Enneagram Types 5w6 and 6w5 - main differences?

[XoX]

I usually test as one of these. I wonder what is the core difference between 5w6 and 6w5 in enneagram?

[Ezra]

There are big differences. One is a 5 and one is a 6.

Misidentifying Fives and Sixes

Fives and Sixes are both Thinking types and, when educated, can both be quite intellectual. It is far more common for Sixes to mistype as Fives, but for some easily understood reasons. Of the two types, Sixes tend to be more linear and analytical in their thinking because they are interested in troubleshooting, in prediction, and in establishing methods that can be repeated. Thus, contrary to popular belief, the world of academia and higher education is more the realm of Sixes than of Fives. Academia teaches students to work with advisors and mentors, to cite sources and back up arguments with quotes from authorities, to follow proper procedures in papers and theses, and so forth–all type Six values.

Fives are much more non-linear in their thinking. They are interested in finding out where established theories break down and in developing iconoclastic ideas that shake up structures and established methods. Fives are, generally speaking, bolder than Sixes in their positions and creativity, but also far less practical. Fives feel that they can only trust their own minds to come to conclusions–they believe that everyone else is likely to be less well-informed. Sixes get frantic trying to find something to trust precisely because they do not trust their own minds to come to meaningful conclusions. The difference between them can be seen in the difference between Umberto Eco ( a Five) and Tom Clancy (a Six), or Peter Gabriel (a Five) and Bruce Springsteen (a Six).

[XoX]

Ok. Thanks a lot. You were one of the main targets of the first post I think this makes me 5w6.

[MysticSonic]

But you seem so incapable of trusting your own mind and any of your decisions. :/

[normal]

But you seem so incapable of trusting your own mind and any of your decisions. :/

+1
6w5 work more with you.

[XoX]

But you seem so incapable of trusting your own mind and any of your decisions. :/

But I'm even worse at following proper procedures :/

[Phaedrus]

I think this makes me 5w6.

If that statement is true, we are back at the beginning, XoX. In that case I can see no other reasonable explanation than that you must be an INTp.

[XoX]

But you seem so incapable of trusting your own mind and any of your decisions. :/

But I'm even worse at following proper procedures :/

I now have an even better counter argument. I'm even more incapable of trusting anyone else's mind than my own. This points to 5>6.

[Phaedrus]

I now have an even better counter argument. I'm even more incapable of trusting anyone else's mind than my own. This points to 5>6.

And here's another: You cannot be a 6 because you are an irrational type, and type 6 is a rational type.

[XoX]

I now have an even better counter argument. I'm even more incapable of trusting anyone else's mind than my own. This points to 5>6.

And here's another: You cannot be a 6 because you are an irrational type, and type 6 is a rational type.

I still don't understand the core difference between rational and irrational.

[Expat]

I still don't understand the core difference between rational and irrational.

Let me try this --

Rationals: want some measure of constancy, predictability in themselves and the world (which is not the same as absence of change)

Irrationals: take the lack of constancy, predictability in themselves and the world for granted

[Phaedrus]

I still don't understand the core difference between rational and irrational.

It is something you see when you observe the behaviour of yourself and others. You have clearly described yourself as an irrational type, as you can see for yourself if you compare your own statements with the typical behaviours of rationals and irrationals. You can also feel the difference when you interact with people.

[XoX]

It is something you see when you observe the behaviour of yourself and others. You have clearly described yourself as an irrational type, as you can see for yourself if you compare your own statements with the typical behaviours of rationals and irrationals. You can also feel the difference when you interact with people.

I still don't understand the core difference between rational and irrational.

Let me try this --

Rationals: want some measure of constancy, predictability in themselves and the world (which is not the same as absence of change)

Irrationals: take the lack of constancy, predictability in themselves and the world for granted

This quite well illustrates the problem I have.

My wife who is extroverted rational is clearly rational both in external and internal sense. She exemplifies the rational as you describe it very well.

In my case it is not that straightforward. I might seem externally irrational to some people. Even to my wife. There are some behavior patterns in me which seem irrational to an outsider. For example right now I should go shopping for food but instead I am writing this post. I don't have much time left to do the shopping for various reasons. So to my wife it is rather irrational behavior. She can't understand why I am writing this post now and not after we come back from the shop. From my point of view I just want to write this now and not later. I just feel like writing a post right now and am ready to accept the consequences i.e. that we have to shop in a great hurry because I am acting "irrational". Does this behavior really relate to socionics irrationality? I don't know. Anyways I don't always choose the externally most rational thing to do even if I am aware of the consequences. I choose to act irrationally in a way.

Then again internally I consider myself quite rational. I also like predictability in my environment. And I have married a rational. I probably couldn't live with a person who does irrational things. Especially with money. For example we have agreed rather clear budget rules for the family. I want to come home knowing that the person I live with goes by those rules and not e.g. spontaneously or by "accident" use twice the amount of money we agreed we can use this month. It would drive me crazy. Changes to the budget rules need to be agreed before executed and there has to be a reason for not obeying them. Something like "Look, I bought a new tv because I saw a cool tv in the shop and I felt like wanting it!". Argh. Does this have anything to do with socionics irrationality? I don't know. Even Expat would probably be too "irrational" for me in this sense Perhaps UDP or Diana could reach the necessary level of rationality. If even them.

So as a summary I am externally (behavior wise) somewhat irrational but internally quite rational. And even if I tend to get attracted to all kind of women and find irrational women quite fascinating and interesting I probably would always choose a rational woman as a partner for a serious relationship exactly because of the predictability. Same with business relationships. Irrational business partner doesn't sound appealing. Or perhaps the "rationality" I'm looking for in a partner is just some function (Ti or Te?) and not the rational temperament. I'm not sure.

[XoX]

and after all this analysis if someone asks me to choose from rational or irrational based on nothing but intuition/gut feeling I guess I would say irrational.

About my type and probabilities which Phaedrus asked in another thread. I don't think giving exact probabilities makes much sense. However I can say that with a good likelihood I have weak Si. This also means I have weak Se. This means I am intuitive. I don't see myself as a likely Alpha NT based mostly on comparison with real life NTs I know (not a reliable way but). INFj also seems very unlikely. That basically leaves ENFj, INFp, ENTj, INTp and ENFp. I have long believed to be a negativist and so ENFj, INTp and ENFp are the most likely options. Add there the irrationality and you get INTp or ENFp. I find similarities and differences to real life INTps and ENFps. My wife is adamant on being ESTj (with the only other option being ESFj) and doesn't feel any kind of supervision from me. Relations of activity is quite possible. So, the strongest case would be for ENFp. In hitta's model ENFp and INTp share the same leading function so what's the difference... The only problem is that I see other ENFps as being more irrational and more Si-oriented than I am (among other things). Anyways this is the best probability analysis I can pull out of my a**. (Edit: I forgot, 5w6 or 6w5 doesn't fit well with ENFp so...).

[FDG]

In my case it is not that straightforward. I might seem externally irrational to some people. Even to my wife. There are some behavior patterns in me which seem irrational to an outsider. For example right now I should go shopping for food but instead I am writing this post. I don't have much time left to do the shopping for various reasons. So to my wife it is rather irrational behavior. She can't understand why I am writing this post now and not after we come back from the shop. From my point of view I just want to write this now and not later. I just feel like writing a post right now and am ready to accept the consequences i.e. that we have to shop in a great hurry because I am acting "irrational". Does this behavior really relate to socionics irrationality? I don't know. Anyways I don't always choose the externally most rational thing to do even if I am aware of the consequences. I choose to act irrationally in a way.

This looks like something extremely minor to me, unless you not going to the shop would have some seriously bad consequences (an example of completely "irrational behaviour - not in socionics sense - would be one of somebody preferring to post rather than going to the hospital when having a stroke). To me it looks like your wife is being excessively rational, not the reverse (i.e. on the bigger scheme of things not going shopping once isn't a problem. However not going for 3 times straight it can be).

I think the major difference I've observed in rationals over irrationals is that rationals tend to make decisions and state them out loud and follow them unless properly stated otherwise, whereas irrationals tend not to make decisions and when they do state them out loud it's not tought about as being a final agreement but rather as something that is viable of change. Take into account that these differences can arise even in dual couples when they dual is using the irrational element and the other is using the rational element! (which is what smilingeyes refers at as small-cycle differences).

Rationality in a more "human" sense isn't really type related, if by it you mean capability to reach wise decisions and be consistent in behavior and mantaining your word. Every type is capable of good behavior.

[XoX]

In my case it is not that straightforward. I might seem externally irrational to some people. Even to my wife. There are some behavior patterns in me which seem irrational to an outsider. For example right now I should go shopping for food but instead I am writing this post. I don't have much time left to do the shopping for various reasons. So to my wife it is rather irrational behavior. She can't understand why I am writing this post now and not after we come back from the shop. From my point of view I just want to write this now and not later. I just feel like writing a post right now and am ready to accept the consequences i.e. that we have to shop in a great hurry because I am acting "irrational". Does this behavior really relate to socionics irrationality? I don't know. Anyways I don't always choose the externally most rational thing to do even if I am aware of the consequences. I choose to act irrationally in a way.

This looks like something extremely minor to me, unless you not going to the shop would have some seriously bad consequences (an example of completely "irrational behaviour - not in socionics sense - would be one of somebody preferring to post rather than going to the hospital when having a stroke). To me it looks like your wife is being excessively rational, not the reverse (i.e. on the bigger scheme of things not going shopping once isn't a problem. However not going for 3 times straight it can be).

Could be related to her Ni PoLR too in addition to rationality. She is bad at predicting how me writing a forum post will affect our shopping trip. In her mind it seems like everything is ruined and we will be totally late and never get to eat anything ever unless we go RIGHT NOW. (well I have to admit that I am often late because I tend to finish too many things before leaving. Her experience of me being like this might make her more worried about us being late unless she pushes me to move).

[FDG]

Maybe she's a bit type-A. But yeah, it also depends on past experiences. Maybe I'd be pushy too if I knew that my partner had a tendency to be late.

[XoX]

To make things more complicated I tend to have a very different "work persona" from my "leisure persona". I am way more extroverted, energetic, socially initiative taking and stressing about things and schedules at work. I also can easily get angry and agitated at work but at leisure time I am much more relaxed and calm and lazy. So which persona is more meaningful? Work or leisure?

[FDG]

Everybody is like that at work

[XoX]

Everybody is like that at work

Hah. Partially true. But the change in my behavior is perhaps a bit easier to observe than e.g. behavior of many of my current workmates. E.g. an INTp seem to be quite the same always. Also an INTj doesn't change too much.

[Ezra]

I now have an even better counter argument. I'm even more incapable of trusting anyone else's mind than my own. This points to 5>6.

And here's another: You cannot be a 6 because you are an irrational type, and type 6 is a rational type.

Oh my god. What bullshit. Every type on the Enneagram can be both rational and irrational, except 1s, who are always rational, and 7s, who are always irrational.

[XoX]

Just a note: We better not let my wife's supposed type affect my "diagnosis" too much as it can't be confirmed. This said, in the past only three types have been suggested to her: ISFj, ESFj, ESTj. It seems very unlikely that her type would be something else. ISFj would actually be an interesting option as it would better "allow" me to be a / valuing type. It is just that we have thoroughly explored her type here and she seems to have a too high focus on to be ISFj (among other things). Anyways ISFj was her very first typing when I first got to know MBTI and didn't know about socionics.

[FDG]

From the way you describe her, she seems too much business-focussed to be an ISFj? Even though again the forum stereotype of ISFj seems to be one of hardasses trying to put everybody in line, most of those I know don't have the enterprising streak partially also due to negativism+Ne PoLR (why would they have ENTj as dual then? They could more easily just do it all themselves!).

So what if you're the ISFj and she's the ENTj No wait, what you said about her focus on Si makes it much less likely.

[XoX]

From the way you describe her, she seems too much business-focussed to be an ISFj? Even though again the forum stereotype of ISFj seems to be one of hardasses trying to put everybody in line, most of those I know don't have the enterprising streak partially also due to negativism+Ne PoLR (why would they have ENTj as dual then? They could more easily just do it all themselves!).

So what if you're the ISFj and she's the ENTj No wait, what you said about her focus on Si makes it much less likely.

I can't confirm that she has Si > Se value preference. Actually often when I talk about Si and Se she tends to say she is more Se as she doesn't see herself as "comfort oriented" or anything like that (I probably describe them badly though). I only know that she places big importance on many Si matters which I pay little or no attention to. This doesn't necessarily make her a strong Si person but way stronger than me (or Expat). I tend to think that Si is very very weak in me. I have more or less lost hope of being a sensory type myself

[Phaedrus]

Every type on the Enneagram can be both rational and irrational, except 1s, who are always rational, and 7s, who are always irrational.

No, you are wrong -- and you are probably contradicting yourself without realizing it. You don't seem to be aware of the logical implications of your own beliefs about the correlations between the Enneagram and the socionic types. You are right about 7s and 1s, but we can also add that every 9 is an irrational type, and, as I did, that every 6 is rational (because it is a distinctly IJ type).

[Ezra]

Every type on the Enneagram can be both rational and irrational, except 1s, who are always rational, and 7s, who are always irrational.

No, you are wrong -- and you are probably contradicting yourself without realizing it. You don't seem to be aware of the logical implications of your own beliefs about the correlations between the Enneagram and the socionic types. You are right about 7s and 1s, but we can also add that every 9 is an irrational type, and, as I did, that every 6 is rational (because it is a distinctly IJ type).

NO. 9s can be IJs. 9s can be and are very good at Fi, and they value it. Not all of them, but many of them.

As for the 6, you must just sit in your little hovel all day thinking that 6s fit in with your worldview. Bullshit. There is nothing that contradicts the 6 being any type in socionics.

Mike Tyson: EP cp6w5
Bill Gates: EJ 6w5

So there can at least be EP and EJ 6s.

[FDG]

Every type on the Enneagram can be both rational and irrational, except 1s, who are always rational, and 7s, who are always irrational.

No, you are wrong -- and you are probably contradicting yourself without realizing it. You don't seem to be aware of the logical implications of your own beliefs about the correlations between the Enneagram and the socionic types. You are right about 7s and 1s, but we can also add that every 9 is an irrational type, and, as I did, that every 6 is rational (because it is a distinctly IJ type).

NO. 9s can be IJs. 9s can be and are very good at Fi, and they value it. Not all of them, but many of them.

As for the 6, you must just sit in your little hovel all day thinking that 6s fit in with your worldview. Bullshit. There is nothing that contradicts the 6 being any type in socionics.

Mike Tyson: EP cp6w5
Bill Gates: EJ 6w5

So there can at least be EP and EJ 6s.

Yeah. While I see where Phaedrus is coming from - in an ideal world, 6 type descriptions only apply to IJs, and more specifically, every 6 should be an ISFj probably - I think that when the Enneagram has been created many sets of people were left out and now they must be forcibly incorporated, giving rise to situations where the real world does not match the ideal.

[Phaedrus]

NO. 9s can be IJs.

Maybe you didn't read what I wrote. Just as it is certain that every 4 is an intuitive type, it is certain that every 9 has an IP temperament and is therefore an irrational type. Is that too simple for you to understand?

9s can be and are very good at Fi, and they value it. Not all of them, but many of them.

Totally irrelevant? Why? That I have already explained to you -- because socionic functions are almost totally irrelevant to Enneagram typings, because the Enneagram is a false theory of the types. Only type descriptions matter when you try put people in the Enneagram boxes.

As for the 6, you must just sit in your little hovel all day thinking that 6s fit in with your worldview. Bullshit. There is nothing that contradicts the 6 being any type in socionics.

Your stupidity seems to be unlimited sometimes. Since the ESI is the prototype for type 6 (I think we both agree on that) it is of course totally ridiculous to suggest that an ILE can be a 6. Therefore your statement is false.

Mike Tyson: EP cp6w5
Bill Gates: EJ 6w5

So there can at least be EP and EJ 6s.

Since my above argument is flawless, Mike Tyson is either not an EP or he is not a 6w5.

[FDG]

Phaedrus, but by your way of E-typing, we should avoid referring to "type 6" but rather prefer specific descriptions; because descriptions aren't even consistent among different authors, and sometimes they are so vague that they can encompass half of the socion.

[Expat]

I think that when the Enneagram has been created many sets of people were left out and now they must be forcibly incorporated, giving rise to situations where the real world does not match the ideal.

That's the way I see it, too.

[FDG]

I think that when the Enneagram has been created many sets of people were left out and now they must be forcibly incorporated, giving rise to situations where the real world does not match the ideal.

That's the way I see it, too.

And which type would be a better candidate than the one that "can present itself in very varied forms" "is characterized by ambiguity towards most things" "need to feel secure(something that basically every human needs, with different gradients)" ?eheh

[Phaedrus]

Phaedrus, but by your way of E-typing, we should avoid referring to "type 6" but rather prefer specific descriptions; because descriptions aren't even consistent among different authors, and sometimes they are so vague that they can encompass half of the socion.

By "type 6" I refer to that "object" to which every specific description (more or less accurately) refer. Maybe such an entity does not have a concrete, essential structure in the same way as I believe the socionic types do, but the situation is similar. Also in Socionics I think we should read many different type descriptions to see what they all have in common, and to see slightly different angles of each type described. I think it is possible to get an overall "picture" of what type 6 is like, based on many different Enneagram descriptions.

And I don't insist that every type 6 should necessarily be an ISFj, perhaps not even that every ISFj should be a 6, since we have type 1 as a sort of "trash" type if we need it. But I cannot accept that every socionic type can be any type in the Enneagram, because that idea just doesn't make any sense.

[Ezra]

Phaedrus, your use of Ti is actually almost unbearable to me. And that is coming from someone who is good with Ti. It is laughable when you make statements like "my reasoning is flawless".

FDG, as much as my Ti would like to say you're wrong, as I am a supporter of the Enneagram, I think you may well be right. We see evidence for it in people dubbing people as 6s. The 6 is a total wildcard. "Oh, she can't be this, because she does this, or that, because she does that. I know! She's a 6".

[Phaedrus]

Phaedrus, your use of Ti is actually almost unbearable to me. And that is coming from someone who is good with Ti. It is laughable when you make statements like "my reasoning is flawless".

And what exactly do you think is Ti in my previous post?

[XoX]

I think I have changed my mind based on very recent experiences. I could still be Alpha NT, Ne is more likely than Ni, I'm not likely to be INTp (but not impossible), and I'm likely irrational type. That basically leaves ENTp or ENFp. It doesnt fit with 5w6 well though

Edit:
I had a moment of clarity...and it told me I'm ENTp - Ne subtype. I'm not sure how much I can trust it though...I think it is getting all fuzzy again.

[Phaedrus]

I think I have changed my mind based on very recent experiences. I could still be Alpha NT, Ne is more likely than Ni, I'm not likely to be INTp (but not impossible), and I'm likely irrational type. That basically leaves ENTp or ENFp. It doesnt fit with 5w6 well though

Edit:
I had a moment of clarity...and it told me I'm ENTp - Ne subtype. I'm not sure how much I can trust it though...I think it is getting all fuzzy again.

If every piece in the puzzle doesn't fit, why do you change your mind? Do you through a dice, or how do you make it happen? Why can't you concentrate on the most relevant facts and hold on to them? You must be able to get at least one thing right.

Forget about all your friends and their possible types. You cannot trust your typing of them anyway. You are an irrational type, that's one piece of information that is absolutely certain about you. Don't you ever dare to question that assumpton again. You are definitely an irrational type, XoX. That leaves you with only eight types to consider. What else is absolutely certain about you? Try to focus on that, and don't let your mind lead you astray.

[XoX]

If every piece in the puzzle doesn't fit, why do you change your mind? Do you through a dice, or how do you make it happen? Why can't you concentrate on the most relevant facts and hold on to them? You must be able to get at least one thing right.

Umm...I guess I'm a little bit impulsive Then I tend to forget all the conclusions I / we have reached before and come to conclusion based on only the information "at hand" right now. There is almost no continuum from the past. I have this set of information in my mind that just "clicks". Then a bit later I start to remember conclusions from the past which kind of conflict with the new conclusion. I start seeing various other ways of looking at it too. Then it gets all fuzzy again as I can never make everything "click".

Forget about all your friends and their possible types. You cannot trust your typing of them anyway. You are an irrational type, that's one piece of information that is absolutely certain about you. Don't you ever dare to question that assumpton again. You are definitely an irrational type, XoX. That leaves you with only eight types to consider. What else is absolutely certain about you? Try to focus on that, and don't let your mind lead you astray.

Despite all the warning I have to add that I'm really very sure I am currently interacting closely with an INTp. And I am getting along quite good. However I don't think we are identical types. Today was the last proof of it. We approach problems from a different angle and what is natural way for him to think is not natural way for me to think. Still we can understand each other quite well.

But back to the question at hand. What is sure about me? Low focus on . Weak . Lack of . That combined with irrational leaves us with just four intuitive and irrational types. INFp, ENFp, INTp, ENTp.

[Expat]

Excellent. Now strike INTp from that list, and you'll be making some progress. That is, back to where you were some 6 months ago.

[Phaedrus]

Despite all the warning I have to add that I'm really very sure I am currently interacting closely with an INTp.

I said forget about it, and I mean it. I don't trust that typing at all, and neither should you. Forget ALL your previous typings -- every single one. You must learn the basics first. Only after you are SURE that you have got it right, you can start typing. Now, forget about that "INTp".

One way to go is of course to start testing as many of your friends as possible. And by that I mean really testing them by letting them do MBTI tests, socionic tests, Enneagram tests, Keirsey tests, or whatever. Then you let them read type descriptions and good explanations of the four scales. After that you can begin to form some hypotheses about their types.

[XoX]

Excellent. Now strike INTp from that list, and you'll be making some progress. That is, back to where you were some 6 months ago.

I won't strike INTp from the list I think it is still a possibility. Then I'm not sure if I am reading too much into my lack of but it seems something I can trust.

I said forget about it, and I mean it. I don't trust that typing at all, and neither should you. Forget ALL your previous typings -- every single one. You must learn the basics first. Only after you are SURE that you have got it right, you can start typing. Now, forget about that "INTp".

Oh I'm sure he is INTp Even if I just changed my mind about the person who have made me very critical about ESFps. I realized he might be a more physical than average ENFp. But the INTp is surely an INTp. I also know a very certain INTj.

One way to go is of course to start testing as many of your friends as possible. And by that I mean really testing them by letting them do MBTI tests, socionic tests, Enneagram tests, Keirsey tests, or whatever. Then you let them read type descriptions and good explanations of the four scales. After that you can begin to form some hypotheses about their types.

That doesn't sound very practical. It is very difficult to make people do all that unless they do it from their own interest.


Hmm..another note. I'm not likely ENTp. I spent an evening with Alphas and I just didn't participate in any of their "fun" activities. There is a good chance I am Fi quadra type because there is absolutely nothing in that kind of group "fun" that interests me. I was also very introverted all the time. I practically didn't say anything all evening. This was because there wasn't a single person there who was interested in talking about anything. They were just shouting and running around in circles basically.