I have had this on the back burner for a while, so in the new year spirit of cleaning out the old, here you go.
Stacey pointed out to me this article which maps the MBTI types to the sixteen geomantic figures. I have considered making a similar effort before but come at it from a much different direction. Rather than attempt to map any sort of one-to-one figure to type correspondence, I have tried to map each type onto two figures, an ‘introverted’ figure and an ‘extroverted’ figure.
When you look at an MBTI type, what you have is a trajectory of maturation. Each type describes an individual’s four primary functions, two of which are extroverted and two of which are introverted, as well as the order through which they will be able to develop those functions.
If each function is assigned to a geomantic line, then all of the introverted functions are passive lines in the extroverted figure and active in the introverted figure (and vice versa). I assign the functions like this:
Fire line=Intuition (N)
Air line=Thinking (T)
Water line=Feeling (F)
Earth line=Sensation (S)
The identification of introversion and extroversion as well as perceiving and judging don’t need to be included in the figure; they merely identify which figure has greater influence.
So, for example, I am an INFJ. That means my four functions are Introverted Intuition and Thinking, accompanied by Extroverted Feeling and Sensation. On this model, my extroverted figure would be Fortuna Major and my introverted figure Fortuna Minor.
There is an additional thing you can do with this approach, too, which captures the developmental model within the MBTI material. You can ask after where the person is in their maturation, identifying undeveloped functions as passive lines. Since we are often less comfortable using functions developed later, you can also map what figure a person falls back toward under stress, when their less mature functions have been overtaxed and they fall back toward their core functions.
In other words, the introverted and extroverted figures represent an ideal or judging figure, while another figure may represent an individual’s actual figure. So, taking my own sign, there is a clear trajectory of how those functions develop. An INFJ develops Introverted Intuition, Extroverted Feeling, Introverted Thinking, and finally Extroverted Sensation.
So, a very young (or a very stressed) me would operate under an extroverted figure of Populus (no extroverted functions in action, at least not fully so) and Laetitia (only Introverted Intuition in action). A slightly older (or still quite stressed) me would operate under an extroverted Albus (Extroverted Feeling) and Laetitia. A mostly mature but not fully realized (or a realized but stressed me) would operate under an extroverted figure of Albus and Fortuna Minor (Introverted Intuition and Thinking in action).
Only in the last few years have I reached the point where I can start talking about Fortuna Major coming into play as my extroverted figure, as I develop a greater facility with Extroverted Sensation as a means of supporting my Extroverted Feeling.
What would be interesting from the perspective of this model is whether it would make sense to consider the signs which would produce your ideal figure from a less ideal one. E.g., does the figure of Tristitia have something to do with the process that helps me to pass from Albus to Fortuna Major in the extroverted figure? My experience says yes, but that’s one instance only.
I like this model because it preserves and joins two key elements of both the MBTI and geomancy. Namely, that a type represents a dynamic relationship between disposition and experience (MBTI) and that figures are related to each other through a dynamic mathematical process (geomancy). The pairing of figures also gestures toward some of the alchemical elements inherent in both the Jungian roots of the MBTI and the geomantic figures—the fully realized figures of any individual will yield Via.