...ESTJ is Enneagram 1...
ESTj is the stereotypical Enneagram type 1 thread split
...ESTJ is Enneagram 1...
If and only if LSE is E1, then where do you put LSI at not to mention ESI and even LII?Originally Posted by Agee The Great
Never said LSE was the only E1. LSE is the stereotypical 1.
LSI is more on the spectrum between 1 and 9.
Those are the two types that can only ever be 1...
A lot of types are E1. There is no direct correlation -- just constraints and probabilities. So, an E8 has a strong possibility to be an ESTp or ESTj, among others. Therefore... people could be receiving a lot of their perception from both of these seemingly similar E8 possibilities. See?
...Sorry, but that's wrong. Are you going to tell me that there are ISFp 1s? An ESFj 1? ESFp 1? No...Types on socionics correlate specifically to certain types on the enneagram.
And as for E8, ISTp is between 9 and 8. ESTp is 8.
The only reason why it would take you any effort would be because you'd be wasting your time constructing a lie out of nothing.
Post a thread and invite LIIs and ESIs this forum has to offer, LIIs and ESIs self-typing E1. By that kind of reasoning those two shouldn't even exist which is fine with me, although I still don't know whether E-type commands sociotypes to oblige or is the other way around. So you tell me.
You never said "only". I got that.
Nice wording, don't let siuntal respond to this.
I have an LSE friend who's a 3.
Isn't that exactly what people on here do?
No, its called common sense. Get some.
Then your friend is either, A. Not LSE, B. Not E3, or C. Neither
What is DA's friend, then?
You are a fool.
This is out-of-date, but it still makes my point.
Lol I don't see how posting a picture of minesweeper proves your point, but sure whatever you say.
People shouldn't even be combining socionics with the enneagram anyways. Two seperate theories, and apparently just one of either of them is more than enough for people to handle.
Especially when someone goes and says something like this... "Im LSI Tritype E8w7-637-251 sx/so/sp INFJ RCLUEI Type B Personality"
If you want to combine shit, go read the enneagram carefully, and then come back and read each socionics function carefully. If you have any shred of intelligence and insight, you'd see that everything you people are saying doesn't add up.
ST must relate to the Gut Triad 9,8,1
NT must relate to the Head Triad 7,5,6
NF must relate to the Heart Triad 4,3,2 with the exception of some types that im not sure of, which would probably if anything relate to 6 which is probably the most dominant enneagram type
SF the same as NF
Last edited by Leader; 03-21-2012 at 10:12 PM.
I don't even think enneagram is worth investing in, it's too limited. Sure you can classify people with it to a certain extent, but it's not going to prove much, you have to assume their type is actually suitable and not 'one of the nine types of people.' I agree that all of these specific subtypes going along with Socionics are unnecessary.
I did see your thread on enneagram-socionics correlations and it actually looks the same even though it is "different".
You just bashed yourself saying that but there is a way out, you can always say you're not people as in part of people. Not human.People shouldn't even be combining socionics with the enneagram anyways. Two seperate theories, and apparently just one of either of them is more than enough for people to handle.
Leave that to Aleksei or Gilly.Especially when someone goes and says something like this... "Im LSI Tritype E8w7-637-251 sx/so/sp INFJ RCLUEI Type B Personality"
?If you want to combine shit, go read the enneagram carefully, and then come back and read each socionics function carefully. If you have any shred of intelligence and insight, you'd see that everything you people are saying doesn't add up.
Socio type should fit any enneagram type. They do not contradict. A reformer E1 could easily be NT, (think of the typical intellectual working in a think tank.) A helper 2 could be a NT, think of an emergency room doctor. An achiever 3 could be an NT -think Wall Street analyst and so on.
Enneagram is the emotional core of what impact or "footprint" you want to leave in the world. Their information metabolism something that modifies that desired impact. For example information metabolism could split E2 into different types of helpers - social workers, stay at home moms, medical doctors, pastors, academic deans and so on. They do not contradict because they are discussing life mission, not information processing.
Socionics -
the16types.info
Enneagram and socionics are not linked except by tendencies.
Agee, you're wrong.
Maybe when you find some SLE/ILE 3's you'll understand...
or ESFj 8's.
The end is nigh
Their isn't a correlation thats set in stone like that^^.. The enneagram is more about instinctual energies and motivations that can't really be tied to functions. Although I do agree that their is a general correlation, I've known quite a few people who disprove the one you've given. Haven't you ever seen an ENFp 7w6? or an ST 6w5? I think tritype plays MAJORLY into things, so even if an ST is a main heart type which isn't common they probably have somthing more earthy or gutsy as a close second.. also sometimes a persons main type is very strong and some people have a more overlapping tritype. Like me I've always had trouble discerning whether I'm 4w5 or 1w9....
Maybe, especially Te since Te is involved with watching and observing how things work and observing, comparing.
I agree; I haven't found any one to one correlation between Sociotype and E.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 03-22-2012 at 02:18 AM.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
And INFp 1s, ISFp 8s, Big Foot, and Me Mahgacull Luckee Chams!...
...Please.
So, is your point that certain S types cannot be certain E types or that certain S types must be certain E types?
Personally, I have not seen any particular or consistent correlations. I have a hard time imagining an INFp 1 and an ISFp 8, but can imagine an INFp 9 and an ISFp 5 (ESFj 8, EXTp 3, etc.), both of which I thought you claimed were impossible.
The end is nigh
The main reason why none of what im saying makes sense to you is because you have no sense. Makes sense?
Exactly, you're imagining and not using logic or common sense.
Wtf are you talking about?
I cannot imagine those combinations because I have not seen them. I can imagine the other combinations because I have seen them. You're making a lot of claims about other people's logic without backing yours up.
The end is nigh
....Instinctual energies....don't know what you mean by that but instincts are innate. Therefore, innate abilities = functions. And motivations don't come out of nowhere. A person's perception (functions) will influence how not only they, but the rest of the world sees them. Their perception influences their reality and that reality provides feedback to them reinforcing their behavior, aka their motivations.
People use tritypes and variants only because they want to feel special, to feel individual. Its useless.
You have not seen them? There are 4 other senses which you use (hopefully) on a daily basis. You have ears to hear with right? Just because you haven't seen something doesn't necessarily mean its not there. The only way to solve this problem is if you have this thing called a -brain-. More importantly is how you -use- this brain. And obviously, you're not using yours because if you were you'd understand and "see" what im talking about.
Yeah dude, whatever lol.
The end is nigh
And not backing anything up?
I can't teach common sense.
Either you see what im talking about, or you don't. Either way, as long as I know what im talking about thats all that matters.
Agee, I think you're putting people into patterns, I can relate; I have however seen SEI both be E9 and E5, some of our forum member SEI have made both choices.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Agee, you can disagree all you want. I dont care. It is not my life. However, using obtuse logic in real world settings is not going to be useful to you. You are only hurting yourself.
It's not very EFFECTIVE, is it? It's always good to have someone to judge things like that; I mean he does want to know about things that will actually WORK.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Reply With Quote
