Thread:Loodey/@comment-34698072-20200213214629/@comment-34698072-20200226014404

1) I think that I may have been tripped up by the counterexample I was trying to make with Tarkovsky. I think I became a little obsessed with that one quote in order to satisfy a leaning, but I think you make more convincing arguments. My initial intuition about Tarkovsky was that his fixation on nostalgia suggested Si not Se, more based on filmic evidence than quotes. This seems to be proven false by your arguments and I am leaning towards this for now. In retrospect the "as-is" quality of "Mirror" and "Andrei Rublev" do suggest Se over Si, although I think in my mind the former felt more Si to me at the time since the experience seemed more internalized. Yeah now that I think about it Ne seems pretty dumb for Tarkovsky, Ne types are usually helbent for interprative qualities in film.

2) The IHateEverything submission was not mine. I had another author on here a while ago who I worked with breifly, and ended up typing names like Marcus Persson, Jerry Paper and others. Her articles were usually longer than the brief introductions I give in mine, but for some reason she never put any quotes for that one. I haven't looked into IHateEverything myself so I wouldn't know, although its good that you bring this up because it seems to be the only ISTJ typing we have, and it would be good to clean it up.

3) Bergman still seems to me like INFJ. The intuition/intellect quote seems to me like a good description of a Ni/Ti loop. To first be swept up in the essence of an idea, and then to use intelect to justify it logically and work out its fine details is Ti not Fi. Fi would be more subject to scrutinizing the Ni insight to see if it is agreeable to their values, (XNTJ types are notorious for this.) The curiosity of "sending an army" to catch this essense seems more Ti

The MJK quote to me is more a result of his Se than anything else. People who have Se as dominat or auxillary are usually more accomidating regardless of their Fi because of their appreciation for the moment. Getting an award at the grammys would likely elicit such a response, the moment in of itself was so exiciting that Fi was lost a little while experiencing it. (Funnily enough, a similar thing happened to Trent Reznor when he was announced as a rock and roll hall of fame nominee, he initally hated the idea, but after presenting as a speaker for one of the artists, he thought it would be cool.) Ne is MUCH harder to have this happen with since Ne is already seeing oppertunities in the external, and usually resullting in its greater scrutiny. So with Bergman, it is more likely that he has either Se or Fe with the "building the cathedral" quote, less so Ne/Si. I would think Fe is more appropriate since he is able to set aside personal convictions in order to accomidate a harmonizing attitude with the world, one of the classic INFJ struggles between personal vision and worldly compliance. This is a similar situation with the quotes about getting emotional watching films. In the Adam Driver example, I think he was less comfortable because he doesn't have Se in his stack, which can deceptively seem like Fe in many situations. This coupled with Fi makes for him being unsettled that they were encroaching on his Si sensibilities, which is more selective as to what experience is agreeable. This is not to say SFPs are never combative towards Se, but it is more of a common thread in Si types that the senses are stubborn and more receptive to what is previously experienced rather than being suprised. Bergman in his quotes is reacting to the raw experience of Se because of two reasons. One is that Bergman's Se doesn't care whether the experience was perviously created by him or not, just that what he is experiencing now is unsettling. Second is that the Se is repressed, meaning that coupled with Fe indicates an unease with the sensory world, especially towards things that feel cruel or unforgiving which many Bergman films have.This repressed Se is also apparent in the quote "If I let myself go, nothing will get done."

Lastly I think a good way to reveal type is by their opinions of other typed people. Bergman's quotes on Welles (ENFP) and Hitchcock (ESTP) are both unsavory, but for different reasons. His critique on Hitchcock admits some intrest to the picture he is watching, which may suggest some connection due to shared functions, but he lambasts his immaturity and treatment of women. Bergman on the other hand simply cannot grasp how Welles does what he does, suggesting no shared functions. I think that the Ne of Welles' bombast was unsettling to Bergman, he probably thought that Welles was spreading himself too thin.

I think the only quote that still would trip me up is the "wholeness" one. You are right that there is a lack of "hollisticness" with this statement, seeing human experience as more novel than universal, but I think the other quotes lean towards these missing parts.