Why Neil deGrasse Tyson is ENFJ
May 3, 2012
|
Posted by admin
First, let’s look at the direction of Tyson’s Feeling function. Tyson revels in drawing out his points in order to build verbal crescendos and climaxes for the audience. Introverted Feeling (Fi) is about sincerity and raw immediate emotion. A constructed, built-up crescendo, by its very nature, is not sincere and immediate, but in fact the very opposite of Fi. So Tyson’s Feeling function is likely to be extroverted.
Next, let’s look at Tyson’s manner of presenting information to his audience: There are no disjointed, free-vectored nuggets of truth. In fact, every single piece of history, detail or fact that he presents to his audience aligns with his agenda to form a coherent and linear narrative. If this is indeed correct (and Tyson uses Fe and Ti), Tyson’s use of Introverted Thinking (Ti) is likely to rank somewhat low in his function order.
Notice further how whenever Tyson presents a piece of information, the “correct” attitude (i.e. what he wants us to think about something) is already obvious even before Tyson reaches any conclusion or presents any actual argument. So Tyson’s Fe must rank as his first or second function, and Ti is indeed likely to be either his tertiary or his inferior function.
We are thus down to four types: ENFJ, INFJ, ESFJ, or ISFJ
All rules of thumb obviously suggest that Tyson is an iNtuitive, but his manner of expressing himself traverses upon Sensing as he saturates his narrative with facts and details and takes care to hammer home the point by repeating it over and over with different fact-oriented examples. Yet when Tyson uses facts, he uses them in an immediate, sudden and surprising way, like a rabbit springing forth from a magic box. Tyson’s use of facts is that of a performer and not that of someone who wants to archive the facts and to subdue them by putting them in their proper context and order, as an Si user might.
So Tyson’s use of Sensing is extroverted, and this leaves us with two types: ENFJ or INFJ.
Here the thing to note is that Tyson’s manner of presentation is entertaining, animated and improvised, and that Tyson himself makes eager use of body language while presenting. He appears conscious of his Se mavericks as if he anticipates the audience’s reaction to those shenanigans in his mind, even while he is in the midst of presenting them. Hence we posit that his Se must be conscious to some degree and that it is actually Ti that is his repressed function.
Thus he fits the bill of an ENFJ spokesperson uniting people (Fe) in the pursuit of a common vision (Ni).
Update December 2012: We recommend this short video in amplification of our argument that Tyson has a well-developed Fe function. (Hat tip to Desmond F.)
Categories: Psychology
|
Leave a reply
He’s definitely NOT a J. When he talks about the field of science he explains that it is about the journey not the discovery, and that if you are in the field of science for discovery, you’re in it for the wrong reasons. That alone points to P – the process of doing something rather than closure/completion/end result. I agree with you on the extroversion & intuition. He, in my opinion is an ENTP.
It seems the previous poster does not understand the functions. Tyson’s an Fe dominant if I ever saw one.
BD: There is room within the journey you describe to act in accordance with a judging demeanor because this journey of striving for scientific knownledge is very complex and long and filled with countless substages which can be strived for in a J manner. I believe that what Neil Degrasse Tyson is trying to convey is partly that you can’t expect science to prop up direct results in the same manner that a company presents an increase in stock value to shareholders, because the field of science deals with the unknown, which by defition is unpredictable. And; furthermore,that it would be naive to become a scientist for the sole reason of making a scientific breakthrough as it has been shown inductively that such breakthroughs are very rare. Many scientist would agree with Tyson here, and plenty of them will be J types, this is neither impossible nor even strange because whether you are a J or P type has little to with your overall understanding or picture of a matter, rather it has to do with how you achieved it, you can strive for a goal and desire it in a typical J matter but you needn’t necessarily expect to reach it to do so, as expecting breakthroughs and big discoveries are naive within the context of scientific research.
I also think you’re intepreting his FE style of communicating much too litteraly, he can indeed be seen in many clips to prioritize conveying a message rather than stating a categorical truth. Indeed he is not so much interested in his own words as in what they will mean to those he is speaking to, as such he will unlike for instance Richard Dawkins only tell the truth to the extent and with the nuance that he believes can be percieved. Then again I don’t know the context of what you quote.
I agree with the first poster, he is an ENTP, as an INTP i can relate to Tyson in a unique way, in fact the only difference i find between us is the fact he is better able to express his ideas to a wider audience than me since he is more comfortable expressing his thoughts.
He is a “thinking” since his life revolves around creating logical conclusions to problems, rather than taking consideration to how others may be perceiving a given situation, he also responds well to logical questions he is able to understand the questions put to him and produce a logical response.
He is a “perceiving” since it’s biggest trait is curiosity, there is a genuine longing to find truth, science is the only way a perceiver can actually accept something as true, thus the percevier is constantly looking for knowledge, nothing is held as fact before empirical evidence, a trait of a true scientist!
KW: Thank you. We did some more research, and the Fe still seems heavier than the Ti in him. We don’t know if this applies to your argument, but in general people have a tendency to confuse the subject matter in which a person is actual with that person’s personality as a whole. The system would be neater if every scientist was a ‘T’ but, at least according to our research, that simply does not appear to be the case. Again, we are not saying that this caveat applies to you specifically, we merely list it as a general rule of thumb.
If you have any specific arguments, which you would like us to answer, by all means list them here. In the mean time, you may find this video of interest, in which Tyson more or less rebukes Dawkins his flagrant Ti: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik
Essentially I wanted to explain how inferior Thinkers EXFX can think logically whilst mutually arguing through contradiction that intuitors as weak sensors are unable to understand reality as it is and mutually “applied science”.
—
Most of the responses above are coming from a Keirsey mentality were the best traits have been attributed to intuitors, especially “intelligence”. And sadly that is unhelpful once you actually start understanding Jung and actually understanding real people, and the real cognitive functions. The styles that affect how people see reality.
Preference is not ability. When you start using your feelings you don’t get dumber. Had you guys been born ESF you’d just be prioritize the feeling aspect of you as it naturally dominates your personality, depending on your genes, you’d still have the same analytical ability.
The problem is that we are all thinkers, feelers, sensors and intuitors. Theoretically since intuitors understand ideas, but suppress the actually state of reality, according to theory they are too stupid to understand what is actually there. Applied science is a intuitor’s worst nightmare since it involves “sensing” understanding concrete information about reality in order to manipulate it intelligently. Putting theory into practice is a headache as reality actually punishes you for not understanding its actuality. That the hallmark of high sensing intelligence in science.
I don’t know why Keirsey an NT failed to look past his biases and typecasts.