what is the most dominant/aggressive type?

[viche]

YES exactly, so TJs (e.g. Te or Ti as primary function) are not so aggressive when 1-on-1 because they are impersonal. They can only be aggressive in "attacks" of rationalities (which is usually only verbal or in writing). Although TJs can be very harsh and rigid and without any tact, I actually dont consider that aggressive, its just harsh.

Being impersonal doesn't make one any less aggressive. You can be focused on your own subjective logic (Ti) or on outside facts (Te) and want to bend others to your reason. Impersonal to me simply means objectifying. When people are personal this mean they relate to you as a person. It is much more scary when their main value is cold hard logic rather than your personal value as a human being.

The real aggrssion comes from damaged FJs (e.g. Fe or Fi as primary function)

Stalin was ENTJ. Napoleon was ENTJ or INTJ. Most of the historical figured of the old like Alexander the Great have been types as TJ or TP also, not a single F-type among them. Besides Hitler aggressive FJ leaders have been very few. You cannot ignore all these other people. Majority of world's military and political leaders have been men, and 80% of men type as a T-type of some sorts.

 

[SkyWalker]

@viche

you are messing it all up

stop quoting historical "evil" leader figures please.

the question was not "what is the most evil type" (this was already posted in another thread, go tell it there)

i am NOT looking for the most evil.

I AM LOOKING FOR THE MOST AGGRESSIVE, THE KIND THAT GETS INTO <<PERSONAL>> 1-ON-1 FIGHTS EASILY.... THE KIND THAT DOES NOT CARE TO KEEP A "GOOD PUBLIC IMAGE"'. ... although quite scary one-on-one, these types are usually not that evil (from a big picture), they are only "local bullies" and they usually self-destruct

(stalin/napoleon/hitler do not get into 1-on-1 fights easily and do not so easily self-destruct, and they care about their image.)

 

[EyeSeeCold]

1 on 1 fights? Probably male ES*P.

 

[MacGuffin]

A raging ESTJ control-freak gets my vote.

 

[alphaxys]

INFJ without a doubt. They can adeptly use your sensitive spots and idiosyncrasies to their advantage while using subtle emotional theatrics to make themselves appear to be the martyr as they are aggressing. It's frightening. The examples listed earlier in the post about them are dead on. I'd be glad to never know another INFJ past surface level interaction again. It's like being choked under a cloak of seething passive-aggressive fury, and if you're not smart when dealing with one they can really fuck you up. (Well, only for a minute. INTP superpowers of deattachment and all.)

 

[Firehazard159]

Since we're only using anecdotal evidence for our scientific proof, I figured I'd throw in that in my personal experience, ENTJ's and INFJ's I've known have all been extremely nice, pleasant, laid back people. Granted, I only know of 2 confirmed INFJ's and 1 ENTJ personally.

And, I saw someone mention bullying being correlated with aggression - well, most of the most aggressive people I knew, especially in high school, were the ones being bullied. They'd regularly lash out, even to people who were nice to them, because they expected to be bullied. I also saw both the bully and bullied as some of the nicest, non-aggressive people at times they aren't interacting with someone they disliked for whatever reason.

This whole discussion seems absurd to me. It's stereotyping types into something that's innate in all of us, depending on where we're pushed, or what we desire. Plus, you're missing so many factors and variables here...

I'm not saying something like this shouldn't be discussed, I just notice a ton of misinformation being spread around in here that really can't be taken seriously, and if it is, is going to be extremely misleading to others.

Speculation is fine and all, and brainstorming, but more fact checking needs to be going on, and MBTI is in itself questionable as to what it actually measures, and to go building further onto that seems rather reckless.

 

[echoplex]

NOTE: This is purely speculative and I'm not very confident about it. I doubt there is an answer to this topic, and I'm sure my reasoning is as flawed as any other, but I wanted to argue something different for shits n giggles.

So it seems that J types (especially ExxJs) are considered the most dominant/aggressive. I can see how that makes sense, as Te and Fe are often thought to be domineering in some way, and very determined and goal-oriented, blah blah. But let me consider a few other types...

Domination:
I think it would be fair to say that Te (and to a lesser extent, Fe) types are the ones who most wish to be dominant, as manipulation of external dynamics seems to come natural to them. However, I'd suggest that types like ENTP, INTP, and INTJ may in fact be far more dominant, even if they don't realize it. A society that depends so much on ideas, innovation, and technology is, in many ways, dominated by those who develop the things/ideas that future generations run on. I'd wager that the inventive ENTP can have a far greater mark on the world -- and one that lasts long after they die -- than a power-hungry ExTJ, who may be too focused on short-term goals (money, accolades, career) to do anything with long-term impact.

Aggression:
Are ExxJs really the most aggressive? Indeed they are driven toward goals, but imo it's those same goals that make them less aggressive than ExxPs. See, an EJ has to carefully weigh their actions to ensure they reach their goal, so they may only be as aggressive as their situation allows. An ETJ will be hesitant if the logic clearly calls for it, or to maintain order, as will an EFJ if it's necessary to maintain harmony and/or relationships. However, the EP sees little reason to hold back; after all, their main function is to simply experience the world for what it is. They have little concern for failure, unlike the EJ. They are less likely to care what others think, or how an action fits situationally. They just want to take it all in, and imo this is most conducive to aggressive behavior.

So, why not ENTP?