Bond, INTP Bond

[Decaf]

During my MBTI Qualifying class my instructor was asked "What type do you think James Bond was?" After hashing out whether they meant the movie version or the book version she said she thought the book version was an INTP.

Much of that makes sense to me. Spies by their nature need to be people who keep much of themselves private from the outside world, so I seems unavoidable. He kills people for a living, and T seems equally unavoidable. A complete disregard for any rule that makes his life more difficult sounds awfully P to me. So what about S or N?

Anyone want to weigh in?

(I'm fairly certain the movie version is an S, so we'll restrict this to a book version discussion)

 

[Ogion]

Hm, i don't know the book-Bond, but i don't think spies with an "I" could get far. They need to pretend multiple roles, need to get along with other people quickly, get their confidence. Ok, it depends on the target role...

With the T i agree, they can't rely on their emotions, that would be dangerous. (Well, hm, the Film-bond however...With all his girls he is probably rather a Feeling-type :-P)

But i don't really know enough about the daily routine of a spy

Ogion

 

[Decaf]

I suggested that spies were introverts primarily because I don't believe spies make lots of acquaintances. Every person you get to know under cover is someone who can learn about you, expose you or they could be working for the enemy gathering information about you. Introverts tend to develop a greater ability to restrict outward flow. More inclined to think first, act second. I would think that would be highly valuable when any reckless action can cause your death.

I don't believe F's need to be very emotional. Its about making decisions where values are the primary concern rather than objective analysis. If you're an F and an assassin, you're probably psychotic. It'd be impossible to hold any value in the concept of life and simultaneously work to end it if you were an F.

Being an INTP, I have multiple books on how to be a spy sitting around my apartment, so forgive me if I get a little overbearing rehashing my understanding of the subject matter.

 

[Ogion]

Hmm, yes ok, the "I" makes sense.

Well, to the T/F i agree with you, as i said. (I don't consider the film-Bond to be an authentic/realistic personality, so that remark was just a joke).

To the S/N. One argument ofr "S" could be, that as a spy you'd have to be very careful and attentive to details. Just the bg picture doesn't serve you enough. You have to be after the details, when concerning your cover, and when concerning plans for information recover.

Ogion

 

[Devercia]

I can't speak of the books, but INTP sounds right within the movies. I would not think he is an S because he is not at all conserned with his gizmos or the workings of his enviroment beyond the N like actions like shooting supports of a cat walk in the heat of the moment. His impulsiveness is very NP.

I would say he is an I. I have heard and agree with that INTPs are very chameleon like when in social situations with those they don't know well. This is because of their carefulness socially due to slow iT being near useless and quick inciteful eN functions allowing adaptation. One could say this adaption tendency is a means to avoid the center-of-attention E like situations.

 

[Wisp]

I is a spy trait. Probably N too

 

[murkrow]

Bond is definitely an N, there's no question about that.

F/T is slightly harder to decide on, but it's probably T.
He tends to gauge where things are going and make decisions accordingly.
He also gets down on himself for mistakes he has made, even when there was nothing he could have done.

I think he's an INTJ.

While he does sometimes leave things to fate he always DECIDES to leave things to fate.

INTJ.

 

[Decaf]

eT's tends to work within the confines of the world around them. That's one of the reasons why NTJ's are so much better at applying ideas than NTP's. eN's on the other hand have an easier time keeping their mind open to the more "outside the box" kind of innovation because they don't tend to use external rules to define their options. I think that better describes Bond that the former.

That and P's don't have trouble deciding. We just refrain when we don't feel a decision is necessary.

 

[Decaf]

OK... here's another thought that struck me...

When watching the bond movies... what bits have the potential to ruin the movie for you? Too much violence? Scientific inaccuracies? Poor dialogue? What parts lose your interest (or you might be riveted the whole time... who am I to say?)

If Bond is an INTP, we should be able to figure out how accurate a portrayal it is.

 

[Ogion]

You know, just with the films, i wouldn't say "Bond" is any realistic character at all. It is always the same: He let's himself be captured after introducing himself to the important girls, ahem, people, at the end breaks out of his capture, kills his main enemy (along with many of his helpers) and gets away with his "Bond girl".
So i wouldn't see the films as depiction of any 'real' character...

Ogion

P.S.: It's nice to watch anyway

 

[Jordan~]

The new movies are pretty good. Watching the old ones it's all the:
"Why hello, Mr. Bond. Goodness, you're so handsome!"
"Why yes, yes I am."
that makes me go -_-.

 

[Olba]

James Bond, huh?

Definitely I and T at least. After all, he has the license to kill and he works undercover. Killing with F just seems much too twisted and an E spy wouldn't last long.

S and P, huh? I would say he's P, because INTJs are leaders and ISTJs just come off as polices or military officers to me.

Now, INTP or ISTP, eh? This is funny, as the difference between the two is quite small, as far as I can see. ISTPs are more traditional and stick to the known methods while INTPs do the opposite. Now, which sounds more like a spy to you? Yes, INTP.

Therefore I say INTP.

However, do take into account this: I've not read a single one of the books. And using the movies to analyse Bond would be pointless as each of those Bonds is nothing more than an interpretation of the actor.

Or maybe it's better that I didn't think of Bond when I said that?

 

[Perseus]

ESTP Police Officer or Lion/Tiger

 

[murkrow]

As someone who has read all the books (I think.), I still go with INTJ.

Bond has shown leadership capabilities in several situations, mainly the Thunderball case but also at other times. However he shows no real desire to lead or ambition for a position of power, so long as he can do as he wishes he is happy. This points to I and J, due to his ability to accept authority that does not effect him, realize the necessity of the chain of command and yet not desire to top the chain.

Bond always makes a point of justifying all of his decisions. (like in the short story where he shoots the russian gunlady in the hand instead of killing her and then argues that the service shouldn't reprimand him since her career is over either way.) This is a rather common NTJ trait as the decisiouns made by NTJs are worth so much to them. NTPs are more likely to simply disregard the negative emotions their actions bring up, while NTJs will actively seek to change them through application of logic.

Bond often follows his intuitions.("man with the golden gun" when he goes to Jamaica, unwillingness to change weapons due to his preference of the beretta in "dr no", sense of the desires of women (all books), accurately sizing up personalities at first glance [Blowfelt in "on her magesty's secret service, the russian assassin in "from russia with love"])
However he doesn't act on these intuitions until he has rationally proven to himself, dealing with external sources, that they are accurate beyond a reasonable doubt. This is another NTJ trait, but the patience and meticulosity he shows in building the ideas is specifically INTJ. It really showcases his use of introverted intuition and extroverted thinking.

He has a rather strong S, but still an INTJ.

 

[Perseus]

I am going by the books rather than the films for ESTJ.

Ian Fleming I have got as INTP.

 

[murkrow]

Why do you put him as INTP when there's so much evidence for J?

 

[Decaf]

My primary argument for P over J is how serious Bond treats life. P's and J's can both behave in whatever ways they've learned to, but its very difficult to hide how you feel about those behaviors. Bond is constantly stepping over the line because he has no respect for it. Not that he thinks the line is worthless, just not important. INTJs don't need to follow the rules, but they tend not to discount them. They just find exceptions where INTPs discount them entirely if they don't believe they fit. This is best seen in the generalizations people have of others. An INTJ may be fine with breaking the rules when the need arises, but they tend to have a low tolerance of others breaking the rules if they don't trust the judgment of the individual (never break a rule for the sake of breaking it). The INTP have no such impatience because once a rule has been proven inadequate, they chop it down.

I may think of it a little too simplistically because my girlfriend is an INFJ who has a chronic problem of taking life too seriously (and being annoyed when I don't), but there you are.

And sorry... that's a longer expose than I intended, but I cut out three additional metaphors and allegories. You'll thank me later

 

[Perseus]

Licence to Kill is over the line.

 

[Decaf]

Bond has shown leadership capabilities in several situations, mainly the Thunderball case but also at other times. However he shows no real desire to lead or ambition for a position of power, so long as he can do as he wishes he is happy. This points to I and J, due to his ability to accept authority that does not effect him, realize the necessity of the chain of command and yet not desire to top the chain.

I think we're mixing up behavior and skill with psychological tendency here. I pretty regularly take on a leadership role in my projects because I work with a bunch of introverts. I don't mind it, but I really have not desire to make it a permanent position. I would be much less comfortable if I wasn't well aware of the requirements of the job, and maybe that is what shows off my INTP qualities.

Also, I didn't have much of a problem being in the Air Force. Chain of Command is an easy thing for a P to recognize and respect as long as its function is determinable. Knowing that the military could not operate without several layers of authority makes it easy for me to work within that system. The exception would be when I sometimes approached the person in charge of a situation rather than my direct superior when I had an idea. Its gotten me in a little trouble, but nothing serious (and its worth it to me to avoid the aggravation of feeling restrained from a logical course of action by the superficial structure).

Bond always makes a point of justifying all of his decisions. (like in the short story where he shoots the russian gunlady in the hand instead of killing her and then argues that the service shouldn't reprimand him since her career is over either way.) This is a rather common NTJ trait as the decisiouns made by NTJs are worth so much to them. NTPs are more likely to simply disregard the negative emotions their actions bring up, while NTJs will actively seek to change them through application of logic.

Saying NTPs disregard the consequence of their actions is a drastic oversimplification (and a dangerous one considering your surroundings), but I do understand where that view comes from. However, my actions are always carefully weighed before I do anything. That's been a problem for me in the past, constantly second guessing myself. That isn't to say I'm not a risk taker, but if I feel like my decisions are viewed negatively, I am always ready to explain my motivations. The question is, is explaining myself the best thing to do. Sometimes its not. Sometimes you have to live with a decision you've made despite how others might see you negatively from it. The exception is when I feel the person feels negatively in a way that I disagree with.

Bond often follows his intuitions.("man with the golden gun" when he goes to Jamaica, unwillingness to change weapons due to his preference of the beretta in "dr no", sense of the desires of women (all books), accurately sizing up personalities at first glance [Blowfelt in "on her magesty's secret service, the russian assassin in "from russia with love"])
However he doesn't act on these intuitions until he has rationally proven to himself, dealing with external sources, that they are accurate beyond a reasonable doubt. This is another NTJ trait, but the patience and meticulosity he shows in building the ideas is specifically INTJ. It really showcases his use of introverted intuition and extroverted thinking.

I disagree that these are J traits. Patience and acting meticulously have never reminded me of an extraverted judger. At risk of being dismissive of the skills that even eT's and eF's develop, patience seems to me to be primarily an iT and iF characteristic. How many IxxPs have had the experience of waiting for the right moment, only to have it never arrive and end up doing nothing at all. That's pretty trademark and stems directly from a tendency to be overly patient. And for being meticulous, I don't think any personality type can lay claim on that entirely. It all depends on interest.

I also don't think intuitiveness, sentimentality or sexual desire do anything to help us differentiate between P and J. Admittedly J's tend to have a stronger desire to be part of a relationship, but I believe that stems from a cultural awareness of the expectation of such a relationship existing. If INTPs were unlikely to have significant or even primarily sexual relationships, our characteristics would have been bred out a long time ago.

I'm not using these arguments to say "Clearly he is an INTP", but rather to say that these are not adequate reasons to believe he's not. I'll also say that I enjoy the interchange and look forward to your rebuttal.

 

[loveofreason]

Just for fun: if Bond's an INTP, where does he get his flashy dress style, hmm?

 

[murkrow]

disregard for rules that make his life difficult?

I think he generally just sticks to the rules that keep his life most efficient and don't make him feel too robotic.

I'd say disregard for rules is more of an N trait than a P one, but maybe that's just because I'm a NJ who's disregarded every rule ever.

While I agree that he is likely an I, I don't agree that having a killing lifestyle is necessarily I. Many of the killers he goes up against and works with seem rather E .(that guy who leads the Unione Corse in "OHMSS", number 2 in "Thunderball", Felix Leiter[maybe], that big scary black guy with the grey skin who pretended to be a zombie... forget his name)

I need some points for P, because really I can only see (admittedly weak) points for J.

we should maybe break down his functions.

here's some short summaries of N/T from mypersonality.info

Ti (XXTP types, primary function of INTP)
Thinking people make decisions based on logic, so the Introverted thinking function allows a person to categorize and analyze data. Is it the ability to identify inconsistencies, know how things work and problem-solve.

Te (XXTJ types)
Thinking people make decisions based on logic, so the Extraverted thinking function allows a person to organize and categorize things, thoughts or arguments. It is the ability to see the logical consequences of actions. It follows sequence and organization.

Ni (XXTJ types, primary function of INTJ)
Intuitive people process data through impressions, possibilities and meanings, so the Introverted Intuition function allows a person to have a sense about the future. It is the ability to grasp and get a sense of a pattern or plan. Information that is usually hard to understand and dissect is easily processed through Introverted Intuition.

Ne (XXTP types)
Intuitive people process data through impressions, possibilities and meanings, so the Extraverted Intuition function allows a person to see different path or ways. When information comes in, different possibilities are thought of, realizing that there is always another way of looking at things.


When I look at it this way INTP does seem like the likely choice from the INT types.

I think Leiter is either INTJ or ENTJ, he tends to be better at predicting the moves of the enemy (and subsequently get himself into trouble).

Now for S and N.

Se
Sensing people process data with their five senses, so the Extraverted Sensing function allows a person to process life through their experiences. It is the ability to be keen to what is seen, smelled, touched, heard and tasted. It is energized by experience and it is able to live "in the moment."

I think N matches much better.

So yep you were right, INTP.


What about M? ENTJ for sure.

 

[Fleur]

Maybe he has well balanced stats?

 

[Decaf]

Bernard Lee as M? Oh, absolutely ENTJ. I think Judy Dench might play M as an ESTJ though. She is much stricter about rules and procedures, but maybe that's just relative to Bond.

And I think you're right about Felix Leiter too, though he tends to be much more outspoken than Bond, INTJ sounds right. I know he's just a character, but I am quickly becoming hard-nosed about spies being introverts. I just don't see how an extravert could manage that kind of inner isolation without coming back with some psychological issues. Imagine being forced to be a very public person, not just for a little while, but for years, consistently without reprieve of hope of reprieve. I believe introverts can extravert themselves and vice versa, but that would be cruel and unusual.

 

[murkrow]

Yeah, the more effective spies are going to be Is, but not so for criminals and militiamen and things like that.

There are effective uses for Es in the secret service though, and an E who can manage long enough as an agent will likely make an executive rank quickly and fulfill those duties very effectively.


To be honest I haven't watched any of the movies except Dr. No, I was talking about books M.

 

[Ogion]

Maybe he (to take up Decafs comment) is just not really a thought-out character? I think there is not enough 'he' to dissect it, i mean "James Bond" is not a character story (ok, i don't know about the books)...
(Am i the only one with this opinion?)

Ogion

 

[murkrow]

Fleming almost always takes the time to detail what's going on in Bond's head.

The character doesn't really develop much but you do get a very good look of who he is.

 

[Ogion]

Hm, ok, seems the books are of a better quality than the films.

Ogion

 

[Vrecknidj]

INTJs are efficiency maximizers. Bond is only an efficiency maximizer when it's necessary. He'll worry about those issues, but not always. INTPs are far more willing to have desert before dinner, as it were, and Bond is that sort of fellow, I think.

Dave

 

[Perseus]

Blofeld has a cat as an ally. Now by my animal portraits a Cat is a ISFP. Now is you pet yourself or your companion?

I think it is played in the film as a Pedagogue
each is both the other's mentor and student: has a "parent to child" feel

This makes Blofeld a ESFJ (the most dangerous Horseman) which put Ian Fleming at the counterpoint INTP. But an INTP will employ the best agent to deal with his animus (opposite sex) enemies.

I would choose an enforcer ESTJ as a Policeman, but I might need a ESTP if laws have to be broken. 007 is a ESTP. What did I say before?

This is from real life experience!

 

[Perseus]

007 is ESTP
M is ENTP
Q is INTJ
Leiter is ESTJ
Iam Fleming is INTP

 

[murkrow]

I feel like your browser filters out everyone else's posts.

 

[Perseus]

007 is not a spy he is an enforcer. But of a very special kind. Spies might be the FERRET ENFP but in a dangerous business they are more likely to be the SNAKE ENTP.

The Snake is one of the most misunderstood character types. As they are the extravert version of INTPs it is possible to understand them in the short term. They are probably outside of the normal cognition of a ENTJ s much as the INFP is.

This is why WOLVES ENTJ are a pain sometimes, as they reject all cognition outside of their own personal experience by natural tendency, although the older ENTJs learn by experience when their plans go awry.

However, it is the ESFJ HORSE that is really spooked by the SNAKE.

 

[murkrow]

urgh...

 

[Jordan~]

All these animals perplex me. Is this a forum or a menagerie?

Answer: On Saturnalia, it might be both.

 

[Dissident]

Perseus: You have a thread to discuss the animals thing, keep it THERE, discuss it with whoever is interested in it THERE and leave the rest of the threads free of that. PLEASE !

 

[Decaf]

Equating personalities to animals can be fun, but it is a form of generalizing that I find clouds the issue more than enlightens. If anything personalities should become more complex the more intently you focus on them. And I'm sure ENTP's would love to be called Snakes or Ferrets. You should post that on their forum.

OK, maybe that's harsh considering here I am trying to type a fictional character, but I guess the broad diversity that exists in even the most precise description of a person's psyche is very interesting to me and its hard to appreciate the applicative use of creating useful definitions.

Anyway, back to 007. I wonder if I could team up with a dominant intuitive and come up with the story of Bond's youth as an INTP. I think that could be fascinating if done carefully.

 

[Perseus]

Sherlock INTJ
Moriaty ?
Mycroft INTP

 

[Decaf]

Sherlock INTJ

That's another good topic. There's likely more evidence and continuity in Sherlock Holmes than James Bond. So the question is... is that his personality.

At face value I see Holmes as an information gatherer much more than an information applier. He obviously has a knack for the big picture and seeing the inter-relatedness of things, so I think INT is a must, but might he also be an INTP?

Thoughts?

 

[Perseus]

Conan-Doyle as an INFP (Healer or Questor)

I alternate between a Questor INFP (Dragon) and a Architect INTP (Eagle) with short spells as an Inventor ENTP (Snake) and Journalist ENFP (Ferret).

So this makes me a NP Abstract, which is the opposite of SJ Guardian. Therein lies a major problem.

 

[Jordan~]

Oi, Perseus! What about Moriarty?

(Spent too long in Speakers' Corner... damn, I love that place. If only Dundee was half as good as London.)

 

[Perseus]

Oi, Perseus! What about Moriarty?

(Spent too long in Speakers' Corner... damn, I love that place. If only Dundee was half as good as London.)

I lost my original post by accident. By deduction rather than intuition, I conclude that Moriarty was a ENTP Snake. Only Mycroft can understand Moriaty, he was too good for Sherlock as a mere INTJ hawk.

Inicdentallly, I photographed this falcon up the downs yesterday.



Intuition did not work for me in this case because the books were written in a culture I am unfamiliar with. This is the trouble with intuition, in a foreign land it does not work very well. It is at least part culturally-based acquired cognition.

 

[Gorgrim]

A friend of mine is ESTP, actually, interesting, but it doesn't fit because 007 acts differently in the Sense/Intuition than a ESTP, that much is clear imo. Bond is too different from a ESTP type, for some reason, It seems harder to look at the big picture and adapt to an ESTP, than me ( intp ) and Bond seems like the guy who is quite innovative and intuitive, and sees broad.

So if you point out a character, which atleast, seemingly, - you would have to include Intuition. And definitely Thinking too.

I think it's fun to put personalities on fictional people. Bond is badass, and i don't mind thinking of him as INTP.

 

[Auburn]

Hmmm...

MyPersonality.info has James Bond (James Bond Series) as an ESTP?
http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/estp/

 

[Perseus]

007 is a Policeman ISTX, Ian Fleming is INTP.

 

[Anticitizen]

During my MBTI Qualifying class my instructor was asked "What type do you think James Bond was?" After hashing out whether they meant the movie version or the book version she said she thought the book version was an INTP.

Much of that makes sense to me. Spies by their nature need to be people who keep much of themselves private from the outside world, so I seems unavoidable. He kills people for a living, and T seems equally unavoidable. A complete disregard for any rule that makes his life more difficult sounds awfully P to me. So what about S or N?

Anyone want to weigh in?

(I'm fairly certain the movie version is an S, so we'll restrict this to a book version discussion)

I haven't yet read the other posts in the thread, but I'm a huge fan of the Ian Fleming Bond novels and really think that the Bond of the novels is an ISTP, whereas (most of) the movie portrayals picture him as being more extraverted.

Edit: I've read the rest of the thread now. Bond's recreation time in the novels is spent skin diving, gambling, driving... his only hobby, he says, is his car - a 1925 Bentley (the books were written beginning in the 1950s) that a wealthy prior owner had wrapped around a tree, and Bond bought the scrap and had it cobbled back together. 'She went like a bird and a bomb and Bond loved her, if possible, more than all the women in his life wrapped together'. This is all very ISTP to me (I used to test as an ISTP when I was a teenager, 10-15 years ago). He recharges his batteries, as it were, by throwing himself out into the world and soaking it up. He detests small talk and prefers solitude.

The movie Bond is a very different character.

Now, as for Sherlock Holmes - I'm also a huge fan of that series and just only last week finished rereading the entire collection - he's DEFINITELY an INTP. Moriarty is an INTJ, as are most of Bond's villains.

 

[Enne]

Seemed like an ESTP t'me.

 

[Czech Yes or No]

Being an INTP, I have multiple books on how to be a spy sitting around my apartment, so forgive me if I get a little overbearing rehashing my understanding of the subject matter.

I have the same thing. I would like to assert that spies must have some ability to extrovert in order to gain contacts. However, this all depends on what type of spy they are. If they are a HUMINT or HUMan INTelligence collector, then they will have a good ability to assure and connect with people, on the other hand, if they are the man that is portrayed in the books, especially Casino Royale, then they are very cognizant of their surroundings, in a way that seems more akin to that of an ISTP. Still, none of the types really "fit" anyone accurately, as I see in myself, so that previous idea may be redacted shortly.