Fitzwilliam Darcy, one of Jane Austen’s most recognizable characters, draws a curious mix of certainty and doubt when it comes to assigning him one of the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) personalities. It’s easy enough to recognize the marked introversion, blunt logic, and preference for order, resulting in introversion, thinking, and judging letters. But, as is frequently the case, the preference for intuition or sensing does not as readily appear. The question then—is Mr. Darcy an ISTJ or an INTJ? 

(A note about sources: though several film and television adaptations have done a wonderful job interpreting Pride & Prejudice, Jane Austen’s 1813 novel will be the primary means of arguing for or against a given personality type. Also, I’ll be using MBTI as understood through Carl Jung’s functions; a good explanation of which can be found here. And, of course, spoilers follow.) 

It’s easy to see how there could be some ambiguity between the types of INTJ and ISTJ, since both share interior preferences in the same order:

INTJ— Ni-Te-Fi-Se

ISTJ— Si-Te-Fi-Ne

When Darcy plainly speaks his mind to those around him or adheres to his own feelings and moral compass, one can see either type saying or doing those things. However, the ISTJ leads with introverted sensing, and the INTJ with introverted intuition. In a very general way, the sensing function highlights experience and attention to the physical world; in an introverted sense (Si), this focuses particularly on past experience, with an appreciation for successful habits and heritage. Intuition focuses more abstractly on finding patterns in information; in an introverted understanding (Ni), it focuses on the root realities underlying concepts and behavior, and so is adept at anticipating future outcomes. 

Before continuing, it’s helpful to rule out what is not Si or Ni. One sees many times that Darcy is acutely aware of the inferiority of some of the Bennets and their extended family, which could indicate introverted sensing (as argued here)–but evidence suggests this is actually the secondary function, extraverted thinking. To Bingley’s spirited defense of Jane, in spite of her relatives’ situation, Darcy merely points to the inevitable future consequence—that “it must very materially lessen their chance of marrying men of any consideration in the world” (Vol. I, Ch. 8). In Jane Austen’s world, this conclusion is a fact, and not necessarily a snub.

It is telling that Elizabeth, on first finding out Darcy’s separation of Jane and Bingley, attributes this maneuver more to an Si understanding of Darcy’s pride than that of Te, supposing Darcy’s “deeper wound [to be] the want of importance in his friend’s connections, than from their want of sense” (Vol. II, Ch. 10). This first kind of pride would fit in well with the socio-economic type exhibited by Lady Catherine de Bourgh and idolized by Mr. Collins. However, Elizabeth comes to believe quite swiftly the latter is true of Darcy’s judgement, as “the justice of the charge struck her too forcibly for denial” (Vol. II, Ch. 13), Darcy’s contempt having been “self-attracted” by her family. From Darcy’s self-reflection in Chapter 16 (Volume III), it becomes clearer that his pride was more intellectual than it was systemic, from parents who “taught me to be selfish and overbearing . . . to think meanly of all the rest of the world, to wish at least to think meanly of their sense and worth compared with my own.” If this issue of pride and inferior relations can be ascribed to an inflated estimation of intellect rather than an unreasonable regard for social systems, where exactly is the deciding evidence for either Si or Ni?    

Very early on in the story, Darcy displays a finely honed introverted intuition. He acknowledges the influence that Elizabeth has on him, consequently modifying his behavior in an attempt to avoid going any further down the path of attraction. He accurately guesses the motives of his companions, revealing an incisive assessment of the patterns of behavior of those around him and what their end goals are. He initially deals with his illogical love by proposing—literally a plan—to put his misery to an end, though, as a moment of impulsiveness and stress, it is notably lacking in proper anticipation and planning. 

Pivotally, Darcy’s farseeing intuition plays a key role in both his best and worst moments. His method of separating Jane and Bingley occurs through planning and a future view rather than an appeal to tradition. If Darcy really were an ISTJ, one would think he might have reminded Bingley of his position as an heir and his responsibility of building an estate and good connections (Vol I, Ch. 4) but Darcy instead imposes his own view—that any further acquaintance is futile because Jane does not return Bingley’s affection (a detail a low-sensing user might very easily miss). Darcy further orchestrates events so that the two do not meet when both are in London. However, at his best, he settles the Wickham problem decisively, leaving nothing to chance. He acts with the independence characteristic of INTJs, permitting essentially no involvement or knowledge on Mr. Bennet’s part, where an ISTJ might have included the father or even the authorities, out of respect to external forms of order and regulation. 

Whether guessing his friend’s dislike of arguments or taking hope from his Aunt’s futile threats to his intended, Darcy is confident in his planning and understanding, and when shown his overly confident blindspots, is quick to reevaluate his worldview. It may seem at first glance that his concern with status makes him an ISTJ, but this is most likely indicative of historical context, rather than individual preference. He shows little regard for long-standing customs (such as social dance), though being sensible of their logical effects, and while he may be withdrawn and cold on first acquaintance, his warmth in a familiar setting taps into an efficient and practical generosity common to many INTJs. While it might not be apparent at first glance, upon further inspection Darcy proves himself to be a particularly distinct and honorable example of an INTJ.