seek niche and pursue it

~~~Typing~~~ 

How to "Type" Personality Types: An Ultimate Resource 

MULDER, The Spooky INTP 

{{Extraction: Proving Mulder Is Not an INFJ/INFP}} 

SCULLY, The Enigmatic ISTJ

Mulder and Scully: Love and Touch for INTPs/ISTJs 

Dissecting ‘One Son’ (Part I)   

Dissecting ‘One Son’ (Part II) 

‘Never Again’ and Fear 

KRYCEK, An Unstoppable Manipulator

INTPs In Their Own Words 

SKINmanNER, The Bald and the Beautiful 

MAGGIE, The Passionate Scully

MELISSA, The Soulful ISFP

BILL SCULLY, Junior and Senior (and Charlie?)

AGENT DOGGETT, the Supportive ESFJ

~~~Musicals/Fan Vids/AMVs~~~

Fight Club (Finale)

Fight Club: Finale Redone with Less Kathy Griffiths

TINH: Scully’s Solo

S2 Abduction: Mulder’s Torment 

Drivin’ Right Along

Hungry: Everything Is Food

Our Town: Everything Is Food

Krycek and Marita: You’re My Little Choochie Face

Irresistible: I Whistle a Happy Tune

Syzygy: Everything You Can Do I Can Do Better

Mulder and Samantha: Miracle of Miracles

Amor Fati: If I Never Knew You 

Arcadia: People Will Say We’re in Love 

Scully, Far from the Home She Loves

CSM and Diana: The Riddle  

The Mulders: Sunrise, Sunset

HTGSC: Christmas Can Can

Melissa: Mother Earth and Father Time

Monday: There’s Always Tomorrow

Memento Mori: I Bring You a Song

Pilot: I Ride Alone

Milagro: Hellfire

Paper Hearts: Lovely, Lonely Man

Darkness Falls: Walk Outside

Emily: Come to Me

Talitha Cumi: Misty Mountains

Season 6: 9 to 5

Maggie and Dana: Everything's Alright

Samantha Mulder: God Help the Outcasts

~~~Fashion, Facial Analyses, and Seasonal Colors~~~

David Duchovny’s Face: an Aesthetics Study

David Duchovny's "Hail Mary" Nose (and Beard): an Aesthetic Study 

Dana Scully's Hairstyles, an Overview 

Seasonal Color Theory: a Reference Guide 

Seasonal Color Analysis: David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson

Seasonal Color Analysis: David Duchovny, Gillian Anderson, and Their Colors

Seasonal Color Analysis: David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson-- Skin Tones and Tricky Fashion Tips

Gillian Anderson: Think Pink (with the Color Wheel)

David Duchovny: Renaissance Orange (via the Color Wheel)

Kibbe Body Types: Gillian Anderson

Kibbe Body Types: David Duchovny 

Kitchener Essence: Gillian Anderson

Kitchener Essence: David Duchovny

Kitchener Essence: ‘Changing’ Essences 

Gillian Anderson: Think Pink (with the Color Wheel) 

~~~Extras~~~

React: "Return to Me" from the POV of Someone Averse to RomComs

React: Watching I Want to Believe for the First Time (and Losing My Mind) 

React: A Late-Canon Reviler Gives the Revival a Try

What Happens Later: Misdirection and Miscommunication

Reverse the Curse: David Duchovny’s Heartfelt Period Piece 

Personality Typing: Return to Me

Personality Typing: Bringing Up Baby

Personality Typing: Hank Moody, Maggie Scully, and ESTPs

What Happens Later: ESTJs, ESFPs, and Building Back Love ‘N Trust 

"About Time": randomfoggytiger's Review

~~~Miscellaneous~~~

Makeup Myths and Acne Realities 

Doppelbanging and Dating: an Interesting Socio-Psychological Phenomenon

Thanks for reading~

The Contextual Self 

The contextual self is who we are in any given environment. It is how we behave depending on what the situation requires. The idea of a personality “type” doesn’t leave out freedom of action in the moment. 

The Developed Self

When the contextual self becomes habitual and ongoing, it becomes a part of the developed self. Personality development is influenced by our choices and decisions (free will) as well as by interactions and roles (social field theory).

The True Self

An aspect of our personality exists from the beginning of our lives. This aspect of ourselves is in our genes, our DNA. We are born with a tendency to behave in certain ways, which influences how we adapt, grow and develop. 

When looking at personality types, all three of these aspects must be considered. Current behavior and adaptations may or may not be consistent with the true self. All are interrelated. 

UNDERSTANDING PERSONALITY

What is Personality “Type”?

Personality typing has been around for over twenty-five centuries. It seems we have a natural tendency to categorize so that we can understand and remember. When we were infants learning to talk, we called every furry animal a dog or a cat, depending on which name we happened to learn first. Later, we were able to see the differences between a dog, a cat and a bunny. These categories and names became our models for the world and shape our perception and thus our expectations. We make assumptions and inferences about the nature of things based on these prior learnings….

When trying to understand personality, all we have to judge a person by is outer behavior--we don’t see the motivation behind the behavior. People can display the same behavior for very different reasons. Therefore, it is important to not overgeneralize and make assumptions, yet is it useful to make guesses and hypotheses. Knowing which type pattern fits you best can help you understand what is behind your outer behavior. Knowing about the patterns of your friends, family, and coworkers can help you meet them at their view of the world, rather than just reacting to their outer behavior. 

The context or situation is also important in determining what behavior we engage in. We are not limited by our personality “types.” The best-fit type pattern is the one we “prefer,” the one that comes most naturally to us and that we are most likely to practice and develop. We can remain flexible and adaptable. Sometimes the environmental context can make figuring out who we are confusing because we look like one pattern in one setting and another in other settings. 

Knowing the “Self”

Personalities cannot be measured, they can only be mapped. You cannot describe a person in any definite and specific way since the person is constantly changing, adapting, and evolving. Any one perspective or shadow shape will give only one data point. When mapping a personality, we can make only approximate measurements, so we “triangulate,” or see where several indicators from multiple models meet. Then we have a good idea of what the personality is like. 

 Humans are very complex and cannot be understood in terms of a few simple formulas, yet there are some simple, easy-to-comprehend principles or dynamics that help us understand ourselves and others. Fritjok Capra has said that to understand any “living system” you have to look at the pattern, the processes, and the structure of the system. To Capra’s principles we add purpose. 

Personality can be seen as a living system.

WAYS TO DESCRIBE PERSONALITY

TRAITS AND PARTS

Personality can be described in many ways. The most common approaches include observing and measuring traits like cheerfulness, anxiety, and outgoingness. Sometimes the traits are extremely relevant to a particular job performance, so there is value to this approach. However, even when there is an attempt to see a pattern to the traits, the result is usually a fragmented picture that gives little useful information. 

This approach is a little bit like trying to understand a tree by looking at its parts. You will learn something about the tree but won’t know how it works or why it works. You may not even recognize the tree unless you already know what a tree looks like. 

Parts have meaning only in reference to the whole.

Pattern--The interrelationships within a system. Every system, including personality, is defined by essential characteristics. These are qualities that must exist, such as the trunk, roots, or branches of a tree. The characteristics are interrelated, and the configuration of relationships is the pattern, like the way the trunk, roots, and branches of a tree are related.

Processes--The activities the system engages in as it functions in day-to-day life and as it grows. 

Structure--How the pattern is physically expressed.

Purpose-- The holistic theme of the pattern.

Traits and Parts

Personality can be described in many ways. The most common approaches include observing and measuring traits like cheerfulness, anxiety, and outgoingness. Sometimes the traits are extremely relevant to a particular job performance, so there is value to this approach. However, even when there is an attempt to see a pattern to the traits, the result is usually a fragmented picture that gives little useful information.

This approach is a bit like trying to understand a tree by looking at its parts. You will learn something about the tree but won’t know how it works or why it works. You may not even recognize the tree unless you already know what a tree looks like. 

Processes and Parts

Other times personality is described by looking at separate dynamic processes, such as how we gather information and make decisions. This is not purely a trait approach because no attempt is made to measure the degree of the trait, but the processes are often treated as separate parts that somehow combine with each other. Processes, however, have meaning only in reference to the whole context, so descriptions based only on this approach are often missing essential qualities. 

This is like describing how trees process moisture without considering that different kinds of trees process moisture somewhat differently. 

Systems 

Living systems are not concretely visible. Only in the last forty years have behavioral scientists really been learning to “see” systems, especially human systems. 

Systems are patterns of relationships that are organized.

Systems have “rules” that govern their behavior. The pattern of organization is not imposed from outside but “comes with” the system at the moment of creation. The system is organized around a deep operating principle. 

Systems are “driven” to operate in certain ways. If we try to force a system to behave in ways inconsistent with its nature, we spend energy and encounter resistance. If we can understand the inherent operating principles and work with them, we can save energy. Personality descriptions using a systems approach try to portray the system as a whole. 

SELF-DESCRIPTIONS

One systems approach to describing personality is to have people describe themselves. Unfortunately, people are influenced by the models they already have, as well as their self-esteem, traumas, stress and cultures, so they may describe themselves in a somewhat limited way. However, people and the inborn patterns existed before any theoretical models, so the expressions of self-esteem, traumas, stress, and culture will themselves be influenced by the push of that inborn pattern. 

Since each type pattern is reflected in language, such an approach can use the language of the type, its syntax, vocabulary, rhythm, and so on. Descriptions developed this way can be very helpful in self-discovery, even if they do not comprehensively describe the theory. 

TYPE THEMES AND PATTERNS

A second way of describing personality using a systems approach is to describe personality in terms of the themes of each type pattern and how they are organized. This approach portrays aspects not available any other way. 

Each of the sixteen types is a pattern of related themes.

It reveals the pattern of various dynamics at play. Sometimes it is hard to sort out what is the essence of the theme and what is culture or the result of growth and development. Yet the pattern of themes is constant and varying conditions. 

The themes describe processes that fill a unique role for each type.

The sixteen themes and patterns reflect internal processes as well as interactions with the environment. This is like looking at a tree and recognizing the interrelationships of the parts of the tree and the role of the tree in the larger environment. 

ABOUT THE DESCRIPTIONS

The descriptions are designed to help people sort out which of the sixteen type patterns is the best-fit for them.They are not comprehensive descriptions. Neither are they driven by a single theory or model. They are whole type descriptions, based on themes unique to that type. 

We have found different people find themselves better through different kinds of descriptions. For example, seeing the brief description worked better for some people. For others, the third-person descriptions was all they wanted, and they found the first-person description irrelevant. Yet for many, the first-person description was what helped them the most. As on person put it, “You’ve reached into my reality.” Most found the three approaches taken together worked best. 

-The brief snapshot briefly describes the roles and talents of the type. 

-The third-person portrait describes the themes of the type and the theme in relationships. 

-The first-person self-portraits are based on interviews with at least two men and two women of each type who were asked, “What is it like to be you?” The content is based on the themes of what they spontaneously offered as most relevant to who they are. In the self-portraits we tried to keep as true as possible to their spoken voice, using their words and phrases. 

HOW TO DISCOVER YOUR BEST-FIT TYPE

Best-fit type refers to the type pattern that fits you best. No one description or pattern will be a perfect match to all of who you are. Your personality is rich and complex, and a “type” or type pattern cannot adequately express all of that richness. Each of the sixteen types comes in a variety of “flavors,” and best-fit type means that the themes and preferred processes of that type seem to fit you the best. 

PERSONALITY INSTRUMENTS

Sometimes people come to understand who they are through self-reporting on personality instruments. No instruments that rely solely on self-reporting are completely accurate. They must all be accompanied by a validation process, preferably involving self-discovery. Many instruments have standards that require face-to-face facilitated feedback with a qualified professional. This booklet is not meant to replace this valuable interactive process but to support it. 

Personality instruments that are well researched and well designed can help us tune in to key aspects of who we are. They are designed to reveal ourselves to ourselves. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) was developed to suggest possible best-fit type patterns. While the MBTI is one of the more thoroughly researched instruments and is widely used, it is sometimes not 100 percent accurate on all four of the letters that are use[d] to summarized personality characteristics. 

As you read this booklet, allow yourself to “try on” more than one type pattern to see which one fits you the best. If you have had exposure to instruments like the MBTI, set aside any assumptions you have about your best-fit type pattern. 

In any case, any one model--like temperament or the MBTI--is frequently insufficient to reveal one’s personality pattern by itself. This is why we recommend the use of multiple models in The Self-Discovery Process--with or without a personality instrument. 

An instrument will not tell you who you are, it can only indicate who you might be.

The Self-Discovery Process

One powerful way to find your best-fit type pattern is through self-discovery. This works very well for many people. 

Self-Reflection

The Johari Window, originally used for improving communication, is a useful map to help us understand this self-discovery process. 

For example, one area is “Public Knowledge”--what we know about ourselves and is known to others around us. These “public” aspects of ourselves are easily recognized. What do we talk about over coffee or around the water cooler? Discovering how we communicate in general is one part of getting in touch with who we really are. 

Listen to what you say and how you say it. What do you like to talk about? These topics will likely reflect your natural self. Be aware that your public self may reflect adaptive or learned behavior. This adaptive self is also part of who you are but may not hold the key to what energizes you. 

INTERACTION WITH OTHERS

Sharing and Feedback

We also learn who we are through our interactions with others. Finding people who are similar to us and comparing notes and sharing stories helps many of us discover our own best-fit type pattern. This often happens in workshops when people openly discuss their type patterns in order to better understand themselves and others. Sometimes this kind of discussion takes us into the “Private” area of the Johari Window--those aspects known to ourselves and not known to others. In the same way, self-discovery often sends us to this area, at least privately. 

One valuable way of finding out who we are is by actively seeking feedback--asking others to tell us how they see us. These people may be trained facilitators or merely people who know us well. The “Feedback” area of the Johari Window gives us the opportunity to learn about those aspects of ourselves unknown to us but known to others. This provides additional information as we explore who we are. And remember, this feedback is a gift, often given through the eyes of the giver-so seek feedback from many people. 

Openness to New Information

During The Self-Discovery Process “Unconscious” information sometimes comes into our minds--aspects previously unknown to ourselves and unknown to others. The unconscious is often where we “store” information about how to “be” in the world. As you explore who you are, stay open to valuable insights from this area. 

Many variables may be involved in your self-discovery process. Be aware that family, social, cultural, and other influences will affect how you view yourself in relation to the type patterns. These influences are often unconscious until they somehow come into our awareness when they are described and pointed out. Stay open and searching. Seek input from all areas of the Johari Window.... 

A WORD ABOUT WORDS!

In writing the descriptions, we have chosen various words to try to capture the themes of each type pattern. These words often reflect the way people with this type pattern think of themselves as well as the deep theoretical underpinnings. Words are subject to individual interpretations with various connotations, so beware the one-word category! One or two words cannot capture the whole of a pattern. The words were tested with many people, but they are not the last word! Don’t let the meaning you may find in any one word or phrase prevent you from considering the pattern as whole. 

The Names of the Patterns

We’ve given names to the patterns in order to emphasize that the type is more than the sum of its parts or any single model. Names can more easily represent themes and also make the pattern more personal and real. 

There is also a logic behind the names. The first word in the name is the inside view:

-How we often see ourselves

-What others often don’t see

The second word in the name is the outside view: 

-How others often see us

-What we may not see in ourselves

ESSENTIAL QUALITIES OF THE PERSONALITY PATTERNS

We use three lenses to look at the sixteen types--Temperament, Interaction Styles, and Cognitive Dynamics. Each lens provides different information about personality. Sometimes it is useful to explore each lens on its own. Other times two lenses are used together for a more complete picture. The three lenses taken together give the fullest picture and provide the most information. 

TEMPERAMENT

The "Why" of Personality.

Temperament Theory is based in descriptions of behavior that go back over twenty-five centuries. It tells us the “why” of behavior, our motivators, and sources of deep psychological stress. Knowing our temperament patterns tells us our core needs and values as well as the talents we are more likely to be drawn to develop. Temperament gives us four broad themes in a pattern of core psychological needs, core values, talents, and behaviors--all of which are interrelated. 

The four temperament patterns also have qualities in common with each other and can be described in those terms as well. 

Abstract versus Concrete language--the way we tend to think about things and the way we use words.... Abstract language focuses on intangibles: concepts, ideas, implications, and meaning. Concrete language, meanwhile, focuses on tangibles: experiences and observations. Concrete individuals seek, get, or give useful information to plan and take action in the present while Abstract individuals weigh the possibilities of future action (personal or metaphysical), its consequences and impacts.

The Idealist and Rational patterns are characterized by abstract language... People with these patterns as primary seek to know or explain the meaning of something that is not seen in order to access information that is not obvious. The Guardian and Artisan temperament patterns are characterized by concrete language....

Affiliative versus Pragmatic roles--the way we prefer to interact with others.... Pragmatic roles are not about practicality, but about a utilitarian approach to doing what works regardless of norms or agreements. Affiliative roles involve some kind of explicit or implicit agreement or sanction before acting.

(Sidenote: An Affiliative individual is more likely to ask permission first, while a Pragmatic individual will ask for forgiveness later.)

The Idealist and Guardian patterns are more Affiliative in nature, with a focus on interdependence, human and group effectiveness, inclusion, agreement, and sanction. The Rational and Artisan patterns are more Pragmatic in nature with a focus on independence and operational effectiveness, self-determination, autonomous actions, and expedience. 

Another dimension not shown on the matrix is the focus on Structure versus Motive--where we focus our attention when interacting with others. The Rational and Guardian patterns are characterized by a focus on structure, order, and organization to gain a measure of control over life’s problems and irregularities rather than be at the mercy of random forces. The Idealist and Artisan patterns are characterized by a focus on motives and why people do things in order to work with the people they are communicating with rather than trying to force them into a preconceived structure. 

Of the three lenses, temperament is the broadest and each temperament pattern describes the driving force of four of the sixteen types. 

From the Five Lenses of Type, Dr. Linda Berens:

Guardian (or Stabilizer): Concrete/Affiliative

Artisan (or Improviser): Concrete/Pragmatic

Idealist (or Catalyst): Abstract/Affiliative

Rational (or Theorist): Abstract/Pragmatic

The language preferred by [Idealist]s and [Rational]s tends to be abstract, referring to concepts, abstract patterns, and symbols. The language preferred by [Guardian]s and [Artisan]s tends to be concrete, referring to the tangible and observable.

[Idealist]s and [Guardian]s tend to prefer affiliative roles of cooperation and interdependence. [Rational]s and [Artisan]s tend to prefer pragmatic roles where the focus is on the outcome and independence rather than getting permission....

The shared dynamic between [Rational]s and [Guardian]s in that they both look for structure. [Rational]s look for conceptual structure like frameworks, models, and configurations while [Guardian]s look for more tangible structures like sequences and hierarchy. [Idealist]s and [Artisan]s look for motives. [Idealist]s tend to focus on deep motivations whereas [Artisan]s focus on the payoff or what is in it for the other person to behave a certain way.

Temperament Theory, via Dr. Linda Berens-- Abstract versus Concrete language—The way we tend to think about things and the way we use words Affiliative versus Pragmatic roles—The way we prefer to interact with others Structure versus Motive focus—Where we focus our attention when interacting

These dynamics are always operating in a situation, and if we become polarized along these dimensions as we interact with others, communication can become extremely difficult. However, we need to remember that we have at least one thing in common with every temperament.

INTERACTION STYLES

The "How" of Personality.

Interaction Styles is based on observable behavior patterns that are quite similar to the popular social styles models and DISC. INteraction Styles tells us the “how” of our behavior. It refers to patterns of interaction that are both highly contextual and yet innate. Knowing our interaction style helps us locate interpersonal conflicts and situational energy drains. It gives us a map for greater flexibility in our interactions with others. 

These four interaction style patterns are characterized by different interactional dynamics. Those dynamics are Directing/Informing and Initiating/Responding. 

The Directing style has a time and task focus with a tendency to direct the actions of others to accomplish a task in accordance with deadlines, often by either telling or asking. Regarding motivations and process, the Directing style is explicit. 

The opposite style is Informing, with a motivation and process focus. Using this style, people tend to give information in order to enroll others in the process. When a task needs to be accomplished, the Informing style engages others, describing outcomes and processes that can be used to complete the task. 

Each style has its own best and appropriate use, and most people use both at different times but have more comfort with one. 

Each of these styles can also be further differentiated by another dimension--a preference for either Initiating interactions and a faster pace or for Responding to interactions and a slower pace. The four different interaction style patterns are shown in the matrix below. 

**Note**: Extrovert and Introvert in this matrix is marked by pace-- Initiating, faster; Responding, slower-- rather than using or recharging energy. 

CHART-THE-COURSE: Directing/Responding

Push for a plan of action

Keep the group on track

Deliberate decisions

Define the process focus

(Bonus Best Fit-Type: The theme is having a course of action to follow. People of this stylefocus on knowing what to do and keeping themselves, the group, or the project on track. They prefer to enter a situation having an idea of what is to happen. They identify a process to accomplish a goal and have a somewhat contained tension as they work to create and monitor a plan. The aim is not the plan itself, but to use it as a guide to move things along toward the goal. Their informed and deliberate decisions are based on analyzing, outlining, conceptualizing or foreseeing what needs to be done.)

BEHIND-THE-SCENES: Informing/Responding

Push for the best result

Support the group's process

Consultative decisions

Understand the process focus

(Bonus Best Fit-Type: The theme is getting the best result possible. People of this style focus on understanding and working with the process to create a positive outcome. They see value in many contributions and consult outside inputs to make an informed decision. They aim to integrate various information sources and accommodate differing points of view. They approach others with a quiet, calm style that may not show their strong convictions. Producing, sustaining, defining, and clarifying are all ways they support a group's process. They typically have more patience than most with the time it takes to gain support through consensus for a project or to refine the result.)

IN-CHARGE: Directing/Initiating

Push for competition

Lead the group to the goal

Quick decisions

Results focus

(Bonus Best Fit-Type: The theme is getting things accomplished through people. People of this style are focused on results, often taking action quickly. They often have a driving energy with an intention to lead a group to the goal. They make decisions quickly to keep themselves and others on task, on target, and on time. They hate wasting time and having to back track. Mentoring, executing actions, supervising, and mobilizing resources are all ways they get things accomplished. They notice right away what is not working in a situation and become painfully aware of what needs to be fixed, healed, or corrected.)

GET-THINGS-GOING: Informing/Initiating

Push for involvement

Facilitate the group's process

Enthusiastic decisions

Interaction focus

(Bonus Best Fit-Type: The theme is persuading and involving others. They thrive in facilitator or catalyst roles and aim to inspire others to move to action, facilitating the process. Their focus is on interaction, often with an expressive style. They Get-Things-Going™ with upbeat energy, enthusiasm, or excitement, which can be contagious. Exploring options and possibilities, making preparations, discovering new ideas, and sharing insights are all ways they get people moving along. They want decisions to be participative and enthusiastic, with everyone involved and engaged.)

INTERACTION STYLES, EXPLAINED

From the Five Lenses of Type, Dr. Linda Berens:

What is Interaction Styles?  Interaction Styles is a model of individual differences – a typology-that is different from and does not stem from Jung’s model. There are some similarities, but the Interaction Styles model brings new information to the understanding of people and helps bring clarity to the Jungian model. Simply put, it addresses the “how” of our behavior – how we interact with others when we try to influence and relate to them.  Matches of Interaction Style often determine whether we gain instant rapport with another individual or not.

The core of the Interaction Styles Pattern is a basic drive, which we depict as the force behind the arrow graphic. I see this as physical and much of the longitudinal temperament studies point to this. You can see evidence of the Interaction Styles in the way people walk. You can hear it in the way they talk. This basic drive seems to be directed to a kind of outcome or aim. There is also a basic belief behind the style and some related talents.

The basics are in the following table.  (Please don’t take the words as fully descriptive of the characteristic.  Do some follow-up reading in the resources listed at the end of the article.

The Uses of Interaction Styles. One of the most powerful uses of this model is in type clarification. This lens clears up many look-alike issues. For example, it can help us understand even more why an ESFP would look so much like an ENFP. Here is the ‘Get-Things-Going’ theme. See how it fits not only ESFP and ENFP, but also ENTP, and ESFJ.

Interaction Styles via Dr. Linda Berens-- Directing versus Informing communications—ways we influence others Initiating versus Responding roles—ways to define relationships Outcome versus Process focus—where we focus our attention when interacting

These dynamics are always operating in a situation, and if we become polarized along these dimensions as we interact with others, miscommunication and misunderstanding are probable and likely to result in destructive conflict. However, we need to remember that we always have at least one aspect in common with someone of a different interaction style.

COGNITIVE DYNAMICS

The "Pattern" of Personality.

Cognitive Dynamics is based in the Jungian theory from which psychological type instruments are derived. Each of the sixteen types has a theme based in a unique dynamic pattern of cognitive processes and their development. Knowing our innate tendencies to use these processes in certain ways can help us release blocks to our creativity and to effective communication. This model provides us the key to growth and development. 

Carl Jung’s Theory of Psychological Type

In examining individual differences, Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung differentiated two fundamentally different orientations. He noticed some people seem primarily oriented to the world outside themselves. He called these people extraverted. He saw other people as primarily oriented to the world inside themselves. He called these people introverted. This extraverted-introverted difference is related to where you focus and recharge your energy. Then Jung noticed that people could be further distinguished by their preferred mental processes. Jung saw two kinds of mental processes used in everyday life: the process of perception (becoming aware of) and the process of judgment (organizing or deciding).

He then further differentiated two kinds of perception--Sensation and Intuition. Sensing is a process of becoming aware of sensory information. Intuiting is a process of becoming aware of abstract pattern information and meanings. Both kinds of information are available to us, but we pay attention to only one kind at a time. Both are necessary and valuable in everyday life. 

Likewise, he noted two kinds of judgment--Thinking and Feeling. Thinking judgments are based on objective criteria and are detached from personal values. Feeling judgments are based on subjective considerations and are attached to personal and universal values. Even the smallest act involves either Thinking or Feeling judgments, and both kinds of decisions are needed and valuable. 

(Credit to: Best-Fit Type)

Each of these four mental processes can be used in either the external world of extraversion or the internal world of introversion, producing eight mental processes. Then Jung outlined eight psychological types, each characterized by the predominance of one of these eight mental processes (extraverted Sensing, introverted Sensing, extraverted iNtuiting, introverted iNtuiting, extraverted Thinking, introverted Thinking, extraverted Feeling, and introverted Feeling). In his writings he suggested that each of these eight dominant mental processes was supported by one of two opposing processes and that each of these eight types might vary according to which opposite mental process was used in support of the dominant.

(Credit to: Best-Fit Type)

For example, the extraverted Sensing type with Thinking would be somewhat different from the extraverted Sensing type with Feeling. Thus, his notions imply sixteen type patterns, each characterized by preferences for the use of two of the eight mental processes, as shown in the table…. 

Enter Measurement and the Four-Letter Code

When Isabel Myers began developing the MBTI, she faced several challenges. One challenge was the beginning of the self-report movement. Prior to that time, psychologists doubted that a self-report format would work. Also, it was a time of “measurement,” and the scientific thinking of the time was to understand the world by dividing it into parts. Myers faced the challenge of keeping the holistic quality of Jung’s types in the forefront, while meeting the demands of the tests and measurement world. She chose to focus on the opposites in Jung’s theory. Jung said that the orientations of extraversion and introversion were dynamically opposite. You can’t be in two places at one time! He also said the mental processes were dynamically oppostie. Thus, one would have a preference for either Sensing or iNtuiting and Thinking or Feeling in one’s day-to-day interactions….

When the preferences for each of these pairs of opposites were indicated, then the type pattern could be inferred. 

However, a difficulty remained in how to determine which mental process was dominant in the personalty and which was auxiliary. Myers reasoned that we can more readily observe what we do externally, so she decided to add questions to try to find which preferred mental process individuals used in the external world. If they used their preferred judging process to order the external world, they would be likely to make lists and structure their time in advance. If they used their preferred perceiving process to experience the external world, they would avoid such planning and structuring and prefer to keep things open-ended. Thus, the Judging-Perceiving scale of the MBTI was born. The resultant four-letter personality type code is used around the world to give people insights about themselves. 

Type Dynamics and Development

Type dynamics is based on the theories of Carl Jung and refers to a hierarchy of cognitive processes (Sensing, iNtuiting, Thinking, Feeling) and a preference for being either in the external world (extraversion) or the internal world (introversion). Type dynamics and type development refer to the unfolding of the personality pattern as expressed through the development of the mental processes of perception and judgment. Since the personality is a living system, it is self-organizing--self-maintaining, self-transcending, and self-renewing. Growth and development follow principles of organic development, and there is an order to the evolution of personality. 

The first cognitive process to develop and become more refined is often called the dominant. It is the favorite. The second is often called the auxiliary because it “helps” the first one. It develops second (usually between the ages of twelve to twenty). Development of the third process usually beings around age twenty and continues until age thirty-five or so. The fourth or least preferred process usually comes into play more between the ages of thirty-five to fifty. These developmental ages are general, not fixed. At these times, we find ourselves drawn to activities that engage and utilize the processes. 

Thus we can say that development is dynamic and growing. Development in this sense is like readiness to learn to talk or to walk. We don’t have to make children do these, we only need to provide models and opportunities and then stay out of the way. Development can be diverted due to environmental pressures and so is not always in this order as we develop some “proficiencies” using these cognitive processes. Still, the innate preference pattern will remain the same. 

From the Best-Fit Type (via Dr. Linda Berens and Dr. Dario Nardi):

Se, Extraverted Sensing: Experiencing the immediate context; taking action in the physical world; noticing changes and opportunities for action; accumulating experiences; scanning for visible reactions and relevant data; recognizing "what is." Noticing what was available, trying on different items, and seeing how they look.

Si, Introverted Sensing: Reviewing past experiences; "what is" evoking "what was"; seeking detailed information and links to what is known; recalling stored impressions; accumulating data; recognizing the way things have always been. Remembering the last time you wore a particular item or the last time you were at a similar event-maybe even remembering how you felt then.

Ne, Extravert iNtuiting: Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change "what is" for "what could possibly be"; noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts. Noticing the possible meanings of what you might wear: "Wearing this might communicate…"

Ni, Introverted iNtuiting: Foreseeing implications and likely effects without external data; realizing "what will be"; conceptualizing new ways of seeing things; envisioning transformations; getting an image of profound meaning or far-reaching symbols. Envisioning yourself in an outfit or maybe envisioning yourself being a certain way.

Te, Extraverted Thinking: Segmenting; organizing for efficiency; systematizing; applying logic; structuring; checking for consequences; monitoring for standards or specifications being met; setting boundaries, guidelines, and parameters; deciding if something is working or not. Sorting out different colors and styles; thinking about the consequences, as in "Since I have to stand all day…"

Ti, Introverted Thinking: Analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision. Analyzing your options using principles like comfort or "Red is a power color."

Fe, Extraverted Thinking: Connecting; considering others and the group-organizing to meet their needs and honor their values and feelings; maintaining societal, organizational, or group values; adjusting to and accommodating others; deciding if something is appropriate or acceptable to others. Considering what would be appropriate for the situation: "One should or shouldn’t wear…" or "People will think…"

Fi, Introverted Feeling: Valuing; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for. Evaluating whether you like an outfit or not: "This outfit suits me and feels right."

HOW DO THE MODELS RELATE?

The temperament patterns (extended out to the four variations of each) meet Jung’s theory at the level of the sixteen type patterns. The four-letter codes produced by the MBTI, when they are accurate and verified for individuals, match Keirsey’s sixteen type patterns. While at first glance the matching process looks illogical, it occurs at a deep theoretical level when comparing Jung’s and Kretschmer’s original works. More importantly, it occurs on a descriptive, behavioral level. Following, is The Temperament Matrix with the sixteen themes, Interaction Styles, the four-letter personality type codes, and the type dynamics patterns represented by the type code. (The dominant is listed first, auxiliary second, tertiary third, and inferior fourth.) 

Notes for the Facilitator

BACKGROUND

We’ve explained some of the theoretical underpinnings in the text, but you may want to know more about how these descriptions were developed. We come from the perspective that there seem to be sixteen type patterns that have been recognized by many over the centuries. In the 1920s, Carl Jung, Ernst Kretschmer, Eduard Spranger, and others developed theories that eventually led to descriptions of these sixteen patterns. Isabel Myers, in her creative genius, made Jung’s work available to everyone, not only through the development of the MBTI but also through her insightful descriptions of th sixteen types. Independently, David Keirsey, in his creative genius, made Kretschmer’s and Spranger’s works available to everyone through the development of temperament theory. He recognized Myers’s contributions and linked temperament theory and its sixteen patterns to her descriptions. Their contributions have worked synergistically to give people tools to use for better communication and relationships. 

Bonus

For those interested in more (digestible) material, I recommend Dr. Linda Berens and Dr. Dario Nardi's pamphlets linked below:

The sixteen personality types : descriptions for self-discovery

Understanding yourself and others : an introduction to temperament

Understanding Yourself and Others: An Introduction to Interaction Styles 2.0

Quick guide to the 16 personality types and teams : applying team essentials to create effective teams

Conclusion

Interview excerpts:

4:03 p.m., Los Angeles

Anderson: Are you nervous about being interviewed by me? Duchovny: I'm not nervous. I can't wait to see your questions: "What's it like to work with Gillian Anderson? Are you two friends? Do you hang out after work?"

Anderson: Well, first of all, I saw the movie. Duchovny: That's very interviewerlike of you.

Anderson: I loved that there wasn't an ounce of Mulder in it. What's scariest for you when you start a non-"X-Files" project? Duchovny: It's such a reality at this point in my career that [audiences] are going to look for Mulder. I can't fight it. It's so hard -- all of a sudden you're trying to do something different. It's hard to keep track of it, because so much is unconscious.

Anderson: God forbid you do a movie and they ask you to look scared. You have to do a different version of looking scared. Duchovny: And you're stuck with your face and body. If you're not in heavy makeup or doing an accent, there will be similarities.

Anderson: What drew you to "Return to Me"? Duchovny: I liked the old-fashioned quality of the movie. The simpleness of the humor and characters couldn't be farther away from the convoluted movements in "The X-Files." [He plays a widower who falls for Minnie Driver, a transplant patient who receives his late wife's heart.]

Anderson: Did it jar you to act out a romance where you actually do go to the next level? Duchovny: I remember the work I did before "The X-Files." There were plenty of love scenes. I didn't feel the need to show that I could simulate coitus onscreen. [Anderson laughs.]

Anderson: Here's one for you. How do you perceive our relationship Duchovny: It's like the roots of a tree. It's very twisted, but it's growing. You know the tree is alive, and it works in its own treelike way, yet you couldn't untangle it. You could, but you'd need the help of a gifted professional.

Anderson: [roaring with laughter] Like a therapist? Duchovny: Yeah. I always think back to the third or fourth episode. I was sitting in the office with ["X-Files" creator] Chris Carter, and he actually wanted us to get help. He was concerned with how we were relating onscreen. He said, "You seem bored or angry with each other. Maybe you should go see somebody." I thought, "What? We'll go as the characters? 'Hi, my name is Fox Mulder. This is my partner, Scully. We're here for couples therapy.'"

Anderson: I have no memory of that. Duchovny: You might not have been in the room. But maybe we should have therapy for long-running series actors. It'd be good for the cast of "Friends" to have group therapy. We'd have couples therapy, because we're not an ensemble. Actually, when Chris said that, I thought he was insane. But we do spend so much time together, and it's a hard relationship to navigate. As soon as I say, "No, we don't see each other after work," then it's "You hate each other." There seems to be no room in fans' minds -- as the fans are portrayed through journalists -- for a complicated relationship between us. It can't be summed up with "I love her. She's the best!" or "I can't stand her!"

Anderson: Ever hate Mulder? Duchovny: No. I hate that people think I'm Mulder. It's very odd. I hate being called Mulder. I don't like being called Scully, either. Do you ever get called Mulder?

Anderson: Yes. It's very weird. Duchovny: People say to me, "I'm a big, big fan, Scully! I love your show, Scully." [Both laugh uproariously.] Or they say, "Where's Scully?"

Anderson: What's been the most difficult thing in the last seven years? Duchovny: Probably the stuff in Vancouver. [He'd made disparaging comments about that Canadian city, where "The X-Files" was shot for five seasons. He later said he'd been joking.] I felt I had put myself in a situation that I wasn't able to right. People were angry. There was no remedy.

Anderson: Now that "The X-Files" has moved to Los Angeles, do you miss Vancouver? Duchovny: All the time. But I was stubborn. I refused to say I missed anything or anybody [in Vancouver], because I was so angry at them for misinterpreting me. I didn't want to be misconstrued as apologizing. Then they'd say, "He's sucking up." I thought it was a great place. But L.A. is still a better place for me.

Anderson: What's the biggest misconception of you? Duchovny: That I don't like rain. [Pauses.] I don't know. By answering questions like that, I'd be giving power to the misconception. Even if people never thought of me as having red hair, if I talk about it, they'll think, "Maybe he does." The next thing I know, people will be saying, "I thought you had red hair."

Anderson: Is your public persona at all close to your private persona? Duchovny: You don't want to be exposed, give away things that are meaningful to you, on a silly situation like a talk show. You want to do your job as an actor, which is to feed this [publicity] machine, yet you also want to go home at the end of the day and not have to scrub six layers of skin off to feel clean. So I appear not to take things seriously. I joke. But I take it all very seriously.

Anderson: Is solitude important to you? Duchovny: You're not the only person I don't see after work. I've always been pretty solitary. Téa understands. She doesn't get hurt if I want to be alone.

Anderson: If you could live two different lives at once, one being the life you're living now, what would the other one be? Duchovny: Can I use a lifeline? Call somebody in America? [She laughs. He thinks.] I'd be a pro athlete or teaching.

Anderson: If you could do the last seven years over, what would you do differently? Duchovny: I'd have had a lot of things put in writing instead of just a handshake.

Anderson: What do you know about me that I don't know about myself? It can be a negative thing. I'm a grown-up. Duchovny: You should not cover up your mole. You should have refused to do it in the beginning, and you should refuse now. It's a Chris Carter thing. I know it's not vanity for you. He deemed your face not big enough for the mole. And so for seven years, you've put makeup on this mole. It looks like you have a boogie. For both Scully and Gillian, the mole is fine. Oh -- and it's a beauty mark. Don't call it a mole. It doesn't have hair growing out of it, does it?

Anderson: No. Duchovny: You don't like it when I ask you questions, do you?

Anderson: [Laughs.] Do you think we could make a non-"X-Files" movie together? Duchovny: Absolutely. It would be fun to play characters whose relationship is more overt than covert. It would be fun to have a volatile relationship.

Anderson: There have been times where a movie I've been looking at to do, I heard they wanted to use you as the male. Duchovny: Theoretically, it's fun to think about, but practically, there'd be no way we'd do it. Unless it was the best script either of us had ever read and we'd say, "Screw Mulder and Scully. We have to do it." It would be silly otherwise. People would just go to movie theaters to make fun of us. [Both laugh.] Don't underestimate how much people want to make fun. Anderson: I don't know about making fun, but certainly they'd judge.

Anderson: At the time Piper [her 5-year-old daughter] was born, I got so many handmade gifts from people all over the world. It showed me another aspect of fans that I hadn't been aware of before – that's based more in appreciation and love than annoying neediness. Do you know what I mean? Duchovny: No. My fans aren't big knitters, I guess.

Anderson: Is there anything you collect? Like little jade elephants? Duchovny: Yes! Starting now. Please, fans, send me jade elephants. Big, small -- I'll collect them all.

Anderson: Any thoughts on the end of the show? Duchovny: We'll do another movie, at least, so I don't think it'll actually end. There'll be an ending image, but by the sheer fact that it's a self-conscious ending image, I think it'll be overloaded and won't work. My favorite image of the show's seven years is the end of the black-and-white episode, where they had us slow-motion dancing. However it ends, to me, that's my favorite.

Anderson: That's it. I've asked all my questions. Duchovny: I'd never have taken it as seriously as you did or done as good a job. So now are you going to call me in two weeks with follow-up questions? [Both laugh.]

The Daddy Files

That's "The XX-Files" now that Duchovny and wife Téa Leoni have a baby daughter, 11-month-old West.

On starting to shoot a movie when West was 4 days old: "Téa made it easy. She was so involved in becoming a new mother, which made it easier for me. It was still hard. It was hard to watch her get so comfortable with the baby, and I was still at work."

Father in training: "I'm still catching up. West didn't seem to know me. But now we're more comfortable around each other. It took me a while to feel like I wasn't going to kill her [by handling her]. I used to dread when Téa would leave me with the baby. I'd think, 'I'm going to screw up!' "

Fame, fans and new fatherhood: "You get more protective of the family unit. That becomes more pressing when a child actually starts to look like someone. At this point, she just looks like a baby. When she's a recognizable human being, I'll be more concerned. I don't want her to live a weird life. I don't want her to be exposed to all this."

Parenthood's effect on making movies: "Téa is someone who doesn't put show business or work over family. If she wasn't an actress, maybe I could sell her on having to go away for six months to make a big, important movie. But Téa is someone who'll say, 'Screw the movie! Who cares?'"

BONUS

January 1, 2001: Q: What's your take on his relationship with Gillian Anderson?

Tea Leoni: It's complicated. It rivals some sibling relationships I've seen. And some married couples I've seen.

"I’m sure we could have music historians come in and say, ‘Okay, this is derivative of that, or this is not original because of this.’ But ultimately, as Steve Lukather said, as he feels, it’s just the music at the end of the day. This is a guy that fell in love with music when he was seven year old. Basically, you know, it was like the pick of destiny to this guy: he got a guitar and he could play it! He found where he was supposed to be. How often does that happen? That is, that is the success of a lifetime! So his, you know, kind of 'f-k you' attitude towards critics of, like, um… may seem cavalier, and maybe it is a little cavalier in that there were times when I’m sure it was more painful. But I think what we come away with with Luke is, ‘I lasted. I lived long enough, I played long enough to be appreciated. And for the music to stand the test of time in the sense of, ‘Okay, I weathered the storm, the critical storm, at the moment,’ which can be painful. But over time, music sheds itself of all its momentary or historical nature; and it’s just, like, ‘Is it good? Do I like it?’ And that’s what he’s saying. Like, kids now are discovering for the first time that they like it. And what better revenge is that? And his sense of, you know, 'I don’t let it in, I don’t let musical criticism in….' Well it, it, I’m sure it was, it took some trial and error to get to that Teflon point. And I think some of his funnier, more pointed remarks against that criticism shows that there’s, some, you know, some anger underneath or hurt. But there’s no need to dig it up at this point because that’s all resolved. He knows who he is and he knows where he is and he knows what time it is.

“I had a similar kind of experience once. I may have talked about this. When I was doing The Tonight Show with Leno, and I heard that Richard Roper, the movie critic, was, um, the other guest. And I dug up a review that was really negative, uh, about me, about a movie that I’d done. About the first movie I’d done, House of D, the kind of generative issue of this whole podcast, you know? A failure of a movie, supposedly, by some critics’ estimation. And I was like, ‘Okay.’ I got, I got Xeroxed-- this was before the internet-- somehow got the, uh, in the hour I had before going on, the hour between learning Roper was another guest and that I was gonna be on, I got the Xerox and had it in my pocket. And I go out there and do my segment. Roper comes on. We shake hands-- as you do on Leno’s, you don’t take off like you do on Letterman. You stay on the couch while the second guest talks, you know, throw, throw your two cents in, come, come what may. So yeah-- so, I shake his hand, we’d never met. And he says, ‘I’m a big fan.’ And I was like, ‘Oh, is that so?’ And I pulled the, uh, the review out; I read it. I think I embarrassed him. And I think I meant to. And, um, I regret that, you know? I regret that. Because while I do think critics in their anonymity sometimes get nasty... and they can be lazy, for sure. I’m not saying Roper is lazy. I’m not even saying he was wrong, I don’t remember what he wrote. But it was wrong of me to, uh, ambush him like that, as satisfying as it was. ‘Cause in a way I was bullying him, you know? I was the first guest, I was the more famous. I was in the position of power and I was calling him out. Now, for sure that’s okay to do in private. And even just thinking about doing that in public, I’d like to apologize to, to Richard, wherever he is. I should probably do that in private as well. Why am I--” [breaks off, laughs] “--why am I apologizing in public, too? Well, it just occurred to me. So, there you have it. But I wanted to, to kind of tell that story as a response to critics: the kind of anger that it can engender. Because a movie or an album, it’s like a child. And you give birth to it out into the world; and then some person comes along and says, ‘Your child should be named yacht rock. Your child should be named soft rock. Your child should be named Not-A-Very-Good-Movie.’ And for those parents out there, you know what it’s like when somebody says something nasty about your child. Doesn’t even matter if they’re right! You go after ‘em. And I think, um. You know, as artists, we learn to kind of get over that initial anger response and then take in what’s appropriate, take in what might be constructive. And then if you feel like it’s been excessive, then maybe you can have a word with that person. But probably not when the camera’s rolling.

May 19, 1997: The only [wedding] guests were a half dozen family members: Leoni's parents, Anthony Pant[a]leoni, a corporate attorney, and wife Emily, a nutritionist, along with the bride's brother Tom, who runs an antiques mall in Ojai, Calif.; and Duchovny's mother (now divorced from his father, Amram, a playwright and retired publicist living in Paris), his sister Laurie, a teacher in Brooklyn, and brother Danny, a commercial director, who served as best man. A friend of Duchovny's sister, Episcopal minister Craig Townsend, presided at the ceremony.

May 1997: Duchovny thinks it over for a few minutes. "I think teaching college is a very important job, yes, but these kids at Yale were already better educated than most people in the world when they got there. I think the real heroic teachers are the ones who work with kids, like my mom and my sister do."

July 1998: Q: Who are the three people in your life you know you can trust?DD: My wife, my sister and my manager.

April 10, 2005: DD: Du-chuv-ny, Du-shove-ney, my father, I think, got tired of being called Duchoveeni, Du-shove-ney, Duke-o-vich, Dutch Oven, whatever. (Laughter) And he took the "H" out but he never did it legally. And then when my parents divorced, my mother as a kind of ... (makes a "stick it" gesture with his arm and hand) .... you know, put it back in. (Laughter) JL: Really? DD: Yeah. So I put it back in. My brother who was older and kind of siding with my dad left it out, and my sister you know was kind of on a Monday, Wednesday, Friday.

July 3, 2015: Q: You’re looking so great. What is your secret? DD: People tell me I look young. I guess I do take care of myself, but it must be just genes, there’s no special secret. My sister who’s 46 still gets carded (asked to show her driver’s license).

August 6, 2024: "My mom was a great teacher; and a champion of the kids who had trouble, a champion of the kids who didn't fit right away. Bless her, y'know. And I think, as I've said, I walk around the village now and people come up to me and they say, 'Hey, your mom taught me; hey, your mom taught my mother; hey, your mom taught my daughter, my son.' And it's very fulfilling to me. And my sister's also a wonderful teacher.... "So, what happens when you're firmly ensconced in the, the 'toxic patriarchy' of a family? How do you get out? Y'know, and this goes for not just women, but for men, too. Obviously. And that's where you get the other cliche: it can take a village-- it can take a teacher, like my mom, like my sister-- it can take a mentor."

September 5, 2025:

DD: [Speaking of Amram Duchovny's book Coney Island] There's his daughter and his agent, right there! ...My dad, he always said he was a writer; and then, yeah. He did it. He did it. And when he went... on his book tour, something happened. Something big... was happening in the culture that was making small crowds for his reading. And bless him, he like... soldiered on. And he gave a reading at Brentwood, uh, bookstore. And I don't know if you were there, Laurie, but-- I think it was just me and Danny in the audience. Were you there, too? [Pause.] Yeah, it was just me and Dan.

DD: [Speaking of his ancestry] Uh I found out-- and I don't know, Laurie, if you know this-- but I found out that my grandfather wrote on a deadline for the Yiddish newspaper here in the city. And... he was like a Yiddish Charles Dickens, apparently. But we don't have any of his work because it was just in the paper.

BONUS