It’s quite amazing I think that in the end the crew managed to create that balanced system of government they preserved. Since Young has always been a leader only formally, and those guys like Rush and Camile have never actually submitted to him (idk, I see it this way), it seems it’s only fair that eventually they came up with this triumvirate thing, meaning among other things that when Rush and Camile don’t agree with Young’s choice they still can find a way out so they can influence and change the situation, as they tend to do in season two. Still, at the second half of the season it’s actually just the three of them working together, getting each other better and better and showing no intention of starting a conflict any time soon.
I actually believe it is the necessary balance needed on the ship. Camile remains the formal superior (i.e. not in actual sense, again) of the civilians on board, Rush does quite the same, to a lesser extent, being an informal one. Young is the actual superior of the military staff (and the formal leader of the crew); Rush is the actual superior of the science team, with this relation being more flexible since they are the civilians (he encountered some obstacles regarding this relation at first – since they all tended to throw obstacles in each other’s way at first, – however it was cleared then).
As for the civilians in general, they must have been hired by the military, but since being hired and being subject to the military law are quite different things, on Destiny they used to follow military orders when they suited them and to show their protest if they didn’t. The things harmonized in the end, however, as it seems, if something ever went wrong, they would still expect Camile and Rush to be responsible for the regulation.
I can't deny that my outlook on life may be too optimistic, but actually, to me, Rush’s and Young’s trajectory of social interaction has always looked quite positive. Anyway, I know that trait of myself that I can’t believe the things I don’t feel, in the main, thus I get what I get.
Rush’s and Young’s cases actually look quite similar: both troubled loners, who have their problems with social relationships, and it is only natural that it makes people tense, especially in their circumstances. It was evident and actually displayed that there were people among the crew who started to blame Rush for stranding them on “Destiny” (the guy had multiple reasons, so I get him, of course, however, their feelings are also understandable), who raged at him and couldn’t trust him. While it was never indicated that it was the attitude of the whole crew – consisting of about one hundred people, approximately… And though his caustic remarks must have made a part of people tense (in fact, it was mainly demonstrated by Eli, and I’d rather not express my thoughts about this guy), it was never emphasized so much as well, at least, as it seems.
Young’s case actually looks quite the same. His military guys were loyal to him and, of course, there were those civilians who were stressed out by his manners, his habit to raise his voice and all the military pressure in general, I mean, the one they felt (I don’t aim to judge, thus only facts), and couldn’t trust him either. Though, again, it was never registered that it was the attitude of every civilian there. And, btw, if it had been like this, I think this point would have been stressed. Regarding both Young and Rush, and the way the crew reacted toward them, at first. I don’t touch on their notorious clash, as Rush&Young’s relationship is a horse of another colour.
However, as the story unfolds, people’s animosity seems to dissipate. Of course, some members of the crew, probably, still feel it toward Rush (I think it was actually pointed out only by Greer’s demeanour, but still), some of them don’t fully trust him. Anyway, there are those, who support him, who even “physically” protect him (like Brody and Volker) and those who actually trust him (Brody, or Chloe, for instance). It’s not that Rush’s science team antagonizes him either, and I can hardly believe that the civilian staff staged the mutiny under his direction feeling actual hostility and disrespect toward him.
Again, it seems to be quite similar with regard to Young. Some people still vocalize their tension and protest (like Chloe, or Lisa in “Incursion”), and well, they stage this mutiny, yes. But after that this tension starts to dissipate as well. Little by little, but still.
And at the second half of season two it looks like people, after all, get accustomed to them both. No one actually shows animosity or disrespect toward Rush (idk it was never demonstrated…), his science team listens to him and leans toward him, of course, people can tense, but still they mostly joke about his crankiness, and even if sometimes those like Volker or Eli can make unpleasant remarks (they are people or what), mostly because of their personal issues (Volker’s illness and “death” in “Epilogue”, Eli’s grieving for Ginn), I don’t see that they actually take offence and bear a grudge against Rush. Even Eli, who felt all this pain after the events of “Seizure”, eventually seemed to calm down.
It also looks like people start to feel at ease with Young, and although there are those who still tense up, they seem to accept him as well. It’s not that they show any actual resentment, at least.
Personally, I think that the actions of the crew convey a lot more about their current attitude: this decision, a bunch of them made, to stay with Rush and Young and continue the Mission; this split-up between the factions on Novus and founding of civilizations. In their honour.
Hence, the final “diner party” of the crew in “Gauntlet” actually looked like somewhat of a terminal manifestation. I mean this toast proposed by Young, this sort of “verbalized acceptance” of Rush (in fact, it happened long before, but still…) and people’s response to them both at that very moment. All of it looked like a kind of a symbol and the actual hint of acceptance, to me.
I may be in a minority of one. But well, maybe not ?
A sort of analysis on Rush in general + an effort to explain, why I view him as an INFj (in terms of psychological types)
Mostly it is an attempt to systematize my views about Rush in general and also to explain my personal opinion concerning some points, which I previously discussed with some people, but didn’t answer in the right time. I tried to mostly avoid special terminology and speak about it in a general way. Hope, it will be understandable for everyone. Read if you like.
I don’t think that there can be any doubt that Rush is a rational person, who values logic quite much. That’s what he shows himself throughout the whole show, so it’s not a point of argument, as I see it. But if we speak about his priorities, from my perspective, the picture is quite different. Since I have the same priorities myself, what I see is that this character always proceeds from his feelings, and though his logic is certainly important for him, it’s not his focus point. In order to make it more comprehensible, hereinafter I will refer to these opposite ways of perception of reality as “logical” (based on logic) and “ethical” (based on feelings, emotions and personal attitudes).
Why I see that Rush’s approach to all his deeds and decisions is purely “ethical”:
- Rush’s actions are not based on any objective rules and patterns, but only on his personal attitude to the things around. That’s how it works in case of “ethical” types (of course I speak about tendencies and the way the distinctions between “logical” and “ethical” approach are generally seen). It’s not a matter of a common morality that will be necessarily accepted and followed, though of course it doesn’t mean that it can’t be like that.
But often it’s not, because it is only your personal attitude and views on “rights” and “wrongs” that build your ethical system from which you proceed. And that's exactly how it works in Rush's case, as I see it. He has his unwavering ethical system, “always think about the benefit of the majority and the less of two evils”, and it will be his personal tenet throughout the whole show. Regardless of how hard it is, he will have to sacrifice the minority in order to secure the majority, and considering the conditions it’s a purely “ethical” approach.
Still he will fight to the end, if there is a chance, he could see, to secure the minority without endangering the others (like he did for Scott, Greer and Franklin in “Air Part 3”, for those in shuttle in “Light”, for Young in “Sabotage” and “The Greater Good” and for Scott in “Cloverdale”, for Chloe and Lisa Park etc.).
What is more, Rush is rarely consistent in his actions and his trajectory is always oriented to his attitude and feelings as well, as I see it: that’s how he acts in “Divided”, fighting for his own safety and the safety of the crew, even to the point of being ready to sacrifice two people, until Camile displays a logical counterargument he didn’t consider himself; in “Faith”, yet again fighting for those people who decided to stay on Eden and demanding that they should be returned by force, even though pressure is Rush’s personal sore point and something he recently struggled against; trying to learn the code while being in the Chair simulation up to the point of practically dying there; deciding to hide the bridge due to being driven by his personal issues, his attitude to Young and the crew; yet again being driven by the need to solve the supply issues while missing the obvious reasoning in “Aftermath”; and so on, in the aggregate it appears to be a tendency.
So, I can’t deny that what I see regarding Rush is a firm ethical system and distinct limits concerning the things he doesn’t consider to be acceptable to attain his goals, he simply doesn’t understand them. Of course it doesn’t mean that Rush cannot be viewed as a morally ambiguous person (it’s rather curious for me though, since I have always thought that Rush is moral as hell.. well, except the cases when he framed Young for murder and killed Simeon, since these are the things which are considered to be “immoral” according to common moral standards.. anyway, they were hardly based on cool judgment).
Though, again, that’s exactly how "ethical" types are known to be viewed sometimes. It’s not that they are moral because they necessarily obey some common rules and are righteous for everyone. But they are moralists since they are focused on moral issues according to their personal ethical system. While their views on social standards tend to be quite flexible, at least rather frequently.
- The way Rush conducts himself in his social relations is purely “ethical” too, since all his reactions to people around are deeply connected with his feelings. He tends to be reserved, mild and placid when the outer world corresponds with his inner state and senses and he expresses his feelings and negative senses when people around say or do something he doesn’t see as “right”. And even if he doesn’t, the way he shows his emotions always indicates that personal relations and people’s attitude is something that affects him rather much nonetheless. Though he will never admit it, of course.
Again, I speak about tendencies, so of course it doesn’t mean that "ethical" types should be rough and explosive, since it would be nonsense. But it is true that, as compared to “logical” types, they are usually viewed as more “complicated”, in relations as well, while “logical” types appear to be more mild and more attached to common rules, in theory of course. (But, as I think, at least it’s the distinction that can be seen between Rush and, for example, Chloe, since the latter belongs to a "logical" type, as I see it, even though they have some things in common.)
Since, from the “ethical” standpoint, emotional reactions are an integral part of human interaction, they don’t necessarily mean indifference and insensibility toward other human beings. Even a conflict itself can serve an amount of goals and it’s not always seen as something destructive, even if not preferable. It also doesn’t necessarily mean an intention to hurt.
And though, yet again, it won’t relate to everyone, as I know, it’s quite habitual for “ethical” types to somehow “switch off” their feelings and emotions, in a manner of self-defence to avoid an overwhelming and losing inner balance; while sometimes it’s just a necessity. Still, it doesn’t mean that you will stop caring, even if you seem insensible to others.
From my perspective, all these points are distinctly expressed in Rush’s demeanour as well. By the way, I can’t deny that Rush’s reactions and caustic remarks always looked quite mild and reserved to me (as compared with what I frequently witness regarding "ethical" types), which is why I was never able to take his crankiness seriously.
- I also cannot say that Rush has poor social skills. What I see is that it works in quite a different way, habitual for me as well. I admit that he tends to push people aside, in a way of an unconscious self-defence due to his personal issues, and also that he cannot build a positive contact if it comes into contradiction with his personal feelings.
But when it doesn’t, I witness an utterly different picture. And it’s quite a tendency too, as I see it: the way he treats Chloe in “Air Part 2”, helping her cope with her loss (which couldn’t bring her consolation, of course, but still it helped her in some way, at least I usually get this impression), and how Rush handles Franklin in “Sabotage”; the way he always supports Eli, initiating these talks about his mom and the loss of Ginn; or how he directs Volker in “Hunt”, helping with his amorous issues, and Young in “Greater Good”, and so on. As I know, in real life it usually depends on a field of application - and private conversations are certainly a field Rush has a mastery of.
What is more, it’s quite a common approach people get from Rush in general – when he tries to comfort and reassure them or just speaks in this calm peaceful manner – something that looks like a “safety zone” in his case, essential and natural; like it usually is for ethical intuitive types.
- I see Rush’s sort of obsession with Destiny and the Mission as a clear indicator too. Since, from my point of view, it’s less connected with his search for knowledge and discoveries (though it is valuable too, in some way) and more with his personal issues, his way to honour Gloria, the way to suppress his constant guilt and pain, and also it’s a kind of his personal duty too, his duty to the mankind and to Gloria as well. Mostly it’s an opportunity to “right the wrongs”, as I see it, since it’s not a secret, that Rush’s tendency to self-blaming, even for minor issues, is quite pronounced in his case.
From my perspective, it’s basically the same duty he displays while struggling for the lives of all these people, I see it as something general, but still a focus point. Although it looks quite natural to me that it can’t be oriented to the individuals, since these issues are usually a point of internal personal resources, which cannot be unlimited. He cares in an adequate way, as I see it, but it’s a point of priorities.
- What is very much important for me thereupon and what is a clear indicator too is the way Rush deals with his logic. Since to me it doesn’t look natural like in case of Young, Greer and other "logical" types, but strongly pronounced and exaggerated. And that’s exactly how it often looks in the case of ethical intuitive types (mine as well) – like something you pay much attention to, and you really do. Since it’s something that usually feels like it sort of constantly slips away from you and you have to grasp it, and show that you do. What is more, it’s also kind of a need to structure and systematize all you perceive from the outer world and what you produce internally.
Of course it’s only a tendency again, but that’s exactly what I see in Rush.
(by the way, in Socionics it is called “a role function”, something our social interactions are “framed in”, especially in stressful and unknown conditions; in the case of INFjs this function is considered to be Introverted Logic [Ti in MBTI]..)
Rush is pragmatic and is strongly focused on expediency, and I don’t try to argue with it. But usually I don’t see that it is something alien to “ethical” types either (I can’t deny that I’m quite pragmatic myself and that’s what I often see regarding other people, who belong to ethical intuitive types, especially if it is a point of a common good).
Usually you just match all these goals (and that’s exactly what Rush does in “Pathogen”, counting on getting help from Chloe and trying to help her as well; in “Cloverdale”, I think it’s clear that he is genuinely worried about her there, since she became someone precious to him, even if he has some other reasons to need her back on Destiny too; it’s also what Rush does in “Deliverance”, sending Brody and Volker away from his working process, and still praising them and making them feel better, in “Hunt” and so on, honestly, I witness this approach throughout the whole show).
Though, as I usually see, logical arguments that Rush tends to throw on others are also his way to get the required results in the shortest time. Since he’s convinced from the beginning that the crew doesn’t get his complicated ethical views, he presents the points, which, as he thinks, will be more understandable and will spare his time:
like in “Air Part 1”, when he attempts to explain it to Young why he decided to dial the 9th Chevron – starting with an “ethical” argument regarding the likely mortal danger for people if they had chosen a closer destination, but changing his trajectory and providing Young with a “logical” point, when it becomes apparent that Young doesn’t agree with the previous one;
in “Faith”, when they discuss stranding people on the planet, and Rush displays his litany of “logical” arguments, as it is clear that simple “you can’t let them stay” won’t work;
and exactly what I see in “Light” when Young starts this “double ration” thing, which sounds to Rush as something like “good boy and not a piece of shit so far as you act in a manner I like”, as I see it. Rush looks like he is offended as hell, since all his actions in “Light” were goddamn natural for him, he failed to save his wife and now he is praised for such a minor thing as returning the crewmembers. Since it is clear to him that Young doesn’t get it, he provides him with some different argumentation, which, in his opinion, will be more comprehensible for Young, to spite him and to show it again, that he did no great things; unfortunately, he doesn’t get Young here either.
Still, I don’t think that the reason Rush cannot get Young is that he doesn’t see through relations, since what I usually see is that he doesn’t expect what Young sometimes offers him (like a handshake in “Light” and Young’s humble attempt of atonement in “Faith”), because it contradicts his feelings regarding the matter. Because regardless of how insightful people are, we all still rely on our own view of life, as it is known.
And what is more, sometimes it must be easier for Rush to estimate his relations with the aid of self-persuading, which again is quite common for ethical intuitive types, and as I see it, self-convincing is exactly what Rush does while proclaiming that he doesn’t pay attention to what people think about him.
***
So, it’s my way of seeing Dr. Rush, a rational and calculating strategist, whose goals don’t prevail over his responsibilities.
From my opinion, he is a pure introvert, whose two main functions are Feeling and Intuition.
[and I have to call them “main functions” since in MBTI and Socionics they might be of different order, but in the final analysis are often meant to be the same – a more pronounced Feeling, a less expressed Intuition]
The list of points described above is also the one I usually see regarding those INFjs whom I know and whose confirmation regarding Rush’s type I relied on. Though they mostly belong to the intuitive subtype, the one I think Rush belongs to as well. I can see it as a possible reason why INFjs who belong to the ethical subtype won’t view Rush as the representative of their type, but it’s only a guess, of course.
I can only admit that the way Rush usually thinks, reacts and makes decisions is something that feels very close to mine (and I rarely feel this way), of course considering the known divergences between INFjs and ENFjs, whom I myself belong to. It doesn’t mean that I would necessarily make the same decisions and take the same actions in the similar circumstances, but still, I can’t deny that I perceived them as something expected and naturally determined, like something very understandable.
As usual, it’s only my personal impression, the picture that I see and show in case it can be helpful in some way. It’s not an attempt to convince those people who disagree. Feel free to come and talk to me about it, of course if you like.
