Myers Briggs Types and the Court Cards

JSNYC

conversus said:
This is a very interesting contribution to the larger conversation. However it is not enough to define the King and Queen as active adults and the Knight and Page as some sort of incomplete image of the Adult. If you are going to develop a system of Descriptors for the Honour cards you out to try harder for the Knight and Page. If the King is a Field Marshal, what scope does that leave for the Knight and Page to fill.

CED

I don't use the actual, concrete adult or child descriptions, they are only analogies, useful as descriptions. I will refer to stefficus's post:

stefficus said:
still, it's a damn sight better than the old "a dark-haired youth" designations i've seen thrown about. does anybody really use those?

Nope, I don't. I never could use that. I don't view the Knight and Page as incomplete images; they are simply different variations. And I certainly don't use the Knight as an actual teenager, or the Page as an actual child. They are just general descriptions, a way to understand the energy of the Knight and Page. To use your example; both the Knight and the Page have just as much potential to be the Fieldmarshal or Mastermind, or an Inventor or Architect as the King and Queen, but the Knight is taking something, some aspect, or some particular personality trait, to the extreme, possibly too far. The Page can also equally be the Fieldmarshal, Mastermind, Inventor, or Architect, but the Page is exhibiting an immature or undeveloped aspect or personality trait of the Fieldmarshal, Mastermind, Inventor, or Architect...

I think assigning anything to the Knight or Page is flawed; they are examples of specific aspects of a personality, or particular traits. All the court cards are described by the temperament, and each court card highlights and exemplifies different aspects of that temperament, but more importantly, they highlight and exemplify different aspects of an actual person, which isn't specifically addressed in the individual, general personality traits or temperaments.

In that sense I think the King and Queen should be treated exactly the same as the Knight and Page, they also represent a particular aspect or personality trait of the overall temperament. However, since their traits are mature, well-defined, or "normal" their interpretation is closer to the actual definitions of the personality traits or temperaments, which describe the normal or ideal pesonality.

Now I think I am venturing into the realm of over-explaining my approach. So I will leave this thread for a while to give others a chance to express their views on the topic. However, I appreciate the question, I thought I was being too vague, and now I think I obviously was.

Aerin

There's a really interesting diagram of Keirsey in this link http://users.viawest.net/~keirsey/difference.html if you scroll down. It is also good at explaining why the confusion between MBTI and Keirsey Temperament Sorter.

It could, if you wanted to go along these lines, make an interesting tree for applying the Courts to. I'm unwilling to give up on one court=one temperament because it appeals so much to my need for a pattern. Instinctively I'd tend to put "Directive" with the king/ Queen and Informatives with the Page/Knight. I need a darkened room again to figure out what I'd put where if following this further than suits.

By the way, as a INFP I have sometimes wanted to biff people who say "oh so you hate maths then". Speaking as someone who did a physics degree and who makes her living doing maths I love it

. The way I heard it explained is that it's to do with the way you make decisions. Someone with a strong T preference will be very objective and consistent, e.g. sending every thief down for 10 years whatever the background because that is completely fair. Someone with strong F will take feelings and values into account, so might give a light sentence to the poor mother stealing so their child can eat.

I do think there are several ways of doing this, some make more sense than others though. I agree that you need to dig into the background, you could also just go back to Jung and ignore what came afterwards.

I often/ usually read courts as aspects of personality either projected on to others or aware of in oneself. So I can see the attraction of seeing them as one expression of one personality.

intuition897

stefficus said:
i'm a rational. i do not have a neatly defined black-and-white world. i wasn't disagreeing that people don't always fall neatly into buckets, but rather using that example (along with my contention that seeing the world in black-and-white or not has more to do with the J/P axis) as a jumping off point for the rest of the post, pointing out why i think it's so much MORE difficult to apply the meyers/briggs to the entire court.

...if that clears it up at all.

LOL, I don't think I said that Rationals DO live in a black-and-white world. They would just prefer it. Rationals like definition.

I'm no expert on Myers-Briggs or Kiersey's type descriptions but I still lean toward the 4-bucket theory. None of us falls squarely into any one of the 4 buckets, but that's because we are all real people. The Court Cards are all representative of certain personality types in their ideal, perfect state. No one outside of the Tarot Court is perfect, and there IS no black-and-white definition of anyone's personality. But the perfectness of these cards' adherence to their family/kingdom/suit/element means that they will be extreme in both their positive AND negative aspects. It's our melding of personality traits from across the spectrum that makes us (more or less) well-rounded, well-adjusted, flexible and effective people. As a default, I always fall back on the suit's elemental qualities. Earth, fire, water and air. None is worth more than the other, none is better or worse than the other, because they are all necessary. They're just have their different strengths and weaknesses. So if I went to the elemental qualities to define the Kiersey types, Guardians are Earth, Artisans are Fire, Rationals are Air, and Idealists are Water.

I think it may come down to just printing out the descriptions on slips of paper and intuitively pairing them up with their most likely match in the Tarot Court. This isn't something I have to do; it really just started out as an exercise to try and add some other dimensions to my understanding of the Courts, which have thus far eluded me. Okay, maybe I know them fairly well, but I still get the feeling that there's something I'm missing. I wonder if that ever goes away?

EDIT: I almost forgot to mention that I will be going to a workshop tomorrow to find out what my type is. Once upon a time I was an INFP (Idealist Healer). I have always sort of identified with two cards: the Queen of Cups and the Queen of Swords. But according to some matchings of the Courts and the MBTI types, I was supposedly a Page of Cups. I guess that's where this really started from. The last time I took the test was in 2001...long time ago. People do change as they grow, and I know that since that time I experienced a major shift in my personality due to personal trauma. It will be interesting to see what the result is now. I'll let you know.

stefficus

Aerin said:
By the way, as a INFP I have sometimes wanted to biff people who say "oh so you hate maths then".

oooooohhhh, yeah... do it, i won't tell. it's the same way i wanna smack people who equate introversion with shyness. :laugh:

it is NOT the same thing! has nothing to do with it - there are tons of shy extraverts, and it's sad.

Someone with a strong T preference will be very objective and consistent, e.g. sending every thief down for 10 years whatever the background because that is completely fair. Someone with strong F will take feelings and values into account, so might give a light sentence to the poor mother stealing so their child can eat.

i feel that once again that's gotten mixed up with the J/P dichotomy. i personally see the king of swords (in his ideal aspect) as being more flexible and discerning as a judge than the king of pentacles, for instance. they're slightly different shades of "heartless". :laugh:

(my sister is one of those rare INFP creatures, and she's always accusing me of not having feelings.

) they likely wouldn't base any decision on feelings, but would want to adjust for the varying details and logic in each case.

it's part of why, even though it may be somewhat restrictive and pushy, i TOTALLY understand the appeal of assigning these types even more narrowly than the suits (aside from the patterning, which is shiny! :bugeyed:

)... i don't think the NT designation can address things like decision-making style, which falls under the judging/perceiving axis, while the SJ designation doesn't go far enough to define what those decisions tend to be BASED on, which in that example is under the thinking/feeling axis. it's a different function, and there's a fiddly urge to add all that information in and get an ever-clearer picture. because when we're trying to find stuff out, as we do when we read tarot, we want MORE associations rather than fewer, more explanation. while i (probably) agree with JS that it's not entirely feasible to assign the 16 types to the courts one-to-one, i do so reluctantly because it's not entirely satisfying NOT to.

it's a nice system, though... the knight of swords upright could be the INTJ who wants to implement every idea until they burn out, the knight of swords reversed could be the INTP who wants to think and think and think and ends up doing nothing.

it occurs to me that i'm riled at saying rationals tend to be black and white because INTPs have been described as the type most comfortable with paradox.

we still wanna know ALL about the grey areas and put them in patterns, but we like to leave them grey. this has very little bearing on either court card OR suit assignments so i'll shut up about it now. heh.

on balance, anything that gives us another option to deal with those courts is a Very Good Thing.

JSNYC

stefficus said:
oooooohhhh, yeah... do it, i won't tell. it's the same way i wanna smack people who equate introversion with shyness. it is NOT the same thing! has nothing to do with it - there are tons of shy extraverts, and it's sad.

Yes, you obviously understand the function types! That would have been my second biggest misconception, after Thinking and Feeling.

stefficus said:
it's a nice system, though... the knight of swords upright could be the INTJ who wants to implement every idea until they burn out, the knight of swords reversed could be the INTP who wants to think and think and think and ends up doing nothing.

And you obviously understand the system I was proposing as well! :thumbsup:

stefficus said:
on balance, anything that gives us another option to deal with those courts is a Very Good Thing.

Agreed! Every system is only good for the insight it can provide, and no system can provide all the answers. The Tarot is the authority, not the system or systems used to (help) explain it.

stefficus said:
I almost forgot to mention that I will be going to a workshop tomorrow to find out what my type is. Once upon a time I was an INFP (Idealist Healer). I have always sort of identified with two cards: the Queen of Cups and the Queen of Swords. But according to some matchings of the Courts and the MBTI types, I was supposedly a Page of Cups. I guess that's where this really started from. The last time I took the test was in 2001...long time ago. People do change as they grow, and I know that since that time I experienced a major shift in my personality due to personal trauma. It will be interesting to see what the result is now. I'll let you know.

Actually, I don't agree, simply because I agree with Jung. People do change as they grow, but their personality type does not change. Jung postulated that our personalities are defined from the beginning and do not change. And this is one of the major issues in which Jung disagreed with Freud. Freud thought we were a product of our environment, Jung did not. (Our environment certainly influences us and our lives, it does not, however, change our base personality type.) Our lives are the result of our personality, not the other way around.

Jung actually used an example of an Idealist being born to strict, Guardian parents (he obviously didn't use the temperaments, I am). The Guardian parents may stifle and forbid the fanciful dreams of the Idealist. And then, at least for a while, this Idealist may show up in personality tests as a Guardian. But that situation would eventually lead to neurosis because the person's base personality type is being suppressed.

I don't think you will always show up in tests as the same personality type, because the tests are imperfect and must measure external, quantitative things. But I also don't think your base personality changes either. It is the same whether you are 1 or 100.

And I will also note: when I took the test around 15 years ago, I was an INTJ, the same as today. I am a dominant Thinker; I always have been and always will be.

Aerin said:
The way I heard it explained is that it's to do with the way you make decisions.

Agreed!

Aerin said:
Someone with a strong T preference will be very objective and consistent, e.g. sending every thief down for 10 years whatever the background because that is completely fair. Someone with strong F will take feelings and values into account, so might give a light sentence to the poor mother stealing so their child can eat.

I don't agree. Provided all other variables are the same (including the people being the same, except Thinking and Feeling obviously), a Thinker and a Feeler will generally reach the same conclusions. What you proposed is mixing emotions with Feeling. (I know I need to qualify that statement, but this post is already so long... And I think it would be off-topic to focus exclusively on this so it probably requires a new thread as well.)

And BTW: excellent link Aerin! :thumbsup:

Exactly what we are talking about here is why I said (in my first post) that a comprehensive analysis of the function types was necessary to assign the personality types to the court cards. Not only to assign them but to use them. Like stefficus's observation above, "the knight of swords upright could be the INTJ who wants to implement every idea until they burn out", that takes an understanding of the personality and their tendencies, their strengths and weaknesses. Looking at the function types and the personalities can help us understand the person and their actions better and in more depth, and thus the court cards (and I propose the entire minor arcana) as well.

Sanctum_Priest

Single word descriptions

I went through this exercise when I was working through the Mary Greer book on Court cards a few months ago. Basically, I tried to come up with a single adjective that encapsulated the Myers Briggs type combined with what I knew of the tarot. This is what I came up with:

King of Wands ENTJ -- Fatherly
Queen of Wands INTJ -- Assertive
Knight of Wands ENTP -- Impulsive
Knave of Wands INTP -- Innocent
King of Cups ENFJ -- Bon vivant
Queen of Cups INFJ -- Serious
Knight of Cups ENFP -- Flamboyant
Knave of Cups INFP -- Dependent
King of Swords ESTJ -- Enterprising
Queen of Swords ISTJ -- Independent
Knight of Swords ESTP -- Uncompromising
Knave of Swords ISTP -- Withdrawn
King of Pentacles ESFJ -- Generous
Queen of Pentacles ISFJ -- Maternal
Knight of Pentacles ESFP -- Ambitious
Knave of Pentacles ISFP -- Precocious

northsea

Hi, Sanctum-Priest, here's assignments I did several years ago based on the piecemeal approach while using LWB descriptions. It looks like we have some overlap on 7 of them.

King of Wands ENTJ -- the Exemplar -- David Letterman
Queen of Wands ESFJ -- the Rewarder -- Donald Duck
Knight of Wands ENTP -- the Flake -- George Carlin
Page of Wands ESFP -- the Gossip -- Goldie Hawn

King of Cups ENFJ -- the Nurturer -- Ronald Reagan
Queen of Cups ENFP -- the Romantic -- Ariel, the Little Mermaid
Knight of Cups ESTP -- the Suave one -- Madonna
Page of Cups INFP -- the Mystic -- James Taylor

King of Swords ESTJ -- the Dictator -- Lucy (Peanuts)
Queen of Swords INFJ -- the Psychic -- Angela Lansbury
Knight of Swords ISTP -- the Lone Ranger -- Clint Eastwood
Page of Swords ISFP -- the Observer -- Fred Astaire

King of Pents INTJ -- the Planner -- Gandalf the Grey
Queen of Pents ISFJ -- the Servant -- Kristi Yamaguchi
Knight of Pents ISTJ -- the Follower --Jack Webb
Page of Pents INTP -- the Bohemian -- Tiger Woods

Sanctum_Priest

I'd like to say, in the words of Meatloaf, "7 out of 16 ain't bad" but it doesn't scan nor does it sound like much of a correspondence!
I should have said that my M-B types were taken from Linda Gail Walters who is cited in Greer's book but the descriptors were entirely my own invention.
Obviously, there would have been better overlap of personality traits if we had used the same court card to M-B type.
Has anyone else tried this?
SP

northsea

Sanctum_Priest said:
I'd like to say, in the words of Meatloaf, "7 out of 16 ain't bad" but it doesn't scan nor does it sound like much of a correspondence!

gotta love a Meatloaf reference! Yeah, it actually doesn't correspond much.

Aerin

JSNYC said:
I don't agree. Provided all other variables are the same (including the people being the same, except Thinking and Feeling obviously), a Thinker and a Feeler will generally reach the same conclusions. What you proposed is mixing emotions with Feeling. (I know I need to qualify that statement, but this post is already so long... And I think it would be off-topic to focus exclusively on this so it probably requires a new thread as well.)

The person who gave me the example had advanced training so I had no reason to doubt them. Re-reading though I think I meant values based not emotions, although crossing values usually raises very strong emotions so....

I come as INFP very consistently, especially since I was told not to answer based on how I act at work but rather how I want to act. One of the best questions IMO is "If you had to be one way for the rest of your life, what would it be?'

Myers Briggs Types and the Court Cards

JSNYC

Aerin

intuition897

stefficus

JSNYC

Sanctum_Priest

northsea

Sanctum_Priest

northsea

Aerin