Is Alan Watts an INFJ??? | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

Is Alan Watts an INFJ???

This recording of Alan Watts convinced me he is an INFJ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpugMBQD2to

The pacing of his voice is quite Fe to me, but overall I am basing this on what I perceive to be a deep similarity between his presentation style and that of Adam Phillips, another individual who I am positive is an INFJ, along with their types of criticisms and, to me, a lack of comprehension of the other person's thought which rules out Te-preference.
 
He's been labeled as ENTJ. I think it fits him and his works very well. He has very clear, concise writing style and tends to use a lot of analogies and double meanings. Which tends to be synonymous with Te-Ni.
 
Yes; he exemplifies the level of mysticism an INFJ can reach if spiritually and metaphysically inclined. Very inspirational and powerful figure worth studying as an infj. Him and Joseph Campbell are great examples of INFJs who succeeded in making the spiritual a practical journey for most people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mancino
I think everyone is wrong, Alan Watts is the most stereotypical ENFP you are going to find out there.
He is Ne-Fi dynamic is observable in his obsession with trying to figure out who he is.
A lot of people like Alan, for instance, Osho have this same mystic style about them.
They are so obsessed with finding out who they truly are, that they eventually end up in mysticism.

Watts: "Being brought up and 'educated' is a form of hypnosis, brainwashing, and indoctrination that is extremely difficult to survive with one's senses intact."

Watts: "For me, being literate and articulate is a form of judo, of overcoming the [system] by its own method."

Watts: "I made to myself the solemn vow that I would never be an employee or put up with a 'regular job.' ... [And in my life] I have been a free lance, a rolling stone."

Watts: "I want ... to consort with people whose emotions are not ... cold and standoffish."
 
The thing about N is that it's pattern finding, not necessarily about the bigger picture. The perceiving type is required to hold the bigger picture because it requires one to suspend conclusion until the real conclusion is actually found and not merely evaluated and determined.

The J type will probably ponder until "It's good enough for me" where as the P type will ponder until "Is the picture complete"


Another thought about it is that Js generally take on a lot of assumptions without realizing it. Like in math, 1+1=2. Everyone is fine with that and nobody bas a problem. But is going to be a P that's going to question the underlying assumptions: does ! + 1 really equal 2? And yes, there's a 1000 page mathematical proof in 2 volumes proving that 1+1 indeed equals 2.

The trigger that showed me that Watts is a P and not J is the style of his thinking. He's questioned just about everything and thus gained a much deeper understanding of the things he talks about. Citing clear examples and thought experiments initiated by the word "suppose that" or "imagine that".

Stereotypically, Watts as an INFJ would have assumed a great many things and would be engaged in an emotional level with the audience and not the analytical level. The topic would also me more of mysticism talking about the chakras and the pillars of wisdom than actually going through the mechanics of spirituality and clear delineations of ideas.

If you can see it, his speech is that of math.

Let x equal the universe.
x+y = parallel universe

which is similar to

suppose we have two circles.
then suppose we draw another circle.

---
more on J/P
There is some research linking the J type to a left brain dominance and the P type to a right brain dominance. The left brain being the ego, self and boundaries where as the P is about the whole picture, relational thinking and holistic thinking.
The P and J thing about left and right-braininess is Ps to the Left and Js to the right. Check Dr. Dario Nardi's work with EEG and types. Ego Left and Self Right. INFJs may be self-centered but aren't egotistical. We have double introverted identity functions, so being self-centered; which is different than egotistical, makes sense. Anyway, I went off topic a bit, I can understand what you are saying.