Okay...I did the same thing as you, Stone, in terms of ranking the planets, as described by Eric, in order from highest to lowest (most like me to least like me):

Neptune (Pisces)
Uranus (Aquarius)
Venus (Taurus, Libra)
Sun (Leo)
Moon (Cancer)
Saturn (Capricorn)
Mercury (Gemini, Virgo)
Jupiter (Sagittarius)
Mars (Aries, Scorpio)

I have to admit I found this difficult, as I could see parts of myself in most of these. The only one that I absolutely knew *didn't* fit was Mars.

Eric, do you want to do the same thing to my list as you did to Stone's to see how well this works?

On 2002-03-20 22:05, Sherry63 wrote:

Okay...I did the same thing as you, Stone, in terms of ranking the planets, as described by Eric, in order from highest to lowest (most like me to least like me):

Neptune (Pisces)
Uranus (Aquarius)
Venus (Taurus, Libra)
Sun (Leo)
Moon (Cancer)
Saturn (Capricorn)
Mercury (Gemini, Virgo)
Jupiter (Sagittarius)
Mars (Aries, Scorpio)

I have to admit I found this difficult, as I could see parts of myself in most of these. The only one that I absolutely knew *didn't* fit was Mars.

Eric, do you want to do the same thing to my list as you did to Stone's to see how well this works?

Good job, Sherry! I hope Eric is willing to test this out because I really am curious. Surely my case was a coincidence. But it really was enough of a coincidence that it merits further examination.

I use several objective factors to determine if aspects are strong or weak: whether planet(s) involved are angular, rule sun or rising sign, closeness of aspect, kind of aspect, whether inner planets are involved, and/or mutual sign rulership.

Using these criteria for Sherry, I come up with this estimated (not completely precise) list of strong and weak aspects in her chart, balancing the above factors. I list them also in rough order of strength:

Strong aspects:
Venus trine Neptune
Moon conjunct Venus
Venus square Jupiter
Moon square Jupiter
Sun conjunct Moon
Sun sextile Mars
Venus trine Chiron
Moon quincunx Saturn
Moon trine Neptune
Jupiter sesqui-square Uranus
Sun conjunct Mercury

Weak aspects:
Moon semi-square Uranus
Jupiter sextile Saturn
Sun square Jupiter
Sun semi-square Pluto
Venus sextile Pluto
Mercury semi-sextile Uranus
Uranus conjunct Pluto
Moon sextile Mars
Mars semi-square Neptune
Moon trine Chiron
Chiron opposite Pluto
Neptune sextile Pluto
Neptune trine Chiron
Venus semi-square Uranus

Using Stonewall's system of ranking, for Sherry I get
Moon 13 (Cancer)
Venus 10 (Taurus, Libra)
Jupiter 8 (Sagittarius)
Sun 8 (Leo)
Neptune 7 (Pisces)
Uranus 6 (Aquarius)
Pluto 5 (Scorpio)
Mars 4 (Aries, Scorpio)
Mercury 3 (Gemini, Virgo)
Saturn 3 (Capricorn)

I suggest revising the test a bit for completeness; the signs occupied by planets, rising sign, and Midheaven should be considered too. So score 2 points for an inner planet and Asc. (Sun through Mars), or an angular planet (including Chiron), and 1 point for the others, plus Midheaven; and for Sherry I get:

Cancer 8 (Moon)
Leo 1 (Sun)
Virgo 4 (Mercury)
Scorpio 1 (Mars or Pluto)
Aquarius 1 (Uranus)
Pisces 3 (Neptune)
Aries 1 (Mars)

Adding these point to the list, using Pluto for Scorpio, I get for Sherry:

Moon 21 (Cancer)
Venus 10 (Taurus, Libra)
Neptune 10 (Pisces)
Sun 9 (Leo)
Jupiter 8 (Sagittarius)
Uranus 7 (Aquarius)
Mercury 7 (Gemini, Virgo)
Pluto 6 (Scorpio)
Mars 5 (Aries, Scorpio)
Saturn 3 (Capricorn)

Which planet to assign as ruler of Scorpio is admittedly uncertain. If Scorpio is assigned to Mars then Mars gets 6 points and Pluto 5.

Seeing as how Sherry admitted she is typical of Cancer, I don't know why she rated the Moon as #5. It is clearly #1 in this system, along with Cancer!

I'll leave it up to you guys whether you want to add in this part scoring planets and angles in the signs. Applied to Stonewall's chart, it would add points as follows:

Neptune/Pisces: add 4 points
Mercury/Gemini & Virgo: add 6 points
Pluto/Scorpio: add 3 points
Jupiter/Sagittarius: add 1 point
Saturn/Capricorn: add 4 points
Uranus/Aquarius: add 4 points

Again, if Scorpio is assigned to Mars, then Mars gets all the points I assigned above to Pluto.
_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-21 14:27 ]</font>

Eric:

Thanks for your insights. I have not had a chance yet to take a close look at your proposed equation but I noted that you ran into a problem in trying to attach weight to planets from multi-planet signs. I encountered the same problem and that is why I stuck with planets exclusively and ignored signs. But perhaps there is a way around this.

BTW, did Sherry use your complete planet descriptions or abbreviated ones from this thread? The only reason I mention this is because I believe my ordering changed after reading your more detailed descriptions. The same may hold true for Sherry in which case her intitial ordering may be less valid for comparison purposes.

One other thing to consider is tiers. When Sherry read the planet decriptions, she probably seized upon 3-5 of them which definitely applied to her such that she knew that these 3-5 planets ought to occupy the top 3-5 slots regardless of their actual ordering. Similarly, she probably seized upon 3-5 which she knew definitely did not fit her such that they ought to occupy the bottom 3-5 slots regardless of their actual ordering. She would be left with, say, 0-4 planets which applied to an extent but not strongly such that they occupy a middle tier, regardless of their actual ordering.

I think the strong degree to which my three "tiers" held up is what really surprised me. Tiering allows for slight variation in actual ordering while providing a real test of validty with respect to planet meanings. If Sherry's tiers did not survive her chart, then my experience was probably mere coincidence.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Stonewall Patton on 2002-03-21 16:06 ]</font>

My fear in trying that is that I know what my results "should" be, so that will probably color how I order the planets.

I don't know that much about astrology except that I used to have a book that charted out where each planet was when, and what each planet meant. With that in mind, I can tell you some of the highlights (i.e, what I remember), and just knowing me as little as you do, and knowing that my MBTI is an ESFJ, and my enneagram type is a 2w3, here goes.

OK, the Sun is how you really really are. Mine is in Leo (August 22, if anyone wants to send a card). That would account for me thinking someone would want to send me a card...Leo is a very "all about me" sign.

The rising sign is how you appear to be. I have Sagittarius rising, which is why I I seem (among other things) much more easygoing than I am.

The Moon is what you need. Mine is in Gemini, which means I need to talk and communicate with others...well, need I say more?

Venus is how you love. I have Venus in Libra, which means domestic harmony is very important to me, both in terms of having my surroundings be nice and comfy, and in terms of not having screaming fights with my honey...this is going much better with the current hubby, but even with the last one, we couldn't stand each other, but we didn't have many screaming fights.

Mars is involved with love too, but more on the physical side. Mine is in Cancer, which means I like feeding and taking care of my loved ones and I get embarrassed by too much or too graphic sex talk.

I forgot where Jupiter and Saturn were (this was awhile ago and I guess I was more interested in my love life anyway, ha ha), but in any case, just from that, does that sound like me and my various personality types or what?!?

Eric, if you want to do any research on me, I'll PM you with my exact birth info. Let me know - I'm not trying to get away cheap and make you do a free chart for me! :wink:

Yes Ally Bear, let's do it.

We may be developing an important new test for astrological validity here. It does need some tweaking, as it was kind of off the cuff to start with in how Stonewall and I used it.

First, he is right; people should also ask me to send them my descriptions of the planets and signs before deciding how much they fit you and your life, as they are more detailed than those on most web sites. If you have detailed descriptions of your own though, from another book, that's probably good enough.

Stonewall's idea of 3 tiers is good too.

To develop a complete scoring system, I should probably further add aspects to the angles themselves. Being on an angle might merit an additional two points for that planet, and a major aspect to an angle would merit one point. In Stonewall's score, whether a planet was on an angle or not only affected the score to the extent that this planet also had aspects to it (helping to make that aspect a strong one). For Stonewall, Saturn would get 2 more points (which may not fit his tier system), but on the other hand, the five planets in his top tier would also gain points, and no others would. Uranus and Pluto would gain 3 points, Jupiter and Saturn two, and Mars and Mercury one.

For Sherry, Venus would get 3 more points, the Moon probably also 3 more, Neptune one, and Jupiter, Pluto and Mars might also get one depending on how close we draw the aspect requirements. We're not counting Chiron here except in the aspect ratings, but it would get 2.

Another factor is being a standout planet in a pattern. In Stonewall's case, this is an outstanding feature, as Jupiter is a handle planet in a "nossle" pattern: one planet on one side of the chart and all others on the other side. I might add an additional two points to Jupiter for that. The "leading planet" in some other patterns might get a point too. I don't see such a planet in Sherry's chart. In this case, the planet should provide 2 points to the planet ruling the sign it is in, instead of one, if it doesn't already do this. Aspects to it would be considered stronger too. I factored this in already in Stonewall's scores.

For signs that have planets ruling two or more signs, if planets are in those signs, we could split the points between the two planets. Generally speaking, Mars and Pluto are the main factors here. Jupiter usually rules Sagittarius, and Saturn is almost always connected to Capricorn. Perhaps Mars and Pluto would split the score for a Scorpio planet.

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-21 18:57 ]</font>

On 2002-03-21 16:04, Stonewall Patton wrote:

BTW, did Sherry use your complete planet descriptions or abbreviated ones from this thread? The only reason I mention this is because I believe my ordering changed after reading your more detailed descriptions. The same may hold true for Sherry in which case her intitial ordering may be less valid for comparison purposes.

Yergh. I did use the descriptions in this thread. If you could direct me to the complete descriptions, I'll read them & see if I need to change my ordering.

One other thing to consider is tiers. When Sherry read the planet decriptions, she probably seized upon 3-5 of them which definitely applied to her such that she knew that these 3-5 planets ought to occupy the top 3-5 slots regardless of their actual ordering. Similarly, she probably seized upon 3-5 which she knew definitely did not fit her such that they ought to occupy the bottom 3-5 slots regardless of their actual ordering. She would be left with, say, 0-4 planets which applied to an extent but not strongly such that they occupy a middle tier, regardless of their actual ordering.

My experience was rather different. I purposely ignored which signs match which planets, because I didn't want to skew my results in the way I *thought* they should be, & only went by the descriptions. After reading them, I really was only sure of not feeling like Mars. As I mentioned, I could see pieces of myself scattered among the other eight planets. Perhaps I was subconsciously skewed by knowing that my Enneagram type is 4w5, too.

Eric, what & where is Chiron & what sign does it go w/? That's a new one on me...although I do remember from my Linda Goodman reading that two planets were supposed to be discovered for Taurus & Virgo so that each sign had its own planet & didn't need to share.

On 2002-03-21 19:31, Sherry63 wrote:

Yergh. I did use the descriptions in this thread. If you could direct me to the complete descriptions, I'll read them & see if I need to change my ordering.

I think Eric stated that he would e-mail them to you privately.

My experience was rather different. I purposely ignored which signs match which planets, because I didn't want to skew my results in the way I *thought* they should be, & only went by the descriptions.

That's what I meant. I ignored the signs altogether and just ranked the planets according to their descriptions.

After reading them, I really was only sure of not feeling like Mars. As I mentioned, I could see pieces of myself scattered among the other eight planets.

I'll bet you gain a clearer sense after reading Eric's detailed decriptions. But it does sound like Mars at least should be bottom tier if not last.

I am not sure if I am doing this right--I can't find where the descriptions of traits associated with the planets are posted, but I know enough of what they represent myself (from having studied astrology in the past) to be able to do this anyway.

1. Neptune
2. Mercury
3. Venus
4. Jupiter
5. Moon
6. Pluto
7. Uranus
8. Saturn
9. Mars

Mercury and Venus were the toughest for me, as both these planets rule two signs each. In the case of Mercury, I have most of the Gemini traits but few of the Virgoan traits (despite my Virgo moon!), and in the case of Venus, I fit Libra better than I do Taurus.




_________________
Labels tell you where the box is coming from and where it is headed and are quite helpful. They do not tell you what's inside though they might indicate "fragile", "handle with care", "this is not a Bill", "magnetic medium", etc.--VIRGIL K. SAARI

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Susan Brombacher on 2002-03-21 20:31 ]</font>

Susan,

Just a point of curiosity?have you ever heard of Arthur M. Young? He invented the Bell Helicopter (the first commercial variety). He was an enigma to his peers because he took the twelve measure formulae of physics (like dl/dt for velocity and dml/dt for momentum) and showed how they could be geometrically associated with the twelve astrological signs. Here?s a quick alignment to show you what he meant (he also proposed certain connective nomenclature, in caps):

Aquarius ~ moment ~ ?SIGNIFICANCE?

Pisces ~ moment of inertia ~ ?FAITH?

Aries ~ acceleration ~ ?SPONTANEOUS ACT?

Taurus ~ mass control ~ ?ESTABLSIHMENT?

Gemini ~ power ~ ?KNOWLEDGE?

Cancer ~ velocity ~ ?CHANGE?

Leo ~ force ~ ?BEING?

Virgo ~ work ~ ?WORK?

Libra ~ position ~ ?OBSERVATION?

Scorpio ~ momentum ~ ?TRANSFORMATION?

Sagittarius ~ action ~ ?IMPULSE?

Capricorn ~ control ~ ?CONTROL?

When he arranges these in a counter-clockwise fashion, what appears is his ?Rosetta Stone of Meaning.? While I?m not enthusiastic about astrology, Young seems to show the rudiments of an epistemological connection between mythology and science. All of his measure formulae have specific relevance to flight (and he should know about that!). What I like about it is his fortitude to go there?risky stuff for a physicist. He took some heat over it.

Risk taking is fun, though.

--Croak

<FONT SIZE="-2">Good move, Croaker. I was wondering when you were gonna figure out where all the babes hang out.

Watch out, Mr. Patton, ya got some more competition comin'!</FONT> :smile:

What is Marc talking about?

On 2002-03-22 16:51, Susan Brombacher wrote:

What is Marc talking about?

I don't know. I guess he thinks Eric is a babe!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

"Yes Ally Bear, let's do it." --Eric A. Meece


Am I missing something here, or are you, Mr. Patton? :smile:

On 2002-03-22 18:38, Marc Lamb wrote:

"Yes Ally Bear, let's do it." --Eric A. Meece


Am I missing something here, or are you, Mr. Patton? :smile:

Marc, if you think that I am Eric, then you must think that I am a babe! Now I am getting worried.


BTW, Marc, interesting suggestion about Eric perhaps finding Ally attractive. According to this MBTI business, people generally find their complete opposites most attractive. For an INTP, that would be an ESFJ which Ally is. Not only did I find her to be extraordinarily attractive in that pose, but another INTP here apparently went about IM'ing people to direct them to that picture. Eric is also an INTP so he may have had a similar reaction. It makes sense.

Now if we consider you as an ESTJ, theoretically, your match would be an INFP. That means that you would likely slobber over a picture of Susan (and Susan might slobber over a picture of you -- hehe). Maybe S&H ought to open up a private chatroom on site and you and Susan can, er, get together...that is if you can get your mind off Eric, er, me. Hehehe.

"Now if we consider you [Marc lamb] as an ESTJ, theoretically, your match would be an INFP."


Mr. Saari, do you recall my MBTI, and that of my wife?

While there may be a few, ok many, bumps in the road, I simply adore my wife. :smile:


p.s. You, as Mr. Meece, Mr. Patton? Nah. Mr. Rush's alter ego maybe, but no the Meece.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-03-22 19:18 ]</font>

On 2002-03-22 19:15, Marc Lamb wrote:

"Now if we consider you [Marc lamb] as an ESTJ, theoretically, your match would be an INFP."


Mr. Saari, do you recall my MBTI, and that of my wife?

While there may be a few, ok many, bumps in the road, I simply adore my wife. :smile:

p.s. You, as Mr. Meece, Mr. Patton? Nah. Mr. Rush's alter ego maybe, but no the Meece.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-03-22 19:18 ]</font>

http://www.fourthturning.com/forums/...um=12&start=90

Posted: 2002-03-22 19:15 by Marc Lamb:


Marc Lamb Your Type is ESTJ
Extroverted Sensing Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
33 22 44 44

Mrs. Lamb Your Type is ENTJ
Extroverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
11 56 44 22

[end]


Marc, it looks like you married Vince Lamb! :grin:

On 2002-03-23 01:16, Stonewall Patton wrote:



Marc, it looks like you married Vince Lamb!

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

On 2002-03-22 18:54, Stonewall Patton wrote:

Marc, interesting suggestion about Eric perhaps finding Ally attractive. According to this MBTI business, people generally find their complete opposites most attractive. For an INTP, that would be an ESFJ which Ally is. Not only did I find her to be extraordinarily attractive in that pose, but another INTP here apparently went about IM'ing people to direct them to that picture. Eric is also an INTP so he may have had a similar reaction. It makes sense.

That is, of course, very debatable. INTPs can find ESFJs attractive, but perhaps, many would find them repulsive. And ESFJs finding INTPs attractive? Doesn't seem too likely. First of all, there are 13 ESFJs for every INTP. ESFJs are THE social type, and INTPs are THE geek type. A match? Sounds way too unlikely. According to Keirsey's PUM II, the best choice for an INTP is an ENFJ since they share an interest in the abstract. One websites says that ESTJs and ENTJs are the best choice for INTPs. And still, another one says that ESFPs are the best choice, while one says that INFJs are the best choice for INTPs.

But let's say that ESFJs and INTPs do find each other attractive. What would a very social person see in an anti-social geek?

Now if we consider you as an ESTJ, theoretically, your match would be an INFP. That means that you would likely slobber over a picture of Susan (and Susan might slobber over a picture of you -- hehe). Maybe S&H ought to open up a private chatroom on site and you and Susan can, er, get together...that is if you can get your mind off Eric, er, me. Hehehe.

Susan and Marc!? Hehehehe.

Now, to feed this conversation, here is what is said about attraction by Keirsey:

http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore

ESFJ: <font color="green">There is a mutual attraction of ESFJ and INTP. The ESFJ, wanting to serve as an anchorage for the INTP's flights to the higher levels of abstraction, finds in the ISTP an even more likely target for anchorage. The ISTP's flights are often literal, not figurative: He really does fly. Look in the cockpit of almost any aircraft and you'll find an ISTP. Of course, most ISTPs do not fly in the literal sense; but the hankering for adventure and exploration symbolized by flight is there, and it is this, the hankering, that draws the ESFJ like a moth to a flame. How does this serve the giving, caring, comforting nature of ESFJ? Why, when the adventurer returns, of course; the giver of comfort is there to provide rest and recreation.</font>

INTP: <font color="green">Why would this abstractionist find the ESFJ "seller" attractive? Think broadly of selling. This amounts to persuading another to receive something of value to the receiver. The seller is essentially caring for the receiver (quite apart from the fact that the receiver pays). This is the essential attitude of the ESFJ seller, and this attitude is perceptible to the receiver (buyer); he feels this nourishing approach. That is what is attractive to the INTP architect-philosopher-the nourishment which anchors him to the real world.

What attracts the ESFJ "seller"? Here is a person who, like a balloon filled with hydrogen, is likely to escape the earth (in his abstract attitude). He needs to have a string attached so that he can be hauled down to earth now and then. In a sense, he needs to be "sold on reality," so indifferent is he to it.

The INTP also has a second likely target to attract him: the ENFJ "pedagogue." What is a pedagogue? A catalyst of the growth process, someone who has that uncanny ability to "bring out" the other, to activate the differentiation or "unfolding" process in the learner. All NFs seem to have this capability in some degree and the accompanying desire to exercise it, but the ENFJ seems to have it in abundance. This relationship-the ENFJ-INTP-can be "deep and meaningful" for the former and anchoring in a charismatic way for the latter.</font>

ESTJ: <font color="green">To preserve the establishment, to keep it healthy, steady, balanced, well insured, that's what is enjoyable and satisfying to the ESTJ. Yet the ESTJ is attracted to the disestablishmentarian, the ISFP! Does he hope to redo this bucolic spirit in his own image? Seemingly not. Perhaps he sees in this person's extreme laissez-faire a respite from the great responsibilities he manages to accumulate.

He can and sometimes does find another sort of complementary opposite, the INFP "monastic." This is very infrequent, there being 15 ESTJs for every INFP. It is doubtful if the ESTJ finds any rest in the INFP, because underneath the monastic is a fierce crusader-hardly what he bargained for. He may soon find himself asked to increase the "depth" and the "meaningfulness" of the relationship without being given even the slightest clue on how to proceed. His renewed efforts to "stabilize" and "solidify" the relationship will only be taken as signs of superficiality and/or meaninglessness.</font>

INFP: <font color="green">The INFP questor probably has more problems in mating than any other type. Let us be mindful of the relative infrequency: about 1 1/4 percent, say two and a half million people in the USA. Their problem lies in their primary outlook on life. "Life," says the INFP, "is a very serious matter." Now when a person makes his life a kind of crusade or a series of crusades, then there's bound to be some taxing of the spouse. If the INFP takes the other tack, the "monastic" (and the same person can tack back and forth-now a crusader, now a monastic), the spouse will find himself again taxed, trying to draw the monastic out of his dark meditative cave.

The opposites of our crusading monastic seem well equipped for this alternating-phase taxation: ENTJ and ESTJ. Both are anchored in the real world with a vengeance. The ENTJ marshaling his or her forces toward distant objectives, the ESTJ administrating in a solid, dependable, and traditional way whatever is his or hers to administer. Both provide anchorage to a person who might otherwise get lost in meditation or in crusade. Selection of a mate of irrelevant form (e.g., an ISTP artisan or an ESTP promoter) would not be the wisest of tactics in so serious a business as life.</font>

It does seem that opposites might attract, as my father is likely an ESTP and my mother is an INFJ.

Hey Robert, now that you're over here, why not take the astrology challenge?

Anyone else? I was going to email my descriptions of the planets to Sherry, but I have no email address for her.

Step 1: ask me to email you my descriptions of the planets and signs (and other info) from my book, Horoscope for the New Millennium.

Step 2: Read them and decide which of the planets and signs fit your personality type, interests, etc.

Step 3: Rank the planets in some kind of order, from most typical to least typical, using rankings or a tier system, which seems to apply. Your rankings of signs can be blended here into one list, since each sign is ruled by one of the planets.

Step 4: email Eric your birth data: time, place and date of birth. eameece@california.com (should be in my profile)

Step 5: Using the system I've posted here, I'll rank the planets according to the strength in your chart, and you can see how well it matches your list. If you prefer, you can do step 3 last.

Meanwhile maybe the MBTI discussion could go back to the MBTI thread. Seeing as how it started with my remark to Ally Bear to "let's do it," maybe I have some reason to step in here...

On 2002-03-23 12:36, Eric A Meece wrote:
Hey Robert, now that you're over here, why not take the astrology challenge?

I'm a rationalist atheist, but what the heck! Bring it on! :smile:

Step 1: ask me to email you my descriptions of the planets and signs (and other info) from my book, Horoscope for the New Millennium.

Alright. Can you email me the descriptions here?

On 2002-03-23 10:37, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-03-22 18:54, Stonewall Patton wrote:

Marc, interesting suggestion about Eric perhaps finding Ally attractive. According to this MBTI business, people generally find their complete opposites most attractive. For an INTP, that would be an ESFJ which Ally is. Not only did I find her to be extraordinarily attractive in that pose, but another INTP here apparently went about IM'ing people to direct them to that picture. Eric is also an INTP so he may have had a similar reaction. It makes sense.

That is, of course, very debatable. INTPs can find ESFJs attractive, but perhaps, many would find them repulsive.

Whoa, whoa! I was merely setting up my joke, Robert. We have already discussed this and you know that I personally ignore all this type matchmaking. Life is not that simple. Some authors do indeed cite direct opposites (e.g. INTP and ESFJ) while others cite near opposites (e.g. INTP and ISFJ). Still others insist on N pairing (e.g. INTP with ENFJ or INFJ). This can be a valuable tool in understanding somebody else but I think it might get dangerous when people include or exclude people from consideration as mates on this basis. It begins to get surreal.

And ESFJs finding INTPs attractive? Doesn't seem too likely.

Well, I guess we have a different perception because I do not see where it is unlikely. Indeed I have known it to happen.

First of all, there are 13 ESFJs for every INTP. ESFJs are THE social type, and INTPs are THE geek type. A match? Sounds way too unlikely.

There is of course a continuum for each of these types. Few ESFJs are completely flighty and few INTPs are completely geeky. And such a pairing would not necessarily require that both parties do everything together anyway. She can go out with her girlfriends all the time and you can bury yourselves in your books and studies. It is the deep trust and affection between you two which sustains you.

But there is a stronger match than you suggest. Personally, I find the sweetness and charm of xSFJs irresistable, and the stability they offer is comforting and attractive. I would guess that many other INTPs have a similar reaction.

As to ESFJ women being attracted to INTP men, you'd be surprised. I think, in general, they might not be attracted initially because they tend to read you as being unbound by any law and immoral and unscrupulous and that sort of thing since you are so independent and non-compliant and disobedient to the whim of your fellow man. But when they get to know you better, they learn that they misjudged you. They learn that you are arguably the most moral of all types because you are the one type which is defined by his principles. Of course this does not make you an adherent of traditional morality in every respect, far from it. Your morality is derived from truth, not from tradition, and these two moralities often differ. But it does tend to make you more moral than most followers of traditional morality (hehehe).

So the ESFJ finds that you are anything but immoral and anything but unscrupulous and furthermore you are a beacon of strength because you are hard as iron inside. You will not bend and will not submit to fraudulence, evil, or anything else unsavory. The ESFJ finds comfort in your unbreakable will, founded upon solid principles, which is directed toward all that is good and opposed to all that is bad.

Now having stated all this, I can see where it would not be at all obvious in your age group (19?). It seems to me that women come more into their own as their own selves a few years out of college...there is some sort of change, refinement, or differentiation anyway. It is at that point that these distinctions become clearer. So really you would have to get back to me in 5-10 years to tell me how you think xSFJs and INTPs match because I know it is not obvious to you at 19.

According to Keirsey's PUM II, the best choice for an INTP is an ENFJ since they share an interest in the abstract. One websites says that ESTJs and ENTJs are the best choice for INTPs. And still, another one says that ESFPs are the best choice, while one says that INFJs are the best choice for INTPs.

Right. These people are all over the map. This is all BS. Every type has something to offer you. Some more than others.

But let's say that ESFJs and INTPs do find each other attractive. What would a very social person see in an anti-social geek?

Your inner strength. Because you are defined by your principles, you are arguably the strongest type inside. Your principles are founded upon truth and you are necessarily directed toward all that is good and opposed to all that is bad or evil. She knows that you would not lie to or cheat on her because to do so would violate your principles. Furthermore she knows that there is nothing you are not telling her, no hidden agendas. She finds a level of honesty and trust with you which she probably finds with no other type. She is drawn to that.

And I am not sure how far you want to push the "anti-social geek" thing. I can handle myself and hold my own in public and I believe you indicated that you can too. This was part of your nerd/geek distinction. It is not as if you are an embarrassment for her to show off to her friends. It is just that you have your interests and she has hers. Because such a deep level of trust and affection exists, both of you can pursue your own interests separately as required.

Now if we consider you as an ESTJ, theoretically, your match would be an INFP. That means that you would likely slobber over a picture of Susan (and Susan might slobber over a picture of you -- hehe). Maybe S&H ought to open up a private chatroom on site and you and Susan can, er, get together...that is if you can get your mind off Eric, er, me. Hehehe.

Susan and Marc!? Hehehehe.

Now you get to my joke! That was the whole point of the exercise!

Whoops! I just read your message Eric. I guess I should have posted my response to Robert on the MBTI thread. Sorry.

Eric, did you ever get the private message I sent you with my birth data? I also ranked the planets in a post above. I hadn't heard from you, so I'm not sure if you saw this.

As far as my attraction to my opposite type, ESTJ, my husband happens to be one, so obviously at one point I must have been attracted to my opposite. However, time does not bode well for complete opposites, as they have difficulty agreeing on much of anything or understanding each other. As a result, these days I tend to be attracted to my own type or something close to it.

Live and learn.