You are on page 1of 5

Marriage and Family Therapy Refuah Institute ‫בס"ד‬

The Torah’s Lessons of MBTI Typology


I am writing this paper as a course synopsis for the Refuah Institute Marriage and Family
Therapy course that was conducted in July of 2005.
The first instructor of the course was Dr. Miriam Adahan. In the first session, she
presented an overview of the concept of personality typology. In particular, we dealt with
the MBTI (Myers Briggs Typology Indicator) system. This system is based on the
teachings of Carl Jung and it posits that we can essentially assign four areas of distinctly
human skills and gage each area for an individual’s preference or dominance to one of
two methods of behavior. The four basic skills comprise:
• Natural Energy
• Perception
• Judgment
• Action Orientation
The first area is Natural Energy. This refers to where a person prefers to invest more of
his energies. The two methods would be (1) focusing on the OUTER world or (2)
focusing on the INNER world. Method 1 implies associating freely with other people and
experiencing activities and excitements that are “out in the field”. One who favors this
method would be identified as Extraverted and, as such, MBTI symbolizes it with the
letter E. Method 2 implies a propensity for an individual to focus on his thoughts, ideas,
and interests. One who favors this method would be identified as Introverted and, as
such, MBTI symbolizes it with the letter I.
I find it very interesting that the Torah seems to allude to these two personality traits
when it makes a comparison between the two twin brothers – Yaakov and Eisav. The
Torah calls Eisav “Ish yodeah tzayid, ish sadeh” a “man of the field”. I think that this
personifies an extraverted dominance as I earlier used the expression that the extravert
prefers to be “out in the field”. The Torah goes on to describe Yaakov as “Ish tam,
yoshev ohalim” one who “dwells in the tents”, i.e., an indoorsy person who gives and
gets his energies within the “daled amos shel halacha”. The tent shelters one from the
outside world, and so, this would seem to indicate an introverted dominance.
The second area is Perception. This refers to the individual’s preferred method of
gathering information. Here, the two methods would be (1) relying on the sights, sounds,
smells, and sensory details of the here and now or (2) basing perceptions on a cumulative
database of stored information together with current information to formulate logical
patterns which, in addition to providing an assessment on current realities, allow one to
project on future conditions as well. Those who favor Method 1 would be identified as
Sensory and, as such, MBTI symbolizes it with the letter S. If one favors Method 2, he is
identified as Intuitive and, as such, MBTI symbolizes it with the letter N.
It appears to me that here, again, the Torah alludes to this distinction when it describes
Yaakov and Eisav. I would suggest that the “Ish yodeah tzayid” of Eisav indicates an
inclination to live in the here and now and to master human affairs by way of hands-on
experience. Conversely, Yaakov was described as an “Ish tam”. This can be translated as

Page 1 11/4/2010
Marriage and Family Therapy Refuah Institute ‫בס"ד‬

a simple or unassuming type, but it can also be translated as "complete" and


"unblemished" to indicate one who can see the whole picture and can project what can
ultimately evolve from a specific event or mode of action or behavior. This is the trait
that is lauded in Masechet Tamid, “Eizehu chacham, ha roeh ess hanolad” – who is wise:
one who can see [the ultimate ramification of] something that has just now come into
existence. I believe this is supported by the ensuing narrative of the incident where
Yaakov prepared a red bean soup and Eisav was willing to forgo the future benefits of the
birthright for the immediate gratification of the soup. This is because the soup was
tangible and it was ‘right here’ whereas the birthright was just an intangible status with
no quantifiable value. Sensory people have trouble perceiving the abstract as something
that is real.
One more interesting note about this skill area is that in contrast to the other three skill
areas where the incidence of domination for either method is close to 50-50, in the
perception area the incidence for Sensory dominance is 76% as opposed to a 24%
incidence of dominance for the Intuitive method. (According to Dr. Adahan)
The third area is Judgment. This refers to the individual’s preferred method of making
decisions. Here, the two methods would be (1) taking an objective viewpoint and
employing intellect and logic as the primary arbiters or (2) taking a more subjective and
emotional perspective and allowing the decisions to be influenced by the impact that it
will have on the individual and others. Those who favor Method 1 would be identified as
Thinking and, as such, MBTI assigns to it the letter T. If one favors Method 2, he is
identified as Feeling and, as such, MBTI assigns to it the letter F.
This skill area is oft-times more difficult to discern as it must be recognized that all
people use both methods when making judgments. No one is fully objective and rational
people cannot discount logical impulses from their decision making processes. Here the
question is which method instinctively prevails over the other as the “tie-breaker”.
In terms of my application of these inventories to the comparison between Yaakov and
Eisav, I have no clear grounds for assessing their aptitudes to this skill area. Nevertheless,
I would venture to say that Eisav was heralded by the sages for his meticulous
observance of Kibud Av v’Em. Indeed, although his Sensory inclination led him to
undervalue his birthright, he was overwhelmed by emotion at having lost the blessing of
his father. Furthermore, he cultivated a deep emotional hatred for his brother although
this hatred will have no logically beneficial ramifications. And despite all this, he held
back from immediate (Sensory) retribution out of a concern for his father’s welfare. All
these indicate to me an inclination for a Feeling dominance.
With Yaakov we are not apprised of such an attachment to the whims of his parents
(though we can readily assume that he was no slouch). In fact, when his mother
instructed him to masquerade as Eisav to hijack the blessing, i.e., for his own personal
benefit, he initially resisted her orders on the grounds of logical and intellectually
calculated problematic potentialities – that his father may verify his identity, which
actually turned out to happen. Likewise, though, emotionally, he would like nothing more
to be buried next to Rachel, he readily acquiesced to G-d’s directive to bury her at the
roadside for the eventual benefit of his descendents. Additionally, the sages criticize
Yaakov for displaying overt favoritism to Yoseph among his brothers. We might assume

Page 2 11/4/2010
Marriage and Family Therapy Refuah Institute ‫בס"ד‬

that Yaakov’s motives for this favoritism were purely emotional. However, we see later
that when Yaakov was reunited with Yoseph after a prolonged separation, he suppressed
the anticipated dramatic reception and chose to recite Kriat Shema instead. All these
occurrences appear to me to point out that Yaakov favored an objective and logical
Thinking dominance.
The fourth and final skill area is Action Orientation. This refers to how the individual
approaches his challenges in the outside world. Here, the two methods would be (1)
investing much energy into preparation; working with set plans, goals and schedules or
(2) meeting the challenges in “real time” and adjusting the parameters “on the fly”. Those
who favor Method 1 would be identified as Judging and, as such, MBTI assigns to it the
letter J. If one favors Method 2, he is identified as Perceiving and, as such, MBTI assigns
to it the letter P.
Since I already committed myself to using the comparison of the brothers Yaakov and
Eisav as the paradigm, I suppose I have to complete the exercise. In this skill area, I can’t
say that I truly have any concrete grounds for typing these two ancients. Still, I will
venture a guess. I think there are some indications that Yaakov was leaning toward a
Judging dominance. For one thing, to this point, I have him typed as I-N-T. I am certainly
no expert in MBTI but my own intuition dictates that most people who display the
tendencies for I-N-T would naturally be inclined to J dominance as it better conforms
with the characteristics of being introverted, intuitive, and thinking. Moreover, we see
that Yaakov was constantly planning ahead and ‘covering his bases’. We see this with the
bean soup incident. Yaakov was not merely seeking a status symbol. He had plans for
what to do with the birthright. Likewise, in all his dealings with Lavan he set goals, rules,
and contingencies and no matter how often Lavan tried to change the rules, Yaakov came
out on top just by sticking to his initial game plan (of course, a bit of Heavenly assistance
didn’t hurt). Finally, we see that Yaakov was a crafty strategist by observing how he
prepared for his encounter with Eisav. He was not about to take it as it comes.
As for Eisav, I honestly have less to go on but one thing seems clear – Eisav could be
bought. That means that no matter what he had in mind for himself when he woke up in
the morning, if someone offered him what looks like a better deal, he would readily adopt
a new agenda. Again, I think this is indicated from the bean soup incident as well as how
he was swayed by Yaakov to meet him on friendly terms when his initial intention was to
stay on the warpath. So there may be a subtle indication that Eisav was leaning toward a
Perceiving dominance.
Of course, a figurative fringe benefit of making this assessment is that it would then
evolve that Yaakov and Eisav are polar opposites as Yaakov would be typed as I-N-T-J
and Eisav would be typed as E-S-F-P. I would venture to say that this is truly the case
and that the Torah is alluding to this phenomenon when Rivka sought the word of G-d to
explain the harshness of her pregnancy she was told, “There are two nations in your
belly, and two ethnicities will separate from your innards”. Rashi explains this to mean
that from the moment of birth, they will separate from each other in their characteristics.
This can be construed to mean that their inborn personality traits would be diametrically
opposed.

Page 3 11/4/2010
Marriage and Family Therapy Refuah Institute ‫בס"ד‬

I take a personal stake in this analysis and give myself a measure of satisfaction in this
that my own personal self-assessment as well as the assessment of the Humanetrics
online (amateur) self-test reveal that I type out as I-N-T-J similar to my assessment of the
righteous protagonist, Yaakov. It would be easy to gloat and to say, with much prejudice,
that I-N-T-J is a structure for being disciplined and righteous and that E-S-F-P is a recipe
for being loose and undisciplined and, as such, a customer for following one’s base
instincts. Heaven forbid, should anyone ever think this way (T’s are not supposed to be
prejudiced, anyway.). “All is in the hands of heaven except for fear of G-d.” If Eisav was
the quintessential ESFP, many of his Germanic descendents were certainly INTJs and,
with complete self-righteousness, they performed the worst atrocities known to man. It is
also quite likely that Aharon HaCohen would type out as ESFP!
In fact, I have heard Torah commentators that ask if Eisav was predestined to be a rasha
and an antagonist of Yaakov as Rashi writes, what was the purpose of creating him at all?
Or, better, why not program him as INTJ as well and everybody would be righteous and
would get along? The obvious answer is that Yirat Shamayim is not a consequence of any
personality type and, as such, Eisav was not predestined to be a rasha. In fact, he was
imbued with these traits to use them in a productive way to compliment Yaakov’s traits
for the ultimate advancement of G-d’s master plan. However, it was understood that the
forces of evil (as the first serpent) would challenge both of them to misuse their potential
to foil the realization of this tikkun olam. Neither one would succeed in overcoming this
force unless they truly want to overcome it and enlist the aid of Heaven. The all-knowing
G-d could ‘foresee’ that only Yaakov would have the innate desire to fight this adversary
and that Eisav would not.
To sum up, I would conclude that as Shlomo said “Educate a youth in accordance to his
style” that the Torah fully recognizes the diversity of the methods within the skill areas
and that all of the traits can be both strengths and weaknesses. Even the high-discipline
traits (NTJ) can be abused to foster cruelty as well as to develop innovative ideas. The
people traits (EFP) can promote kindness but can also be permissive of decadent
activities.
For this reason, I would like to suggest adding a fifth skill area to the equation: Moralism.
This refers to whether the individual views himself as master of his own destiny or as
subservient to a “higher authority”. The two methods would be (1) believing that he is the
sole authority for his well being, that there is no ultimate reward and punishment and that
he is accountable to no one with the unfortunate exception of a more physically powerful
or higher ranking human being or (2) believing that there is a superhuman being that can
observe him and direct the events that affect him and to whom the individual must
ultimately account for his actions. I might identify those who favor Method 1 as Atheistic
and, as such, symbolize it with the letter A. One who favors Method 2, might be
identified as Devout and, as such, I would symbolize it with the letter D. As such, it
follows that the righteous Yaakov was not merely INTJ, but actually D-INTJ. One who is
A-INTJ is liable to become a Nazi. The wicked Eisav was not merely ESFP. Would he
have been a D-ESFP he might have been an Aharon HaCohen. As long as he is an A-
ESFP he can fall to be the wicked Eisav.

Page 4 11/4/2010
Marriage and Family Therapy Refuah Institute ‫בס"ד‬

“All is in the hands of heaven except for fear of G-d.” All of the sixteen MBTI typologies
are a factor of chance as ordained by G-d. It is only the A or D factor that we can instill
into ourselves.

Page 5 11/4/2010

You might also like