John Marston نوع شخصية MBTI

نوع الشخصية John Marston

شخصية
سيرة شخصية
شخصية correlate
شخصيات مماثلة
السمات والخصائص

شخصية

"ما نوع الشخصية John Marston؟ John Marston هو نوع ISTP في mbti ، 9w8 - sp/sx - 964 في enneagram ، RCUEN في Big 5 ، SLI في Socionics."

ISTP > ISFP I believe John Marston is correctly typed as an ISTP (not a ISFP), but I think he is an 8w9. I'll be using examples from both Red Dead Redemption I and II in this analysis, just because RDR II was included in the biography. Now, I will state that action protagonists tend to be type casted as ISTPs (For example I don't think Arthur is an ISTP but an ISFJ. I didn't think Nico Bellick was one either), and that's annoying. But I think John Marston is correctly typed here. If you observe the actions of John, he does not really choose to act in accordance to what he deems as his set of values. John simply does things that make sense from his internal logical worldview. Let's take Charles Smith (an ISFP). Charles would regularly follow what he deemed to be right, even if it goes against what the gang wanted or needed in RDR II. He claimed to never have killed without a reason, prided himself on going out of his way to help people in need (even when the top priority was supposed to be relocating the gang, and even dismisses the gang entirely to join the Native Americans because he viewed that cause as more just. John thinks about what makes sense in the moment, and acts upon that impulse. Now, just because you are Ti dominant doesn't inherently make you intelligent. An individual's internal logical framework can differ severely from another's. Marston's logical worldview is by no means unfaulty (in fact, he is regularly claimed to be impulsive, simple-minded, dumb, and stupid), but he still goes off of it regardless. In accordance to this, in Red Dead Redemption I, John is "wise" because of his age and experience, but not necessarily intelligent or that open-minded. John really only seems to care about immediate results, and not so much about the long-term moral implications of whatever he is doing, nor if he is acting with authenticity in accordance to his personal values (which is something an ISFP such as Charles, would be far more focused on). For example, in the first game Marston had no problem playing both sides of the Mexican Revolutionary War in order to get what he wanted done, and even though he was more sympathetic to the revolutionary side, he didn't show much remorse for his actions afterwards. In fact, he is rather apathetic to the damage he's done and the lives he's taken altogether. I would also argue that John Marston demonstrates inferior Fe, rather than inferior Te. I think Marston is at his most uncomfortable (and when he is most susceptible to positive change) when he is confronted with how badly he treats the people around him (most particularly, Jack and Abigail). In fact, he becomes noticeably better as a person in Red Dead Redemption 2 when after Jack was kidnapped because of the gang's carelessness. He decides to actively become a better father, and therefore, a better person altogether (which inspires him to leave the gang to pursue his own life choices). When his family leaves him because of his impulsive behaviour on the Big Valley Ranch, John is left alone and his forced to reflect on his actions. After some contemplation, he decides to become a rancher, build Beecher's Hope, and create a safe and loving environment for his wife and child, and becomes a far more mature individual (the John Marston we know in RDR I). ISTPs can make great strives in maturity here. Here, John learns to become more romantic and dependable towards Abigail, and tender and fostering towards Jack. Also, just because Marston shows disgust towards certain behaviours such snake-oil sales pitching, abuse towards women, and graverobbing; doesn't automatically indicate heavy Fi usage either. ISTPs can still dislike certain behaviours, or believe in some moral standard. They just don't frame their entire lives around those beliefs. I would argue that John is an 8w9, not a 9w8 (at least, with the added context RDR II gives to his character). I think we get the impression that before the events of RDR II, John was far more brash and impulsive when he was younger, which makes me think he was originally an 8w7. I think as he matures throughout the series, the impulsivity is tempered through wisdom and experience. But John I think is more concerned about having the freedom to make his own choices in life, rather than just living in peace. It's just that his choice was to create a good life for his family because he wants to be a dependable father, it wasn't due to so some longing for peace and stability (which I'd argue is more in-line with what Arthur wanted, who is a core 9). If that was the case, John wouldn't have been so quick to engage in that shootout impulsively on the Big Valley Ranch, or to go after Micah in revenge. As a core 8 matures, they take traits from core 2s. Which is why I think John is far more respectful of the emotions of the people around him (that he respects), in comparison to his younger self. He's clearly matured, but these were learned skills.