I'm a 6w5 because I'm an intellectual that doubts everything

[The Exception]

Formerly I self-typed as 5w6 and also seriously considered 9w1 and 1w9 from time to time. While all three of these types have been suggested by various people at various times, I think I am most likely a 6w5.

It took me a long time to see the light on this. I had a rather soul searching discussion with a friend of mine who knows alot about the topic and one of the key things he picked up is how I doubt everything. I'm never completely sure, it's like I go look for this certainty but never obtain it because it only leads to more questions. Additionally, I am always striving for security, people I can really trust about things.

6w5 commonly mistypes as 5w6. Both have intellectual interests but being intellectual oriented does not make you a 5. I'm more likely the compliant triad than the withdrawn triad, although as an introvert I do withdraw a fair amount.

I was reading about type misidentifications and when comparing the 5 and the 6, it's clear I am closer to 6, minus the part about academia. That kind of environment would stress me out.


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).

[The Exception]

Some other thoughts.

I like to troubleshoot and predict things and establish reliable methods, or improve the ones that already exist. I like having some system that's reliable, that will work almost every time in spite of all the complex variables.

I don't think I'd do well in academia though. The publish or perish type environment would stress me out. It can be quite tedious to have to back up every little statement I make.

I'm kind of a mix of the linear and analytical and the more non-linear forms of thinking. I don't really come up with many iconoclastic ideas that shake up the world. I am more likely to read about some existing theory, maybe add my few words to it, refine it a bit but not completely change it.

I am not exceptionally creative, but I'm not always so practical either, which might be socionics related.

I don't agree with only trusting my own mind. Oftentimes I find others are more well-informed than me. But other times I can doubt them.

I sometimes trust my mind to come to meaningful conclusions. It's not that I can't trust it as all, it's just that in spite of my high intelligence, I still frequently doubt.

[Chae]

Cool stuff! Yes, your elaborations point toward 6. Academia is a bad example to explain enneagram, the basic mechanics count though. Do you think phobic or counterphobic? As far as I observed, the former is the case.

[The Exception]

Mostly phobic, although I do have my counterphobic moments from time to time.

[Stellafera]

I think you would really like Naranjo's type 6 description. Relevantly:

Fear makes the coward unable to be sure enough to act, so that he never has enough certainty and wants to know better. He not only needs guidance, but also typically (distrusting guidance as well as needing it) solves this conflict through appeal to the guidance of some logical system or of reason itself. Ennea-type VI is not only an intellectual type, but the most logical of types, one who is devoted to reason. Unlike ennea-type VII who uses intellect as strategy, type VI is likely to worship intellect through fanatical allegiance to reason and reason alone—as in scientism. In his need for answers in order to solve his problems, type VI is more than any other a questioner, and thus a potential philosopher. Not only does he use the intellect for problem-solving, but he resorts to problem seeking as a way to feeling safe. In his hypervigilance, his paranoid character is on the look-out for problems; he is a trouble-shooter in regard to himself and has difficulty in accepting himself without problems. While there is hope in seeing oneself with problems—the hope of being able to solve them—there is also a trap in problem making that manifests, for instance, as an inability to go beyond the role of patient in the therapeutic process and a diffculty in just letting oneself be. Not only is the ineffectualness or generalized problem with doing of the more timid type VI individuals a consequence of an excessive orientation to the abstract and theoretical, but seeking refuge in intellectual activity is also a consequence of fearful holding back, indirectness, vagueness, and “beating around the bush.”

[The Exception]

I think you would really like Naranjo's type 6 description. Relevantly:

Oh yes, that fits me.