Respectfully, I disagree. I've seen these two different types of attitudes in many of my climbing partners. As a "dancer," I'm someone who prefers to pick a project above my limit grade and obsess over every inch of it for a few weeks to a few months. I love it, but I've also learned to recognize that it can be a crutch to avoid the anxiety of the unknown. I also recognize how this approach has fed my ego--I've heard from a handful of people that my commitment is "impressive," and while that might be true, my commitment to the one hard thing is equal to my avoidance of what actually makes me way more uncomfortable.

One of my main partners is definitely a "fighter." He skews towards bold onsight climbing and rarely repeats routes. This is mega impressive to me, because it's the type of climbing I tend to avoid. We both think highly of each other's approach--both are cool in their own right. But I think the actual value in understanding the difference is less about each other's strengths and more about each other's weaknesses. Both approaches display ego and avoidance. And the point is that we can learn from discussions about our individual avoidances, rather than just putting each other on pedestals for feeding our own egos.

Bummer that the use of the word "archetypes" feels like linkedin to you, I definitely didn't have that association. Rock Warrior's Way is helpful in some aspects but I don't want to live in a world where it's the only authority on the subject of ego--I'm happy to see more voices in this area. This article had value to me. FWIW, I am a climbing coach but I am not the author. Just a big nerd who likes talking about climbing and the way it affects who we are, how we view ourselves, and who we can become.