Correspondence between MBTI and Tarot.

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

Go to this web page:

http://www.learntarot.com/cards.htm

The four MBTI functions correspond to the four suits of cards as follows:

Sensing = Pentacles (element Earth);
iNtuition = Wands (element Fire);
Thinking = Swords (element Air);
Feeling = Cups (element Water).

Now the dominant function is represented by the Kings, the secondary by the Queens, etc. So as an INTP, my cards are:

T: King of Swords;
N: Queen of Wands;
S: Knight of Pentacles;
F: Page of Cups.

Note that the Pages fittingly do not give descriptions, but suggestions—suggestions for developing one’s Shadow function. In the case of the Page of Cups, the main suggestions are:

BE EMOTIONAL
BE INTUITIVE
BE INTIMATE
BE LOVING

Even the second suggestion makes great sense to me (perhaps even especially), even though my secondary function is iNtuition. For to me there’s a difference between intuition and iNtuition. I’m extremely skeptical towards all the popular paranormal or supernatural connotations to the term “intuition”. I don’t tend to act on hunches, don’t actively try to remember my dreams (e.g., by writing them down), don’t believe in ‘psychic experiences’, etc.

Anyway, try it out and tell me what you think!

2

This is a very interesting direction to take, Sauwelios. I’d be careful about using the word “Shadow” to describe the inferior function though. This is not the Shadow archetype, but rather the non-dominant correlation in a pair of type aspects. For instance, if you are classified as dominantly Intuitive, then that non-dominant partner is Sensing – or as Jung says, one is superior and the other inferior.

The site you linked to is good for learning about the cards, but it doesn’t really deal with the MBTI or Enneagram correspondences, though. So I ask, where did you come up with the correlations you mention, such as:

Again, where does this come from?

I found a couple of interesting sites. One is called “Realms of Personality: The Jungian Personalities of the Tarot Courts” here: lindagailwalters.com/Tarot-Court-Cards.html . My type, INFJ, is associated with the Queen of Cups; It says: loving, tenderhearted, intuitive, psychic, and spiritual.

and your type, INTP is shown to correspond with the Page of Wands.. It says: creative, enthusiastic, confident, and courageous.

Another site I enjoyed looking at was “Tarot, Enneagram and MBTI Correlations” here: intraspec.ca/zulu.php . You have to scroll down a ways to get to the good part, but it’s worth it. I liked the way my INFJ correlated with Type Four on the Enneagram, which is exactly right.

INTP, however, correlates with Type 5 on the Enneagram. Have you ever thought of yourself as a Type 5? PK Dick was definitely a 5, which is Wisdom, Knowledge, as is the husband of one of my sisters I think. I had you pegged for a Type 1, but of course I could be wrong; you can really only type yourself, and the books by Palmer and by Riso and Hudson do a very good job of helping one get to their type.

I’ve written here before that I strongly identify with the Fool card in the Rider-Waite deck, since I have so often found myself tripping along merrily along a track, thinking I have found the way towards something or just enjoying what I’m learning or viewing along the path, when all of a sudden it turns out to have been a perilous and treacherous journey and, not really knowing what lay ahead or not looking properly, I would fall off the cliff’s edge.

My solution has always been to dance the fall, to create aeriel fabrics out of clouds and have fun with it.

3

It is not the Shadow archetype because it’s a function, not an archetype. If you think there is any other difference between the two, feel free to explain.

The link between the functions and the suits is the elements. The link between the different ranks of the functions and the trump cards is that they are both four, and both ranked. By the way, I never mentioned the Enneagram.

Sure, I seem to be a 4w5. But as far as I know, the Enneagram has nothing to do with the MBTI. That is, unless you can actually argue for a correspondence, rather than just refer to vague descriptions, I’ll remain unconvinced. Is there any argument for the Enneagram at all, anyway? For instance, why does a type 4 have the characteristics associated with it? The MBTI at least explains the characteristics associated with an INFJ, for instance, as springing from its functions and the rank order between them, namely Ni > Fe > Ti > Se.

4

You misread me. I was pointing out that using the word “Shadow” to describe the function might be confusing since the Shadow is an archetype. The words non-dominant or Jung’s use of inferior might be less confusing.

Again, you misread me. I asked for the specific link to the site that gave you the MBTI correspondences you listed. You still haven’t provided it, and I want to look at it. I did some exploring to see if I could find it, and I came across the two I mentioned, one of which also correlates Tarot, MBTI, AND the Enneagram.

You are most definitely NOT a type 4. You don’t come across as a type 5 either, but as I said, only you can type yourself. You need to read the books I recommended and really think about it. I’ll tell you what is characteristic of a 4, and that is an overarching concern with originality and artistry, self-expression. That’s what Nietzsche had in spades; he even apotheosed it. A type 5 is concerned with wisdom, with the amassing of knowledge on a wide and large scale. If you read PK Dick’s VALIS, you will know exactly how that type manifests; Dick is a classic for type 5 and he even apotheosed Wisdom more than once.

5

I did not misread you. “Shadow” is just a word. Now Jung called one of his archetypes “the Shadow”, so we may speak of the Shadow archetype. Others have called the inferior function “the Shadow function”, so we may call it that. If you think the two are ‘shadowy’ in a different sense, please explain. The Shadow archetype, after all, is also ‘inferior’ (compare the word “Inferno”). The ‘Shadow function’, too, tends to be un(der)appreciated, avoided, and/or even suppressed.

There is no such site. Whatever made you think there was?? I guess it’s your extroverted Judging function that makes you look for external authority, consensus, or something like that. My introverted Judging function makes me rely on my own standards (in my case, Logic (as I am a Thinker)).

Who are you to determine that? :slight_smile:

Exactly…

But why—why are those things characteristic of a 4.

6

OK then, why didn’t you just say so the first time? In a way I’m glad you didn’t though, or I wouldn’t have come across those other sites.

I’ve taken two classes and read the books, you haven’t. Taking a test on the internet is not a good way to find your Enneagram type. You need to explore the Enneagram in depth. If you can’t take classes from experts, then read the books. I’ve already given you enough info to show you that you are NOT a type 4 and that Nietzsche was.

If you are a type 5, as your INTP suggests, then that means you are a man who primarily values Wisdom and Knowledge, an aspect of Omniscience. My type, four, is one of Origin and Source and manifests through artistic self-expression from the core of my being.

Really, you must type yourself, but you should do so knowledgeably with reliable guides… not just based on a cheesy online test.

I’ve told you before, that’s because a 4 manifests as the divine attribute of being the Origin, the One, the Source.

You know I much prefer the Enneagram over the MBTI.

7

And there just happen to be nine ‘divine attributes’?

8

Yes. There is a kind of geometric magic to it, and the way the lines move is important too and gets rather complex. Take Type 4. When I’m relaxed, I move towards type 1, which works well for me. When I’m stressed, I move towards type 2, but it’s coming out of a kind of Shadow, so it doesn’t work so well. Also, the wings are important. My wings are 3 and 5. I don’t know which one has more strength for me, though, because I don’t really relate to either of them much.

Also, don’t get me wrong. I’m really enjoying this MBTI discussion and relating it to the Tarot. I think you have a great facility for taking this to new places that are most interesting.

9

Thanks. Anyway, what I’m skeptical about are the nine ‘divine attributes’. They are like nine fundamental characteristics. In the MBTI, there are only two pairs of fundamental functions, plus one pair of ‘attitudes’ and one pair of ‘orientations’. The fundamental functions consist of one pair of Perceiving and one pair of Judging functions, which makes sense as everyone makes decisions (‘judges’) and gathers information on which to base these decisions (‘perceives’). The notion of ‘attitudes’ arises from the subject/object distinction (which we logically cannot do without), and the notion of ‘orientations’ arises from the notion of ‘attitudes’. The four functions themselves are not yet entirely clear to me, but as I am now in the stage where I understand them as the four classical elements, I can begin to interpret them in the light of two other, more basic dichotomies (‘dry’/‘moist’ and ‘hot’/‘cold’), or even of a basic trinity (sattva, rajas, and tamas)—and then I will perhaps be able to re-duce these to one basic dichotomy, and this in turn to a basic unity. The Enneagram, on the other hand, promises no such thing. One just has to accept, as given, the existence of nine basic ‘divine attributes’. I would call this an appeal to Revelation fallacy.

10

Here we see that Air (Thinking) and Water (Feeling) have something in common with each other, and Earth (Sensing) and Fire (iNtuition) as well—just as we would expect! The quality of ‘wetness’ will then correspond with the quality of Judging (decision-making), and the quality of ‘dryness’ with the quality of Perceiving (information-gathering).

But what about the qualities of ‘hotness’ and ‘coldness’? These must be what I have been looking for for a while. Apparently Thinking and iNtuition have something in common with each other, and Feeling and Sensing as well. May it indeed be, as I’ve suggested before, that the Sensing/iNtuition and the Thinking/Feeling dichotomies are two forms—the Perceiving and Judging forms, respectively—of one basic dichotomy?

I have just analysed the four elements in the Western (Greek) way. I will now do the same in the Eastern (Indian) way. According to the Hindus, the four elements can be analysed as follows:

  • in Fire, sattva predominates over rajas;
  • in Air, rajas predominates over sattva;
  • in Water, rajas predominates over tamas;
  • in Earth, tamas predominates over rajas.

There are no elements that contain both sattva and tamas, as these, being opposite poles, repel one another.

It appears now that where rajas predominates, the elements are ‘wet’; whereas where it doesn’t, the elements are ‘dry’. And we already know what this means in the context of the MBTI, namely, that the functions are Judging or Perceiving functions, respectively. The predominance of rajas, cognate with raja, “king”, makes a function Judging.—

[size=95]The [members of the] second [caste]: they are the guardians of the law, those who see to order and security, the noble warriors, and above all the king as the highest formula of warrior, judge, and upholder of the law. The second are the executive arm of the most spiritual[.]
[Nietzsche, The Antichrist, section 57.][/size]

The three gunas, sattva, rajas, and tamas, are indeed connected in Hinduism with the different castes. The highest caste, the brahmins, are supposed to be ruled by sattva; the second caste, the warriors, are supposed to be ruled by rajas; and the lowest caste is supposed to be ruled by tamas.

Anyway, on to the basic dichotomy I’ve been looking for. The Indian analysis suggests that the difference between Thinking and iNtuition on the one hand, and Feeling and Sensing on the other, is in whether an element contains sattva or tamas. The Greek analysis suggests that the difference consists in whether an element is ‘hot’ or ‘cold’. And “hot” and “cold” are obviously not absolutes, but the opposite poles of one continuum. Cold is relative absence of heat. And tamas means “darkness”. So we see that we have on the one hand a ‘cold darkness’. On the other, then, we would expect a ‘hot light’. And indeed, Juan Mascaro translates sattva as “light”.

I will take a break to let this sink in.

11

I really don’t want to argue about this. If the MBTI and all its permutations work for you, that’s really all that matters. It doesn’t work so well for me, but the Enneagram does in a big way. Also, remember, that I have studied the Enneagram in some depth through the classes and the readings. It is a very fine system which provides great illumination into why people act the way they do and what motivates them.

Anyway, now I’m reading Jung on the Archetypes. The first section is titled “Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious.” In this section Jung explains what is wrong with Protestantism, how and why it couldn’t serve Nietzsche, and the archetype Nietzsche took on after he declared that god is dead and how that worked. This is most interesting. If you’re not familiar with it and would like to read it, I’ll type it out for you. If so, should I post it here or in a new thread?

12

I think that Jung the alchemist and mythologist would greatly appreciate this brilliant analysis. Thanks.

13

That’s a great offer, thank you, but I happen to have the book myself. I haven’t read that section, though. I’ll look into it.

I think I will begin a new thread, about my analysis of the MBTI. I think what I said about cold, heat, darkness, and light was flawed, though.

14

I highly recommend that you read that first section again in its entirety actually. The insights on Protestantism and Nietzsche are very interesting. Jung goes at it from a symbolic archetypal perspective and deplores the way Protestantism took out the props and protections from humans who might need them when an archetype becomes too strong or overwhelming. Jung said that when Nietzsche attacked Christianity and declared that God is dead, he was then taken over by an archetype he calls “the wise old man.” He explains the way that archetype works and the kind of language employed in its expression, which corresponds wonderfully with what Nietzsche did with Zarathustra. It was a most fascinating insight, I must say. I don’t disagree with this view at all, but I would add that Protestantism also destroyed the mystical tradition which also would help someone inclined that way, including Nietzsche.

I’m glad I don’t have to type it out for you. Busy day. I look forward to reading your new thread later.

j

15

I meant I’ve never read that section.

My new OP will not say anything new, but it will just be about the MBTI, not Tarot.

16

OK. I was wondering if you were also going to expand it, perhaps in terms of the Tantric chakras or the Jewish Tree of Life as well.

17

Well, I’ve already reconciled the chakras with the Tree of Life, and even the gunas with the Tree of Life.

Kether = Crown chakra
between Hokmah and Binah = Third Eye chakra
Daath = Throat chakra
between Hesed and Geburah (Tiphareth?) = Heart chakra
[unnamed] or Tiphareth = Solar Plexus chakra
Yesod (between Netzach and Hod) = Sacral chakra
Malkuth = Root chakra

For the gunas on the Tree of Life, see here: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=34475.

18

I think you can also do this with the seven sacraments. Interesting that these energies always come in sevens.

19

No surprise there, really.

Given the influence of humorism on how we perceive people, Tarot’s connection with medieval pop-religion (which is heavily influenced by elements of Greek thought in the same way that modern New Age religions are influenced by elements of quantum theory – and each does it about as accurately too!), and all that jazz. Basically, make any system vague enough (and divination systems have pretty well perfected this art) and you can line just about anything up with it.

But if we are going to go elemental, why not add the fifth element:

20

Try to think in terms of metphors and symbols that act something like activators of energy in the psyche. They are not meant to be taken literally.

Also, not everyone goes through psychic transformation completely or successfully. The process isn’t easy or simple, and that is why symbols and sometimes rituals aid in the journey. Jung has written on this extensively, as a psychiatrist, a mythologist, and an alchemist. Thus, there is nothing all that amiss in what Sauwelios is doing in making the analogies or correlations between various systems and their systems for energetic movement and psychic transformation.

I would think that trying to reduce it through the reductio ad absurdum method says more about you, Xunzian, than anything about Sauwelios’ very interesting thought constructs seeking to make more sense out of the MBTI while, at the same time, give it a breadth and depth cross-culturally.