. Conflictors can have known each other for a very long time without having the slightest understanding of each other's motives. This makes true collaboration and intimacy difficult.

It is quite common for conflict partners at work or in other formal situations to make a point of being civil and friendly to the other and openly demonstrating their good will. In the process of doing this, they usually end up trying to engage one another's vulnerable function, but this only makes the other suspicious and withdrawn. Compare this to the suggestive function, which one readily allows others to engage and support. Because of their disparate life goals, conflictors seldom have the same interests, but when they do discussion of these interests can provide a means of interaction formal enough to not be impeded by socionic factors.

In other words, keep things at a superficial and formal level, don't go too deep, and you'll get along fine. That's been my experience with the type I have a Conflicting relationship with. Having said that, some individuals of that type I cannot stand; they annoy me too much. In such cases, I agree with socionics when it says that Conflict is the worst type of relationship. Generally, a friendship can survive a bad socionics relationship: I've been good friends for years with two individuals whose types are in a Supervisor relationship with mine; another good friend of many years is a Benefactor, and yet another is a Beneficiary. But I've never been friends with a type with whom I have a Conflicting relationship. I think that this is because Conflicting pairs don't share any valued functions, whereas Beneficiary / Benefactor and Supervisor / Supervisee pairs do. In other words, the pairs in the latter group have something in common, whereas Conflicting pairs have nothing in common.

I couldn't possibly conclude this essay without looking at the Conflicting relationship as it appears between certain characters in popular culture, particularly in comic books. The most famous Conflicting relationship is between one comic book character who is an INTP and another who is an ESFP - I am speaking of Doctor Bruce Banner and the Hulk. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby understood, on an intuitive level, socionics and MBTI, and in a stroke of genius came up with the idea of embodying two types who couldn't be more unalike - the INTP and ESFP - in the same superhero character. The Hulk series gives us the most sustained picture of what a Conflicting relationship is like, and it's not good. Banner and the Hulk don't like one another, to say the least, and each to the other represents all the qualities they dislike in a human being.

What of the ENFJ and ISTJ pair? Do they appear in popular culture? We need to understand that the ISTJ and ENFJ often appear in the form of stock characters in any medium (television, movies, comic books, novels, theatre). The ISTJ character will play the role of the righteous avenger, the martinet, the loyal and obedient servant or soldier. The ENFJ character, on the other hand, shows up as cult leader, charismatic leader (think of DC's Nightwing or the Transformers' Optimus Prime), hero teacher (think of Robin Williams' character in Dead Poets Society (1989)), or interfering busybody who pokes his nose into everyone's lives and who has a thin skin and bears grudges (think of Stephanie Forrester in the TV series Bold and the Beautiful - or Richard Nixon). Often a character of a certain MBTI / socionics type will contain all the stock characters associated with his type. That's true of the ISTJ character Darth Vader / Anakin Skywalker. Through the six-part Star Wars epic, Anakin / Darth reveals different aspects of the ISTJ - avenger, martinet, loyal servant lingering in the background - in turn. As for the ENFJ of Star Wars, Obi-Wan Kenobi, we only see the good sides of the type - charismatic leader and hero teacher - and we don't get to see the negative (although these are hinted here and there).

So Hilary is Obi-Wan, Trump is Darth Vader. These are two male characters: how about a female ENFJ and male ISTJ pair? Those who are familiar with Taylor's blog, Zombies Ruin Everything, we know the answer: the X-Men's romantic couple Jean Grey and Cyclops.

So Trump is the sullen and brooding stick in the mud Scott Summers, and Hilary is Jean Grey, the empathic, sensitive and charismatic leader and mentor of Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters. Or perhaps Hilary is Dark Phoenix...

Mark Hootsen signing off.