MBTI: HOW TO TYPE SUPERHEROES

Comic books differ from other art forms - novels, plays, TV shows, movies - and we are faced with a different set of problems when typing a comic book character as opposed to one in a TV show.

When typing characters on a TV show such as Bold and the Beautiful, it's best to proceed as follows: get to know the 16 types and their little quirks and foibles really well and then attempt to recognise such-and-such a character as a typical instance of a certain type as seen in a TV show, comic book or movie.

On TV, character - and MBTI - is revealed to us in flashes: TV shows give us little pieces of a character at a time (from which we can divine a character's type). TV shows (and movies) can trace their forebear to the play, which is the oldest dramatic art form, and plays (according to Aristotle) only show slices of a character - not all of a character's life, only the most important moments of the character's life.

While comic books portray slices of life, comic book characters - especially superheroes and supervillains - reveal their type to us not only through their personality traits but their powers and abilities. As we shall see, some superpowers are more suited to an Intuitive type than a Sensor and vice versa.

If you cast your mind back to the superhero role-playing and card games of the 1980s and 1990s, you'll recall that usually each character's statistics reflect their strengths and weaknesses in certain areas. One of Superman's weaknesses lies in the field of the supernatural and magic, while Doctor Strange (as 'Earth's Sorcerer Supreme') exhibits mastery in that domain; the Silver Surfer possess the 'Power Cosmic', and is classified (along with Adam Warlock, Thanos, Galactus and Captain Marvel) in the Heroclix game series as a 'cosmic', while Spiderman doesn't show any propensity towards the 'cosmic' at all. One of my arguments here in this article is that these dichotomies - supernatural versus scientific, cosmic versus earthbound and others like them - bear upon MBTI and socionics.

I. Sensor or Intuitive?

We can define that dichotomy - Sensors versus Intuitives - in superhero land as being one of brains versus brawn. Characters whose powers and abilities tend to be mental (e.g., telepathic) or supernatural more often than not should be classified as Intuitives; so should characters whose ability (as opposed to superpower) could be said to be mental and intellectual (perhaps the character is a detective or a scientist) or consisting of some intangible quality such as 'charisma' or 'leadership'. On the other hand, Sensors will have, more often than not, a main power or ability based on strength, force and the use of weaponry; sometimes they will possess enhanced 'super-senses' (e.g., Wolverine, Daredevil). Intuitives tend to dwell in the mental or spiritual realm, Sensors in the material and sensory.

Take a look at some of the X-Men from the Chris Claremont years. Jean Grey, Professor X, Nightcrawler, Storm, Kitty Pryde, Longshot, Beast belong in the Intuitive category; Cyclops, Wolverine, Colossus, Rogue in the Sensor. Remember that Cyclops' main ability is to blast things with force beams from his eyes - force blasts, force bolts, the power to construct energy barriers and shields ('force manipulation') are a Sensor's power. Storm's power (weather control) and Nightcrawler's (teleportation) require a mental effort as opposed to the physical; or, to put it another way, an effort of thought as opposed to an effort of will. You could say that Nightcrawler must use intuition - extraverted intuition, Ne - to avoid teleporting ('bampfing' as he calls it) into the wrong place.

A character can start out as a Sensor and transform into an Intuitive, or vice versa. In her first appearance in an Avengers annual, Rogue plays the role of villain with the ability to siphon off or steal the super-powers and characteristics of superheroes - which, at first sight, makes her seem an Intuitive. But, after she steals Ms Marvel's powers and becomes an X-Men regular - and it's in that series that we get to know her - she becomes super-strong, super-fast, invulnerable; in short, she becomes a Sensor. Likewise, the Beast may seem to be a Sensor, but we mustn't forget that before he became a mutant he was Hank McCoy, a super-scientist, and, like Tony Stark / Iron Man, a rather extraverted and loquacious one at that. The fact that such an obvious Intuitive winds up as having the superpowers of a Sensor represents an intended irony; we find the same irony at work in Spiderman, a geeky and nerdy Intuitive who becomes super-strong.

In the Fantastic Four, we find two Sensors, two Intuitives. Mister Fantastic, as we know, can stretch, turn himself into rubber balls and all sorts of things, but let's remember the defining trait of the character (which made itself felt even before he gained superpowers): he's a brilliant inventor and scientist. That makes him an Intuitive... Like Green Lantern, Invisible Woman can construct invisible force-fields and objects which can be used as battering rams, etc., but these abilities were a later addition. Originally she was known for being able to turn herself (and objects and other people) invisible: more of a mental power than a physical. In contrast, the Thing owns a rocky and impervious body and can lift huge objects. This, to me, makes him a Sensor, and, what's more, can be related back to introverted sensing Si, which, as we know, involves physical strength, physical toughness and self-discipline. As for the Human Torch, his powers manifest themselves in the physical realm in a spectacular way. He blazes fire trails through the sky, makes and throws fireballs, overheats and blows up robots and machines, goes supernova... These demonstrate force, will, and force and will imposed on others - extraverted sensing Se.

In the case of the 'A-list' of DC characters, we find Sensor heroes Superman, Green Lantern, Green Arrow, the Flash and Intuitive heroes Batman, Robin and Wonder Woman. Green Lantern uses will power to make objects with his power ring, the Flash uses super speed to make his body a weapon (able to saw through objects or burn them up using friction, for example) - powers which are based on the sensory and the physical. Batman and Dick Grayson use their mental abilities to do detective work (as does Sherlock Holmes, another Intuitive) and are escape artists (like Mister Miracle, an Intuitive). Wonder Woman, as we know, can lift heavy objects, which should make her a Sensor, but I argue that an intangible quality - moral leadership or charisma - makes up her main ability, an ability she shares with Dick Grayson / Nightwing. Taylor types both Grayson and Wonder Woman as ENFJs, and ENFJ super-characters usually display an intangible, intuitive ability to lead and inspire (and manipulate).

We know that Magneto, Darkseid and Namor the Sub-Mariner possess all sorts of powers, but, if we're to trace back a main, or prime ability in these three, it's the ability to lead (or inspire fear in) men. The same goes for other Intuitive leader-types the Kingpin, the Red Skull and Loki.

The lesson is that we must always look at the fundamentals. In the case of the Spectre, we could be forgiven for thinking that he'd be an Intuitive like so many other Marvel and DC supernatural characters - e.g., the Phantom Stranger or Doctor Strange. But if you've read any of the Spectre comic books, it becomes clear early on that he's an ISTJ - a Sensor. That's because the character started out as an ISTJ: he's a police detective, Lieutenant Jim Corrigan, who comes back to life after being murdered by criminals as a vengeance-driven spook. That theme - the ISTJ as a vengeful supernatural entity - appears again and again in horror. Likewise, Boston Brand / Deadman, before being murdered, is a circus performer and a Sensor; ironically, he becomes transformed, after death, into a character with superpowers we normally associate with Intuitives - he turns into a ghost who can take over people's bodies.

I'll note here in passing that Sensors, particularly the extraverted-sensing ones, seem to be drawn to the use of weapons. Think of Daredevil (billy clubs), James Bond (handguns), Wolverine (claws), Elektra (sai daggers), Deathstroke the Terminator (swords and staves), Valkyrie from the Defenders (swords)... The archer characters spring to mind here also: both Oliver Queen / Green Arrow and Hawkeye are Sensors and both use bows and arrows. All these characters display an uncanny virtuosity when using their weapon of choice.

II. Thinker or Feeler?

Thinking and feeling make up, in socionics and MBTI, the two judging or 'Rational' functions. We make value judgements using either thinking or feeling, as do comic book characters. Dialogue and interplay gives us a fairly good idea of how a character will react to a certain situation and what value judgements they will make.

We see that in the famous Green Lantern and Green Arrow team-up stories by Neal Adams and Denny O'Neil . When confronted with an ethical dilemma, Green Lantern - as a Thinker - will consult the law: he asks himself, 'How does this look objectively and from the standpoint of accepted rules, morals, manners and customs?'. Green Arrow, on the other hand, will emote straight away. He reacts, instantly, and gives his interpretation - based on his own deeply-held moral convictions.

In the comic books, thinker characters tend to be  logical, detached, rational - but not always more intelligent - and calculating; if they don't possess much in the way of morals, they'll use deception if need be. Feelers, on the other hand, show an absence of guile and often find it difficult to detach themselves from their emotions and look at things objectively. Extraverted feeling revolves around what others feel and what their opinions, morals, habits are; introverted feeling, one's own moral evaluations and emotional reactions. A catchphrase of an extraverted Feeler superhero such as Superman is, 'Don't do that - it will hurt other people' ; for an introverted Feeler, 'Don't do that, because I don't like it'. Whereas, for extraverted thinkers such as the Punisher and Batman, things may be prohibited because they are unjust and go against The Law with a capital L -  a higher law than that of the America criminal justice system.

In the X-Men, Wolverine, Cyclops, Storm, Beast number among the rational and calculating types, whereas Professor X, Jean Grey, Nightcrawler, Colossus, Rogue, Kitty Pryde should be thought of as Feelers. The difference is illustrated by the contrast between Magneto and Professor X. Magneto, being a Thinker, looks at events from a calculating and technocratic perspective; Professor X's perspective, on the other hand, strikes us as empathic and moralistic, and always has a view to the common good. You see here the difference between extraverted thinking Te (Magneto) and extraverted feeling Fe (Professor X). Keirsey would classify Professor X, an NF (Intuitive Feeler) as an 'Idealist', Magneto, a NT (Intuitive Thinker) as a 'Rational'.

But wait, Thinking types - who have either Te or Ti as a judging function - get emotional, don't they? Obviously so: they can become just as emotional as Fe or Fi types. The difference lies in how they evaluate their experiences. The first question the Thinker type asks himself is, 'What are the rules on this? How does this thing work?'. Whereas the Feeler is more interested in the question of how such-and-such affects the group atmosphere or dynamic (Fe) or one's deeply personal and natural reactions (Fi), which can be ones of empathy or antipathy. It's how you sum up life - how you evaluate it - that counts.

This goes some way to explaining why some very intelligent characters such as Professor X - who invented the Danger Room and Cerebro, among other technological marvels - should be considered as Feelers, not Thinkers; and why some very ditzy characters such as Lois Lane or Janet Van Dyne are calculating Thinkers (after all, Lois Lane is (in the old comic books at least) always plotting how to get Superman to marry her; the Wasp does the same with Hank Pym).

III. Perceiver or Judger?

Taylor gives a good description of the differences between Perceiver and Judger below:

Judging or Perceiving (J/P)- Judging or Perceiving determines your lifestyle. While Judgers are more strict in their routines and prefer to have things finished, Perceivers are more likely to be okay with leaving things up in their air. Judgers go by a set of externalized rules that keep everything in place, while Perceivers live by internalized principles that guide them and only them. Like dogs and cats.

As Chad Crandall puts it, Judgers appear as 'mappers', Perceivers as 'explorers'.

Here's where it gets difficult. Spiderman, as an INTP, would, in socionics, be called an INTj - the small 'j' comes about because his dominant function (Ti) is a judging function. But, in MBTI, he's an INTP: the uppercase 'P' at the end signifies that his extraverted function is the perceiving one. And Spiderman (in comparison to the Punisher, for example, who is an ISTJ) seems more of a Perceiver than a Judger. So what gives?

I think that the point MBTI is trying to make is that the extraverted primary or secondary function determines how we appear to others: the extraverted function is the one the world sees, and the one that makes one (in the eyes of the world) a Judger or Perceiver. Barry Allen (the Flash in the old Silver Age DC comics) works as a police scientist and leads a structured and ordered life which we'd expect of a Judger. As an ISJF, his judging function - feeling - is extraverted and so it's the one that the rest of the world sees. And indeed, his rather snippy fiancé, Iris West, calls him a 'tortoise'.

It's not entirely true to say that Judgers (in MBTI) want to impose their values on the world while Perceivers don't - all the types, to a certain extent, seek to impose their values - but a great deal of truth exists in that assertion. Take the difference between Doctor Doom (a Judger) and Mr Fantastic (a Perceiver). Doom leads an orderly, structured life and works towards goals, and both activities involve other people: he wants to: conquer the world, rescue his mother from her imprisonment in Mephisto's hellish realm, destroy the Fantastic Four... This is what the world sees of Doom. Whereas, in the case of Reed Richards, we see a man who engages in scientific research for its own sake. He doesn't want to bring the world to heel. What's more, his extraverted function (the one the world sees), which is Ne, doesn't lend itself to world-conquering.

A Judger such as Doom wants the world to follow his rules (or at least expects, like Barry Allen, the world to follow a certain structure and is disappointed if it doesn't).

Judgers seem to be more rooted than perceivers. In the Fantastic Four, the two Judger characters in the foursome, the Thing and Invisible Woman serve to keep the team grounded - a necessity when the other half of the team (Human Torch and Richards) are Perceivers and somewhat flighty.

In the Claremont-era X-Men, we find plenty of Judgers - Professor X, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue (surprisingly enough), Cyclops - who contrast against the 'wild card' Perceivers Wolverine, Kitty Pryde, Nightcrawler and the Beast. Likewise, in the seventies-era Defenders, the Judgers (Doctor Strange, Nighthawk) serve as a counterweight to the comparatively more erratic and unstable Valkyrie, Hellcat and the Hulk. In the eighties-era New Teen Titans, we find a lot of Judgers - Robin / Nightwing, Starfire, Wonder Girl / Troia, Raven, Cyborg, Kid Flash - and only two Perceivers (Jericho, Changeling). The last two were added so as to balance out the team. A good writer of superhero team comic books will deploy various MBTI types to give balance.

IV. Introvert or Extravert?

 Introversion or extraversion in a superhero can be measured by the extent to which he wants to be seen by other people and known by other people.

A superhero or supervillain base can give us a good idea of his extraversion or introversion. Introverted heroes or villains isolate themselves in their base or hideout from others. Doctor Doom (who lives in a remote castle), Batman (who lives in a cave), Doctor Strange (who lives in a spooky mansion in Greenwich Village), Mr Fantastic (who shuts himself away in a laboratory in the Baxter Building for days at a time), Wolverine (who takes off to the Canadian Rockies now and then to be by himself) give us examples of this. In contrast, Superman lives in a 'Fortress of Solitude', which sounds rather like an introvert's den, but a gigantic, highly visible metal door can be found at the entrance, and a few metres away we see a gigantic golden key pointing to that door. It's as though Superman wants to call attention to himself; the Fortress doesn't seem as concealed as Batman's Batcave. What's more, the interiors of the Fortress are brightly lit, and in a few rooms, we find prominent statues of Superman himself as well as his friends and family. Similarly, Darkseid's base - the planet Apokolips - is festooned with images and statues of its dread ruler. Let's not forget that Darkseid, in the Legion of Superheroes series, sculpted the planet Daxam to look like his head.

Extraverts such as Superman, Wonder Woman, Captain America, Robin, Luke Cage, Dazzler, Jack Kirby's Guardian, Green Arrow, Thor, Jean Grey / Phoenix wear brightly-coloured and eye-catching uniforms; introverts prefer to dark or muted outfits (think of Batman, the Punisher, Judge Dredd, Wolverine, Cyclops, Mr Fantastic, Doctor Strange, the Phantom Stranger, Raven, Professor X...). I'll note here that ISTJs such as Dredd, Punisher, Jack Kirby's Orion, Cyclops, the Spectre, Darth Vader like to conceal themselves behind helmets, hoods and visors.

One might point out that introverts such as Spiderman or Mister Miracle wear brightly-coloured, leery costumes: true enough. But what we find here is another instance of intended ironic contrast. The introverted and shy Peter Parker designed the gaudy Spiderman costume for the purpose of working in show business; likewise, the loner and introvert Scott Free inherited a uniform from his mentor Thaddeus Brown who was a professional theatrical performer.

Batgirl / Barbara Gordon and Nightwing / Dick Grayson patterned their uniforms after Batman's, whose colours certainly doesn't match Gordon or Grayson's extraverted personalities. But Gordon added some yellow to the design, and Grayson some yellow and years later, some red.

Generally, we can pick an introvert from an extravert by asking ourselves this question: does he want to be seen and acknowledged by others, or does he prefer to conceal himself and even live in darkness? Daredevil, in his civilian identity as Matt Murdock, wears shades, dark suits and attempts to make himself look as unobtrusive as possible. Much of his superheroing seems to be done in darkness, and on rooftops, and in that regard he resembles introvert heroes such as Batman and Spiderman. Nightcrawler has the power of becoming invisible in the dark. Cyborg of the New Teen Titans attempts to cover up his body by wearing caps and trench coats - he hates people staring at him. In contrast, his teammate Changeling / Beast Boy wants to be seen as much as possible; so does Superman, who patrols, in full view, in the skies above Metropolis. Iron Man / Tony Stark clearly likes being around other people, while the Silver Surfer, who floats above Earth on his surfboard, doesn't.

V. Putting it all together: the Scarecrow

It always helps, when typing a character, to read their first appearance and origin story. Below we find the a page of World's Finest Comics #3, which introduces the Batman villain Jonathan Crane, the Scarecrow. What can we learn from it?

Let's look at where Jonathan Crane fits in to the MBTI dichotomies:

THINKER OR FEELER?

It would seem obvious that the academic Crane, a teacher of psychology, would be a Thinker - but not so fast. Professor X is, after all, a professor, but I type him as a Feeler, not a Thinker. Crane is a Thinker, but this is revealed by his behaviour more than anything else, specifically by his calculating and reasoning. In the opening panels, he delivers a reasoned discourse - and a discourse on (not coincidentally) how to manipulate people. Thinker characters who are bad guys tend to be manipulative... Then, in the last panels of the page, we find him engaged in ratiocinations again: he's performing another set of calculations. Were he a Feeler, he'd be reacting in a different way to the scorn of his colleagues: 'Nobody likes me, my life is terrible! What shall I do...'. His colleagues - and the world at large - doesn't respect him, but instead of reacting, he acts; he becomes determined to get even. He thinks in terms of problems and solutions.

INTROVERT OR EXTRAVERT?

The question answers itself. Crane resembles other brooding, isolated loner characters the Punisher, Wolverine, Peter Parker, and Bruce Wayne himself. He lives in a gloomy pad. A mousey-looking man, he doesn't want to draw attention to himself, neglects his appearance and wears shabby clothes (later on we'll see that the colours of his costume are dark and muted).

Let's go on to the next page...

JUDGER OR PERCEIVER?

Does Crane lead an orderly, structured life? Or does he take life as it comes? We see that Crane - like the other Judger characters who appear in that issue (Bruce Wayne, Clark Kent and Dick Grayson) - leads the same life, day in, day out; he isn't as erratic as Peter Parker, who aspired to work in academia for a while and made a poor teacher and student. Crane begins the story in the classroom, goes back to his pad, broods, comes back to class the next day, returns home and broods some more ('In his home, Crane's distorted brain begins thinking along fantastic lines - criminal lines'). This is a man who is accustomed to regularity and an even rhythm in his life.

Does he seek to impose his values on others? Yes indeed. Perceivers such as Reed Richards, Peter Parker, Wolverine, Oliver Queen (the bearded one in the comics, not the TV one) hold strongly-felt values but really don't care if the world is congruent with those values or not; they won't strive particularly hard to change anything. Scarecrow, on the other hand, does want to bring the world in line with his values: specifically, he wants to induce fear in others - and, at the same time, make money and gain prestige from doing so.

INTUITIVE OR SENSOR?

Do Crane's abilities and / or powers use brains or brawn? Obviously, the Scarecrow relies on his brains, and his power - altering the emotions of others (using special chemicals) - makes him an Intuitive character, not a Sensor.

In Socionics, intuitive intuition Ni is understood to be the perception of time and also cause and effect. Crane's broodings and ratiocinations are all about discovering the principles behind human psychology and how a certain cause (making people afraid) brings about a certain effect (making him wealthy and powerful).

SUMMING SCARECROW UP: INTJ

Crane is an Introvert, an Intuitive, a Thinker and a Judger. Taking into account Crane's displays of introverted intuition (planning, study of cause and effect) and his extraverted thinking (organisation of data), we can conclude he's an INTJ (INTp in Socionics). And that's how Taylor types him. It's no accident that his origin story and his character resembles other INTJ characters Doctor Doom and Batman himself - doesn't Crane's Eureka moment ('So I look like a scarecrow - that will be my symbol - a symbol of poverty and fear combined! The perfect symbol - the Scarecrow!') remind you of Bruce Wayne's?

Mark Hootsen signing off.

MBTI: Justice League: Gods and Monsters (2015)

I can't emphasise enough how good this movie is - it has to be one of the best cartoon movies DC has made - and urge everyone to run, not walk, and go and see it.


One of the reasons why I love the Paul Dini and Bruce Timm cartoons is that they respect and love the 'old' DC - the DC universe that existed before 1985's Crisis on Infinite Earths - as much as I do. Their work feels like home to me. While DC continues to upend the entire DC universe as part of the latest multi-part crossover marketing gimmick and change the fundamentals every other month, the Dini and Timm universe proceeds in its own way, unaffected by trends.


Having said that, the characters in Gods- depart - and depart a great deal - from the norm. They don't resemble the Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor that we all know: the MBTI types differ radically from those in the mainstream DC universe, where Superman is an ESFJ, Batman an INTJ, Wonder Woman an ENFJ, Lex Luthor an ENTJ... Gods- does a brilliant and skilful job of keeping the viewer off-balance and challenging (and thwarting) his expectations.


I think that this movie would make a great introduction to MBTI. Out the of 16 types, Gods- 13 (see below) and the characters can all be typed with minimal difficulty. They can all be understood using the basic Keirsey dichotomies (sensors versus intuitives, perceivers versus judgers, thinkers versus feelers).


Unlike many other superhero cartoon movies, Gods- relies on plot twists a great deal: except for the last quarter (which is a rather dull superhero slug fest) I was kept guessing the whole time. This is why I must give a

******************************************************************************

Spoiler Alert! You have been warned!

******************************************************************************
Now let's go through the characters.


Superman characters

Superman (Hernan Guerra):

In the Wiki entry, we find:



This universe's version of Superman is Hernan Guerra. He is the son of General Zod who was rocketed to Earth as a child and raised by a family of honorable and hardworking Mexican migrant farmers. Having to go through the troubles that illegal immigrants have in the United States leads him to become short tempered and withdrawn from humanity.


A bit political, don't you think? Our undocumented Kryptonian (undocumented superhero? unpapered Kryptonian?) should be typed as an ESTJ. The leader of the team, ruthless and undoubtedly a sensor, Superman-Guerra fits the ESTJ description. (He inherits the extraverted thinking characteristic from his father, General Zod).


Lois Lane:

I found her hard to type at first, but after a while realised I was overlooking the obvious. In the comic books, Lois Lane belongs in the ESTP category: here, she's an ENTP. She's critical of Superman and the Justice League, sceptical and as a reporter, bent on tearing their reputations down. ENTPs are often accused of wanting to dismantle ideals and replace them with - nothing.


General Zod: 

No question, the would-be dictator of Krypton (who inadverdently ends up destroying it) is an ENTJ.When he breaks into Jor-El's lab, he's accompanied by a posse of guards (who are loyal to him to the bitter end). As EJ Arendee says, an ENTJ never travels with his posse. 

Lex Luthor: 

In the comic books, he's an ENTJ; here he winds up becoming an INFJ (in one of the surprising twists). INFJs act as counsellors, and here Luthor acts as a mentor of sorts - to Hernan and then Bekka. Bald and confined to a wheelchair, he reminds us of Professor X in the X-Men - another INFJ. The withdrawn, solitary Luthor lives in a satellite orbiting the Earth; he spends his time pondering the cosmos. Most INFJs in the comics seem a little cosmic or mystical, and Luthor here is no exception.

I couldn't help notice the resemblance between him and Metron in Jack Kirby's Fourth World. Indeed, by the end, he turns into Metron.

Wonder Woman characters

Wonder Woman / Bekka

While Bekka in Jack Kirby is an ESFJ, here she displays ISFP characteristics: swordfighting (ISFP characters often like melee weapons), an elfin appearance and strongly-held convictions. You can find plenty of ISFP characters at Taylor's site here.

While at first I thought Wonder Woman would be an Amazon, the 'Kirbytech' circuitry on her sword gave her away.



Steve Trevor

Hard-nosed, authoritarian, by the book, an army man with a buzz haircut - obviously an ISTJ. Most ISTJ characters in pop culture strike us as being somewhat unpleasant and creepy, and Trevor is no exception. While they get the job done, you don't want to be friends with them.


Izaya the High Father

At first, Izaya appears to be what he is in the comic books: an INFJ. But, in a brilliant twist, he's revealed to be an evil, scheming mastermind - an INTJ - whose calculated coup against Darkseid succeeds perfectly. His granddaughter Bekka goes against his wishes, being an ISFP, because, being a perceiver (Keirsey categories again) she can't see the big picture, unlike Izaya, who's a judger.


Orion

In the comic books, an unstoppable juggernaut, a cold, relentless ISTJ; here, an ESFP who a) breaks with tradition; b) appreciates beautiful things; c) is none too bright. Not what you'd expect Orion to be, and not what you'd expect of a scion of Darkseid. This is why Bekka pleads with High Father to spare Orion's life, but to no avail. 

Batman characters

Batman / Kirk Langstrom

Created by Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams, Langstrom in the comic books turns himself by mistake into Man-Bat; as a classic mad scientist type, he's an INTP. Here he's an INTP also - only he turns himself into a vampire, not a bat.

We find, in Langstrom, an instance of an INTP subtype - here the Ne secondary function in the INTP makes itself just a little more than the dominant Ti function. This INTP subtype, being soft and dreamy, reminds us more of the Peter Parker INTP than the more hard-edged Reed Richards or Sherlock Holmes INTP (both of them Ti subtypes). But make no mistake, Lanstrom's scientific and analytical abilities, ineptitude and lack of social graces make him an INTP.

Vampirism, as a superpower, strikes me as being more an intuitive's power than a sensor's. Langstrom definitely seems to be an intuitive, not a sensor (Keirsey again).

Will Magnus

In the comic books, an INTP; here, an ENFJ. A crazy messianic type who wants to meld all of humanity into a uni-mind, he's definitely an ENFJ. Unlike the INFJ, who wants to redeem humanity through one-on-one counselling, the ENFJ wants to reach as wide an audience as possible and bring them together as one; Magnus' scheme - of showering billions of mind-controlling nanobots onto humanity dropped through boom tubes - serves to do just that. 

Tina 

The human Tina here gives a stock ESFJ who cares for just about everyone. She shows a lot of consideration for Magnus' friend Kirk Langstrom, which arouses Magnus' jealousy - even though it's a case of an ESFJ being an ESFJ. Whereas an ENFJ wants to convert and redeem as many people as possible, the ESFJ wants to take care of many as possible. 

Tin

The bumbling, self-effacing, adorable servant who performs useful tasks around the house - such as taking out the garbage - Tin is an ISFJ. He remains loyal to his master to the end, and loyalty defines an ISFJ.


Tina / Platinum

Deadly and efficient, smooth and graceful, doesn't talk a lot, good with weapons, tenacious and unyielding - how could robot Tina be anything other than an ISTP? Wheres the Platinum in the Metal Men comic books seems to be more of a zany, emotional, annoying type (ENFP?), Platinum here reminds us more of Elektra or Lashina in Jack Kirby's Fourth World (both ISTPs) - a slick and deadly female assassin.


That's the 13 characters - who did we leave out? The ESTPs, INFPs and ENFPs. Well, you can't fit all the types into one short movie... Gods- gives us thirteen, and what's more, we don't find any double-ups (more than one instance of a type).


Mark Hootsen signing off. 

Myers-Briggs and the Superheroes: an Introduction

I.

The Myers-Briggs system of personality typing (MBTI, or Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) can be used for lots of things, including careers counselling and self-improvement, but to me, the best use one can get out of it is typing characters in popular culture - movies, TV, comic books. Some sites do a great job in that regard, and I point to Taylor's Zombies Ruin Everything blog as a prime example (I shall be linking to Taylor's personality profiles throughout this article). Typing characters in your favourite comic books really enhances your enjoyment of the stories. In future posts, I'll be typing some characters; this post should serve as an introduction to typing - as a manual.

To go through Myers-Brigg very briefly...

Everyone perceives (and acts in) the world in four ways: sensing, intuiting, thinking and feeling. Sensing (S) refers to physical sense perception of a thing and the drawing of meanings from it. After perceiving a thing, sensing links it up to a greater perception of the whole, in the same way we can infer what a completed jigsaw puzzle looks like from one piece. Intuition (I), on the other hand, means the perception of mental things - things which aren't out there in the material world. Intuition views concepts - overall ideas of things which we draw from seeing patterns and making connections; it could be characterised as whole pattern recognition.

 

These two - sensing and intuiting - belong in the category of perceiving functions; thinking (T) and feeling (F) make up the judging functions. Instead of merely perceiving - i.e., sensing and intuiting - the judging functions criticise, evaluate, draw conclusions and map out pathways to goals. Thinking evaluates things according to their use - i.e., it determines their usefulness - and puts things in order. But thinking only sees small portions of things. Thinking, applied to a painting, only sees the brushstrokes. Feeling, on the other hand, evaluates the overall meaning, significance and value of a thing, and sees the entire painting for what it is, not just the brushstrokes. Thinking views the world through the prism of thought, feeling through emotions.

Everyone uses the same four functions, but certainly personality types are biased towards one over the other three. We have thinking-dominant types, sensing-dominant, and so forth. This gives us four categories. But, to complicate matters further, the perceiving and judging functions look either outward or inward - that is, they are either extraverted (E) or introverted (I). So we have dominant introverted sensing (Si) types, dominant extraverted thinking (Te) types, etc., which leads to a total of eight types.

How can sensing be introverted or extraverted? Extraverted sensing means paying close attention to the world of the five senses and losing one's sense self outside in the world - being outside of one's self and one's body. In contrast, introverted sensing focuses on one's bodily sensations and one's physical self, and often a dominant introverted sensing type will be interested in physical fitness and even asceticism. In addition, the introverted sensor stockpiles his memories and impressions of the past, and is nearly always comparing them to the present and finding the present wanting; he tends towards nostalgia and conservatism. Extraverted sensors, on the other hand, live in the here and now.

Extraverted intuition is used to detect possibilities, things that aren't out there in the material world but could be. It could be called the faculty of inventors and entrepreneurs. Introverted intuition focuses inwards and tries to determine the essence of things - what is such and such a thing really, truly is - and makes predictions about the future using hunches, guesses, 'psychic' intuition and knowledge which can come in the form of a dream or vision.

Extraverted intuition expands, introverted intuition narrows. Tell an extraverted intuitor to find a pathway through a forest, and he will see multiple pathways, multiple possibilities, and be enamoured, intoxicated even, by the fact that so many possibilities are presenting themselves. The introverted intuitor will see the one pathway which is the quickest and easiest and just 'know' - without coming up with much of a logical justification - that it is the right one.

Extraverted thinking seeks to put things out there, in the material world, to use, and relies upon a criteria of usefulness to determine their value. An extraverted thinker looks at people as a military man or executive would look at them: a strong instrumentalist bias exists - that is to say, a view of people as a means to achieve a certain end. Introverted thinking, on the other hand, believes in putting one's thoughts in order: sifting through information and analysing and breaking down things into their constituent parts - the operative word here is systems analysis.

Finally, we are left with the difference between extraverted and introverted feeling. The former looks outwards - to one's friends, family, community, social milieu - and evaluates to the criteria of shared feeling, what other people feel. Introverted feeling looks to one's inner emotions, inner feelings - how one feels about it - as a criteria and seeks to shield them (and one's self) from others; it wants to do its own thing. It infers the feelings of others through analogy: that is, 'That other fellow must be like me, so, he's feeling what I'm feeling'. It can be empathic while at the same nurturing and protective of its own self.

One of the eight functions, introverted and extraverted, must dominate in a certain personality type; but one is never a 'pure' type. The dominant function operates with the help of the other three functions, which help balance the self. For example, one may be an extraverted sensor, and live in the moment, and be a somewhat crude and sensual individual; at the same time, this will be balanced out by a secondary function - for instance, introverted thinking, which will at least give that individual a low animal cunning. Likewise, an introverted intuitor, who broods a lot on the meaning and the workings of the universe and ponders visions, will be balanced out by the extraverted thinking function - which excels at organising and directing men. If the primary or dominant function is introverted, the secondary is always extraverted. And vice versa: an extraverted primary is balanced by an introverted secondary.

Given that no type has the same primary and secondary function as another type, we now have not eight but 16 types.

II.

One can familiarise with the basic Myers-Briggs and Jungian concepts - perceiving, judging, intuition, sensing, thinking, feeling, extraversion, introversion, etc. - without too much difficulty, but most people will run into problems when they try and view all this as a whole. After all, the system contains 16 (!) personality types - how are you to get to know them all? The sheer number of types presents an obstacle. After all, one has to learn only 12 notes to play music.

The answer, to me, lies subdividing the 16 types into four or so groups. Once you learn the basic traits of each group, then you can focus on an individual type within the group in more detail. That's the approach Keirsey takes: he splits the 16 types into four - the SJs ('Guardians'), SPs ('Artisans'), NJs ('Idealists') and NTs ('Rationalists').

Studying Keirsey's categories will help you get a handle on Myers-Briggs. But I think an improvement on Keirsey's system can be found in Calise Seller's work. I identify four groups there. I'll list them, and give a nice or neutral title for each type, and a nasty one which represents the Shadow (Jung's term for bad or evil alter-ego).


IPs (Ruminators / Solipsists) - introverted perceivers;
EJs (Technocrats / Tyrants) - extraverted judgers;
EPs (Theatrical Impresarios / Used Car Salesmen) - extraverted perceivers;
IJs (Lawgivers / Mad Monks) - introverted judgers.

When it comes to MBTI and comic book characters especially, we are dealing with stock types and caricatures, and simplification and exaggeration - as well as myths and misconceptions - all have a part to play there. In real life, we'll never encounter INTJs as cartoony and hyperbolised as Batman or Emperor Palpatine (from Star Wars), but the exaggerated, even distorted, depictions of the INTJ type will help us remember the INTJ designation and what it stands for. We need the exaggerations, and absolutes of black and white, when trying to work out a character's type.

The functions in each of the types - sensing, intuiting, judging, perceiving - are used, in Sellers' system, to answer four main questions:


1) Details and Data: Who am I and what's my role in life?

This line of questioning concerns one's self and how one relates to one's self - specifically, one's innermost thoughts and feelings. Do I organise my thoughts in a methodical fashion, or do I study and explore my emotional experiences? In other words, do I habitually engage in thinking (putting my thoughts to use in a logical and efficient manner) or feeling (appreciating the meaning and significance of great emotional experiences)? Am I technician and laboratory scientist by nature, or am I a poet and artist, even a mystic...

To engage in such activities - feeling or thinking - one must look inside oneself; one must practice introverted thinking or feeling (Ti or Fi).

There are only two answers to the question: 'I am a Poet / Artist' (introverted feeler) or 'I am a Scientist / Technician' (introverted thinker).


2) Motivations and Observations: What's life about and how does the world really work?

Here one develops a philosophy of life - not marine life, or micro-organic life, but human life - and holds to one of two competing theses. The first is: what's true is what is (realism, materialism); the second, what's true is what could be (idealism). The latter could involve the exploration of all sorts of exciting possibilities and perspectives in life. In either case - looking at what is or what's possible - one is looking outwards; one is either practising extraverted sensing or extraverted intuiting, respectively (Se and Ne). An extraverted sensor is a Realist / Aesthetician, an extraverted intuitor an Idealist / Inventor.


3) Actions, Consequences, Decisions, Planning: What's my default action role?

Over the course of a comic book story, a lead character will habitually play one of these four roles: Master of Men; Zen Warrior; Master of the Body; Communitarian.

The four roles require both extraverted and introverted functions. A character in Zen Warrior mode will accomplish some difficult task, cleanly and efficiently, without thinking about it and with perfect concentration and faith in the outcome; he goes into action like a 'full metal jacket', with 'perfect aim', to borrow a phrase from Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket (1987)). This calls for introverted intuition (Ni), the seeing of the one 'right' answer in one's head and arriving at in a flash, 'without thinking'. Being a Master of Men requires extraverted thinking (Te) - putting people to use in an organisation and hierarchy. To be a Communitarian, you need to appreciate, understand and respect the values of one's group - whether it be one's family, community, nation, state, planet: this needs extraverted feeling (Fe). Last but not least is Master of the Body: one must be physically fit, and practice physical self-restraint and self-discipline, to pit one's body against the world (introverted sensing, Si).


4) Worldview, Principles, Root Causes. How are we to understand the workings of the universe and how can these be manipulated to our advantage?

There are four answers to this question. The first is, the universe, or prime mover in the universe, is God / Fate; or, in Star Wars, the Force; it can be perceived, and used, through divine or cosmic insight. The second answer is that the universe is a Machine; one can pull its levers and put it to use through understanding of engineering. The third answer is that the universe is Feeling; the manipulation of others' feelings will help us get what we want. The fourth and final answer is that the universe is Weight, Mass and Volume; the measurement of it - through our bodies - will enable us to gauge the right amount of physical force to get it to move.

The four answers involve, respectively, 1) introverted intuition, Ni; 2) extraverted thinking, Te; 3) extraverted feeling, Fe; 4), introverted sensing, Si.

The word 'manipulation' does make the process sound cynical. Let's hope that the individual uses the four abilities - Ni, Te, Fe, Si - for good and not for evil.

In total, we find there are four main questions - regarding Details, Observations, Principles, Actions - and four functions per personality type. Each function can be matched up to each question. As we shall see, each of the four categories - IP, EP, IJ, EJ - answer the questions in a different order; the IP category will answer the Data and Observations questions first, for example. So we see a beautiful symmetry at work.

IP:   Data, Observations, Actions, Principles (acronym DOAP);

 

EJ:  Actions, Principles, Observations, Data (acronym APOD);

 

EP: Observations, Data, Principles, Action (acronym ODPA);

 

IJ:   Principles, Actions, Data, Observations (acronym PADO).

 
III.

To repeat, a MBTI personality type contains symmetrical opposites which offset one another. Take, for example, an intellectual egghead character such as Mister Fantastic (of the Fantastic Four) or Spiderman - both are INTP and both use introverted thinking (Ti) as a primary function. The INTP doesn't represent a 'pure' introverted thinking type, because the secondary function - extraverted intuition, Ne - offsets the introversion of introverted thinking and grounds the type in the real world. The secondary function serves as an anchor which prevents the type from drifting away. For example: Mister Fantastic uses plenty of introverted thinking, and, at the same time, his career as an inventor and space explorer (both of which rely on extraverted intuition, Ne) offsets the introversion and prevents him from becoming a purely theoretical person.

The fourth and final function - called the 'repressed' or 'inferior' function in Jung - mirrors in the reverse the primary function. In the case of the INTP type, the fourth function, it's extraverted feeling, Fe, constitutes the reverse mirror image of the primary, introverted feeling, Ti. From the Myers-Briggs literature, we know that the fourth, inferior function comes to the fore in a time of stress. Strangely enough, it becomes transmuted in the process: Fe in the INTP  and ISTP types (see Wolverine below) appears as a crazy, exaggerated Fe, a caricature of normal, healthy Fe. In Sellers' system, the inferior function is used to answer the fourth and final question in the sequence - and doesn't do a good job of it, as we shall see.

Let's go through each category and see how the process (Sellers calls it the 'cognition process') works. Each of the four questions (a 'cognition step') will be answered by one of the four functions, and we'll look at how each cognition step is embodied in the life and career of a famous personality from the movies, comic books, history and the Bible.


IP: Introverted Sensor: Han Solo from Star Wars: ISTP.

 
Han's primary function is introverted thinking, Ti. When left alone by himself, he's naturally inclined to being a technician or engineer (Details and Data = Scientist / Technician), having a brilliant analytical understanding of how the mechanics of his space craft, the Millennium Falcon, works. He adopts a realist and materialist philosophy of life, telling Luke condescendingly that 'There's no such as the Force' and that 'Hokey old time religions' (such as the Jedi religion) are a waste of time. This is Observations and Motivations, and the function here used is Han's secondary function, extraverted sensing, Se - Realist / Aesthetician. In action, he assumes the default action role of Zen Warrior (introverted intuition, Ni, as applied to Actions, Decisions, Consequences, Planning). Think of that scene in Empire Strikes Back (1980), when he walks into the dining room in Bespin and finds Darth Vader waiting for him. It's a trap! Han's assessment of the situation changes from positive to negative in the space of a split second. Without thinking, he draws his pistol and fires at Vader in one fluid motion. (As we know, he doesn't succeed - Vader deflects the laser blast with a wave of his hand).

Finally, we come to Principles, World View, Root Causes. The IP type doesn't do well here. Metaphysics, the big picture and understanding what the universe is made up of - much less how to manipulate it - are not his forté. This holds true even for Han's fellow IP, Luke Skywalker, an INFP. Luke doesn't understand Root Causes very well, either. He doesn't quite 'get' the Force. That's why mentor figures Obi-Wan and Yoda are constantly admonishing him for his ignorance throughout the series - as are would-be mentor figures Vader and Emperor Palpatine.

Han Solo: full marks for Details, Observations, Actions and a fail for Principles. But no type can be good at everything.


EJ: Extraverted Judger - Superman: ESFJ.

Superman's primary function is extraverted feeling, Fe. Superman's default action role is Communitarian, which requires Fe. Being a strongman, he understands the principle of the universe as being Weight, Mass, Volume, and uses introverted sensing, Si, to measure it and determine the precise amount of force to apply. In terms of philosophy of life, he views life as it could be, something that contains great possibilities - you could say he's a utopian, which makes him an Idealist / Inventor. His personal philosophy - Motivations and Observations - draws upon extraverted intuition, Ne.

Where does Superman fall down? None of the EJ types like introversion and being 'left alone with their thoughts' - or feelings. Superman continually asks himself 'Who am I?' and experiences a personal crisis whenever he quits being Superman and gives up superheroics. I call the ESFJ type the 'Mother Hen'. The type is often accused of smothering people and being over-protective. If an ESFJ gives up his default role - Communitarian - he has no one left to smother. What does he do?

We can the same failure to deal with introversion in another EJ type, the Jack Kirby New Gods villain Darkseid, who is an ENTJ. In a great story arc in the Justice League of America series, Darkseid is brought back to life after having been dead for some time. He delivers a monologue to his underlings while holding a beautiful flower in his hand and sniffing it; he tells them that his death and resurrection has made him more reflective, and appreciative of beauty and aesthetics. But, says Darkseid, such moments constitute weakness - weakness which he will never allow himself to experience again - and he crushes the flower in his fist.

A Myers-Briggs psychologist would say that Darkseid's repressed function here is obviously introverted feeling, Fi. Darkseid resists introversion, and he wants to expunge the introverted feeler - a Poet / Artist - from his soul.

EP: Extraverted Sensor: Socrates: ENTP.

Michael Pierce identifies the ancient Greek philosopher and historical personage Socrates as an ENTP.  Socrates believes that life is about the exploration of exciting possibilities and perspectives - extraverted intuition Ne here is applied to Observations, Motivations, making him an Idealist / Inventor. It's not for nothing that Socrates was accused of scepticism, relativism and sophism. We can say that Socrates, like many an ENTP, was in love with extraverted intuition and all it brought forth. This was balanced by an introverted side - Socrates saw himself as a thinker, philosopher and a rationalist and introspected via introverted thinking (Ti, as applied to Data and Details - Scientist / Technician).

He understood the universe as Feeling (Fe, as applied to Root Causes and Principles). There's a strong element of emotional manipulation in Socrates, and he was accused of charlatanism in his lifetime. Many prominent Athenians didn't trust him. The ENTP type in myth and popular culture is often associated with tricksters, fast talkers, hucksters, and chaos-bringers.

Where do the ENTPs and other EPs fall down typically? In the field of Actions, Decision and Planning. Despite the ENTP's penchant for cleverness and manipulation (and all EPs are good at the latter), their plans don't work out. Socrates lacked the political and organisational skills of the EJ type, as we know from history. We can see that another ENTP type - Saul Goodman in the TV show Breaking Bad - just wasn't a good organiser as Walter White, an INTJ. In DC comics' supervillain group, the Secret Society of Super Villains, the Joker doesn't strike us as being a leader type like fellow team members Lex Luthor or Darkseid, both ENTJs; in Marvel's Avengers, Iron Man / Tony Stark doesn't lead as well as Captain America, an ESTJ. The ENTP is no Master of Men.

If it's any consolation, another EP type - Lois Lane, an ESTP - doesn't do well with regards to Planning and Decisions either. Her convoluted plots to manipulate Superman into marriage always fail.



IJ: Extraverted Judger - Moses: INFJ.

The INFJ often appears in popular culture (and myth) as The Sage, and is regarded as the most spooky and mystical of the types. We find the antecedent to Sage-types (such as Gandalf in Lord of the Rings, and Izaya the High Father in New Gods) in the Biblical figure of Moses. Like Moses, Gandalf and Izaya wear dresses, have long beards and carry staves. Yoda likewise wears a dress and carries a stick.

Moses receives the Word of God on Mount Sinai. Here divine insight - or more prosaically, introverted intuition - is used to determine the makeup of the universe and Root Causes, Principles and World View. In his Actions and Decisions, Moses as a prophet and leader takes up the role of Communitarian, which draws upon extraverted feeling, Fe. By organising his thoughts and putting them into order as a lawgiver to Israel and codifying the law in four books, he uses introverted thinking Ti, and defines himself as a thinking (and communicating) person - Data and Details, Scientist / Technician.

The IJ's deficiency lies in the field of Motivations or Observations: typically he doesn't understand human nature and appreciate - or tolerate - human beings for being what they are. In popular culture, the IJ type can often appear to be ascetic, harsh and intolerant - which is why I call his shadow aspect the Mad Monk.

IV.

I think the Sellers system does a great job, not in the least in helping us understand the differences between the types. Keirsey lumps the ESTP and ISTP types in the same category - Artisan - and the pair share exactly the same functions: introverted thinking (Ti), extraverted sensing (Se), introverted intuition (Ni), extraverted feeling (Fe). If we're to go by the letters alone, the only difference appears in the letters at the start of each code - I for ISTP, E for ESTP. Yet both the ISTP and ESTP seem completely dissimilar, and no-one in their right minds would ever confuse the two when put side by side.

The disparity holds true despite the fact that each type shares primary and secondary functions - introverted thinking (primary in ISTP, secondary in ESTP) and extraverted sensing (secondary in ISTP, primary in ESTP). But both the ESTP and ISTP differ in their tertiary function, and this makes all the difference. The ESTP uses his tertiary function, extraverted feeling, Fe, to understand the universe (Principles), and does a good job of it. The ISTP, in contrast, uses Fe as a fourth and inferior function, and does a bad job of it - he has a difficult time grasping Principles. On the other hand, the ISTP has a fairly good grasp on Actions and Planning, which is the shortcoming of the ESTP type. That is, the ISTP effectively uses introverted intuition, Ni, in his default action role as Zen Warrior, but introverted intuition makes up the repressed, inferior function in the ESTP.

Rightly understood, the two leading functions - primary and secondary - lead in the front, while the tertiary sits in the back and helps. The fourth or inferior function acts - or can act - as a spoiler or disruptor. Jung sees it as the repressed 'unconscious' of the leading, dominant function.

Picking a character's type in the comic books necessitates a good working knowledge of MBTI and some skill. But generally, we'll have an easy time of it, because comic books use the same types, over and over again. Mr Fantastic's INTP turns up a lot, as does Darkseid's ENTJ and Judge Dredd's ISTJ. In both movies and comic books, we find Han Solo's ISTP used as a staple, and Taylor has drawn up a list of ISTPs as long as your arm. The conclusion to be drawn is that in order to determine a character's type, you only need to consult the database of existing types and ask yourself, 'Does this character resemble Judge Dredd in any way? Or Superman? Or the Joker?' and then match the character to that best-known example. Spiderman, Mister Fantastic, Doctor Manhattan, Sherlock Holmes, Sheldon from the TV show Big Bang Theory belong in the INTP category; chances are that any geeky, science-minded character like these five is an INTP.