I apologize for intruding on your thread intuition897. But you touched on something that is not given enough credit and really explains the Tarot very well. Yes, not just the court cards. This and other Jungian principles heavily influence my view of the entire minor arcana (and the Tarot overall). But I will just narrow this to the court cards and try to keep this brief (I can’t write a jmd type article, I need to sleep sometime this week!
)
I mentioned that I think stefficus and Aerin got it right. I think, really proving that out would require an extensive look at the Jungian function types, and their evolution through Myers-Briggs and then Keirsey. So, for brevity, I will assume that is accurate and build on it. (stefficus and Aerin can explain!
)
The proposition is this (Suit = Temperament):
Wands = Artisans (SP)
Cups = Idealists (NF)
Swords = Rationals (NT)
Pentacles = Guardians (SJ)
The temperaments are essentially groups of Myers-Briggs personality types with
identifiable similarities. If you further reduce the temperaments to the individual types, they are just too similar. It doesn’t work because it is confining the Tarot, any valid framework should liberate the Tarot, not confine it. Read Keirsey’s book, Please Understand Me II, it goes into a lot of detail. The important point is that although the types within the temperaments have differences, they also many distinctive similarities as well, which is why they are grouped together.
The Temperament defines the minor arcana suit.
Now I must reference Jung a little. In the beginning, he placed a heavy emphasis on introversion and extroversion, which he later recanted, at least mostly. My interpretation of the reason is because he realized, introversion and extroversion simply indicate in which direction the energy that a person creates is being focused. This is externally paramount, but internally insignificant. How and why the energy is being created in the first place is much more important.
So I exclude E/I.
Next, Jung mentions that women will tend to be Feelers and men Thinkers, and I would tend to agree. (And I will also note: Jung’s Feeling has
absolutely nothing, not one little thing, to do with emotions and feelings.
They are two completely and totally separate things! That is such a common misconception. And I will further note that Feelers can be just as good, if not better at math and science than Thinkers,
if they wanted to.
Jung’s Thinking and Feeling had nothing to do with logical capability.)
And with that said, I must add one last thing. I believe this to be a fairly common view, at least among RWS adherents; the King represents the mature, masculine aspects of the suit, the Queen represents the mature, feminine aspects of the suit, the Knight is the teenager, and the Page is the child. So what defines a teenager? Raging hormones and extremes, and what defines a child? Undeveloped and immature, so my framework for the court cards is as follows:
King: the mature, masculine aspects of the suit.
Queen: the mature, feminine aspects of the suit.
Knight: the powerful, and possibly extreme or distorted aspects of the suit.
Page: the undeveloped, immature, possibly childish and juvenile aspects of the suit.
--------------------------------------------------------
OK, now we have the complete structure:
--------------------------------------------------------
Wands
King: ESTP - Promoter, ISTP - Crafter
Queen: ESFP - Performer, ISFP - Composer
Knight: the powerful, and possibly extreme or distorted aspects of the King or Queen.
Page: the undeveloped, immature, possibly childish and juvenile aspects of the King or Queen.
Cups
King: ENFJ - Teacher, INFJ - Counselor
Queen: ENFP - Champion, INFP - Healer
Knight: the powerful, and possibly extreme or distorted aspects of the King or Queen.
Page: the undeveloped, immature, possibly childish and juvenile aspects of the King or Queen.
Swords
King: ENTJ - Fieldmarshal, INTJ - Mastermind
Queen: ENTP - Inventor, INTP - Architect
Knight: the powerful, and possibly extreme or distorted aspects of the King or Queen.
Page: the undeveloped, immature, possibly childish and juvenile aspects of the King or Queen.
Pentacles
King: ESTJ - Supervisor, ISTJ - Inspector
Queen: ESFJ - Provider, ISFJ - Protector
Knight: the powerful, and possibly extreme or distorted aspects of the King or Queen.
Page: the undeveloped, immature, possibly childish and juvenile aspects of the King or Queen.
--------------------------------------------------------
Important note: the King and Queen represent the mature masculine or feminine aspects of the suit or temperament, which means you have to use the personality traits as an anchor and stretch their meaning as well, just like with the Knight and Page, but just not quite as much. Just because the personality traits are assigned to the cards, does not mean the cards are confined by the definitions of the personality traits.
Now take the combined definitions of any Tarot book or site and match them up with those personality traits. I think you will find that they compliment and confirm one another pretty well. Did the Tarot define the temperaments before Jung ever even thought of the personality types?
One final note, I talked about most assignments being “completely and utterly flawed”. What I was talking about are those books that assign a single, individual function type to an entire suit and temperament. Like, Pentacles = Guardians = sensory. I think that cannot effectively be applied by anyone who understands the function types (and the temperaments) and also the Tarot. It is a restrictive framework.
ETA:
Oh, and I should add, I am a Rational - Mastermind.
And for those who don't know, click here to view the thread with the type poll!
(We are all iNtuiters here! With the exception of a few enlightened Sensors!
)