Please please please.
Your ideas of my trytipe/stackings?
Any additional questions will be answered.
Merci.
Enneagram and stackings for Kore
Please please please.
Your ideas of my trytipe/stackings?
Any additional questions will be answered.
Merci.
hot coy dreamy witch stack, type Hedge
This does not bring any light on my questionings but I clearly appreciate the post.Originally Posted by Agni
sp/sx Type 4w5 ...Tritype is more like a venture, I don't know you super-well -- let's say 469
Sp/sx 4w5
Heart triad: 4
Head triad: 6> 5>7
Gut triad: 9 or 1 >8
These are guesses, obviously. But the sp/sx 4w5 seems pretty clear.
E4.
You've unphasable self-love... And talk about your uniqueness.
Total 4.
I think the 4w5 typings are not hard to see for me. I lean 9w1 for your gut. And head - really don't know.
As for instincts, maybe I'm just being blind or just have convoluted how I see them enough, but I don't find the sx that obvious. sp-dominant, I can quite easily imagine.
Perhaps it should be noted for reference that I do not follow the paradigm that your instinctual type is "two" different instincts..I see it just as a ranking, and think any two (or three) instincts can interplay meaningfully, and all the ranking does is tell you there is an imbalance in how they interplay.
You do seem to fit what they call a "reactive" type, and it could be why you emphasize that you're mean to people on purpose (all a guess as to what's behind what you say those things). It seems awfully indirect in your case, but I think you do have that interesting combination of 4 and 9 in you.
What people might be seeing as E6, I might be seeing as E9, and the difference being that both can have a vacillating flavor (vacillating uncontrollably is one way of seeming to move nowhere and thus be in a state of inertia where all vacillations mutually appear to cancel if sufficiently random), but one has a strangely neutral tone, and the other has a negative fear-driven tone, with the former being what I see in you more.
6 is the type I barely get. I can be doubtful but do not have trust issues. Scratches her head.
I first thought I was a 8 then 1 then 9 then 5 then 4. Maybe I am a 10. But 2 is the last one
I worked a loooot on myself.E4.
You've unphasable self-love... And talk about your uniqueness.
Total 4
I had also a major event in my life that made me realise that it was extremely short.
You'd see me 10 years ago
I have been waiting on your musings. As I said I do not get the nature of 6s very well.
Maybe I should read more...
To me, it's actually easier to get E6 somehow than E5. But here I just explain how I see the three of the 567 triad types as related.
The rough idea of the fear/mind triad is that the more foreign a body is perceived, the more one has to deal with a sense of aversion towards it, but foreignness can only exist relative to a sense of self which is able to perceive objects as in negative relation to it. All of this triad could be said to deal with such aversion. However, how they experience it differs. I'd say E6 experiences it in the purest way: an aversion to foreignness and a need to reach inertia/harmony unconsciously felt, which they cannot attain and thus constantly struggle to undermine uncertainty/foreignness. With E5, this is a more implicit fear - it may not even manifest as a direct fear, and rather they build their lives more directly around intensifying the reality of this foreignness especially with 5w4 (much as E8 builds itself around intensifying the reality of its consumption of objects), by developing their sense of avarice, except it is not necessarily a physical avarice here but a general psychological avarice. This avarice tends to be more welcoming to the sense of foreignness it sees outside, as this only serves to mark more clearly what is perceived as of the self.
With E7, the sense of aversion to foreignness is held lightly unconscious, so that they seem to welcome the foreign in small bites (gluttony), but maintaining a subtly known negative relation enough that the bites never seem to grow -- after all, being fear triad individuals, the aversion to foreign bodies still exists, so as long as the object is held at bay and only the feeling of foreignness stemming from the self is examined, their psychology admits this without problem. This has a bit of an 8-bias though and the more 6-like 7 types would more likely be focused on manipulating destiny and seeking gluttony in a less indulgent way and more implicit/mental fashion.
I still get 5 and 7 easier than 6. 6 is like a hotchpotch.
LolI first thought I was a 8 then 1 then 9 then 5 then 4. Maybe I am a 10. But 2 is the last one
What about 5w4?
People suggest ILI and I think that 4w5 does not go well with it.
You can still be 4w5. There is no limit to personality and there are surely more combinations than are dreamt of in our philosophies.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
That's not what the theory saysYou can still be 4w5. There is no limit to personality and there are surely more combinations than are dreamt of in our philosophies.
Fuck theory and I still think feel you are IEI.That's not what the theory says
*fixed*
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
MehFuck theory and I still think feel you are IEI.
*fixed*
It's surely good to be above conventions and rules.
479 Sp/Sx.
I pick 1w2 sp/sx
I can't settle even on your E type, let alone on your sociotype. It's easy to write you off as E4, but I'm less and less sure that's your actual type.
I know this is an E thread, but considering that's quite connected to sociotype, nor IEI nor ILI make sense to me the way they should (except people saying you are Ni). I might be the only one but I think you are IJ.
I don't think either 4w5 or 5w4 is an unimaginable type to me for either IEI or ILI if they're Ni subtypers (based on how I see all these types..which I admit has my bias).
Darya's comment strikes me as true for what it's worth, although for me what's missing to say something definite is additional feedback from you on how you see these typings, what they mean to you in context of your life, and so forth (so that one can establish there to be some footing). This is of course something I can only suggest, and it depends what you're comfortable sharing.
I can't settle even on your E type, let alone on your sociotype
I know this is an E thread, but considering that's quite connected to sociotype, nor IEI nor ILI make sense to me the way they should (except people saying you are Ni). I might be the only one but I think you are IJ.
I know for sure I am a dynamic type. In addition, all my socionics typings have always been around Ni ego.
I base it also upon my own knowledge of my personality and I know myself better than anybody else here.
Of course you can have your personal opinion.Though I won't bang my head against the wall absessing over it.
One person between 100 not approving it, it's just a random opinion that I won't fight.
Sure I'd like to understand it all. Knowledge is power, understanding is peace.
No, they're the most common actually.
Sure, I was just giving my opinion in a typing thread. I was under impression that you don't particularly care about being one type or the other, otherwise I wouldn't say anything.
Okay.
Thanks anyway.
The only IEI I know on the forum who could pass for E 5w4 (from a distance at least) is strnnng.
I actually care more than I show it
I'm sorry thenI actually care more than I show it
@darya - 4w5 and 5w4 being common Ni base types doesn't surprise me but depending on how far one goes back to enneagram roots (which is why sometimes things I say may seem just a little strange to people?), I think if we do purport to place 4 under feeling triad, it might raise a bit of a question about a Fe-polr type. I usually don't do the whole *pull up encyclopedia and quote* because I prefer my own thoughts (heh) and they don't necessarily align with one source, but for sources' sake, Naranjo calls the contrast between E3 and E4 as being between "over-control and emotional expressiveness." Contrasting 6 and 4, he says "Perhaps the most striking difference between these types is the emotionality and expressiveness of EIV, in contrast to the intellectual centeredness and inhibition of EVI. They are not easy to confuse." (side-note - this is why I think I can be a EVI not just EV..doesn't sound too unlike me does it)
In other words, while anything can be anything, at least these descriptions don't sound typical of EIV being a Fe-polr type.
Personally I think those descriptions of E4 apply better to someone who is pretty purely in the feeling triad, not so much having a 5 wing, which would increase that "inhibition" and so forth.
And I also think that it's quite likely some people are better described as "IXI" than IEI or ILI at the end of the day, and this principally applies to the Ni-subs basically..in those cases, you can see a certain vague hazy balance where someone doesn't strike as clearly ethically or logically focused, and it's very clear they're just intuitives.
(Contrast with some intuitive leads who seem like they could closer pass for logic types)
Alright @Kore, let me know what do you think are the most salient points that are E4 about you, E5 about you, and what makes you think certain things about one fit more than the other? Perhaps the other types you're considering. Basically include writing about you that you're comfortable sharing.Sure I'd like to understand it all. Knowledge is power, understanding is peace.
Personally I just get an intuitive undercurrent of image triad from you but am not attached to it being right or anything; I'm more interested in just exploring for the sake of it. And for what it's worth I'm familiar with many, many ideas of what E4 is like, not just that Naranjo quote, and I can perfectly imagine E4 (and E3) turning out to be quite intellectual - their drive with respect to such matters strikes as different from E567's psychology though.
Believe me, I know all about these distinctions
In theory these two E types are not easy to confuse, but in practice and with an added bonus of confusing stackings the story is different.
An 5w4 sx will come off a whole lot like a 4 (4 wing plus sx, which gives off an appearance of 4-ness). I've known these types of people and they are very volatile and sensitive and emotional in their own way. So it's really not always that clear cut as the theory makes it out to be. You have to take a bunch of other factors into account, as are stackings, health level and sociotype (an ESE 3w2 will appear very emotionally expressive despite being E3, I can assure you that. But they will over-control that emotional expressiveness in a way that it will throw a certain image that they want- they won't care about being authentic, but impressive and perfect (being ESE's). LIE E3's, on the other hand will probably appear cold.
E6 can be also extremely emotional and throw tantrums and not intellectually centered at all. It really depends on an individual case. Some 6w7's and 4w3's can be actually quickly confused on a surface level (if you just look at how someone behaves).
But yeah, I'm with you that many people don't fit the box neatly, which can be infuriating
It's alrightI'm sorry then
I know I am not much of a revealer, secretiveness is something people have to deal with. This makes me hard to know.
From what little I'd know I would say e4 mainly because how you present yourself and work situations. You seem to play on others envy which is a feeling e4 are occupied with. You also seem a little cold like you want the differential respect that is typical of e4's (especially from worthy sources), but it feels a bit like a game that is taken lightheartedly-- stuff you say doesn't seem real but like it has an agenda to it but it could be real. I think this is typical of the hopeless cynicism of e4s. Gut triad you seem pretty aggressive and touchy, sharp, but not rude-- so it gives me these e8 vibes in a feminine way. It's hard to say though.
Some things you say resonate with me so I kind of think you are some similar type which I'm probably e5w4 with 8 in gut triad. The 4/5/8 dynamic Is apparent to me in you but we are different in terms of gender, age, and everyday experience.
Interesting point, thanks for your output.
I realise that I am not comfortable with sharing. I actually reveal without revealing..
my sense is that, if you don't compare yourself to others, you might not be a four. even if sp-first (although I can't confirm this.)
the envy is immense, painful, sometimes energizing, and almost always present
I learnt to go over envy and shame, cutting it out with a sharp knife till I grew insensitive to a lot of things.
My soul was bleeding over and over, and now am nothing as I was younger, I drink souls myself.
For the rest, it's too private to explain here, I would feel as if I was naked in the middle of a crowd.
that sounds nice.
fwiw i never let go of E1 for you. b/c you seem fourish but not self-conscious enough, in a way that i can't just attribute to stackings. you own you in a way that fours often don't completely although they would like to. you're more vocal. you don't image-bend. but who knows.
edit: but now i am thinking 5/8....
don'teverletmeposttypingsagainicannevermakeupmymin d
I would rather say that it sounds sinisterthat sounds nice.
fwiw i never let go of E1 for you.
I thought I was 1 to some point.. As much as a lot of other options
Alright, well this was basically what I was clearing up ish except, I would say I brought up Naranjo more to mention how ILI's traditional portrait is overall incompatible to me with E4 as Naranjo seems to see it (and more with E5/6 if anything)...than to say that I in particular think ILI 4 makes zero sense..now my own view here is that a so-called "ILI" 4 is probably closer to "IXI" than "ILI" but could in theory wear either label. I'm well aware you're well-read in enneagram, and FWIW wasn't bringing up those quotes from the standpoint that you're unaware of them, so much as to make it clear why I felt the need, earlier, to clarify that I can "imagine" either Ni-base under 4w5 (rather than it being obvious) - in that they'd basically be IXI, and could just be better fit as "ILI" because they're more gamma-y or something, not because they really favor logic over ethics.
I'm personally of the view that dividing socionics into just 16 types is an attempt to use Jung's theory in a way that's not Jung's theory but something way, way larger in terms of the number of categories playing (we have to remember Jung originally wrote just 8 types, and it became 16 because of the common admixture of the auxiliary function with the dominant function, and that was all the information supposed to be gotten at by his types), so I think if anything, if someone wants a small, manageable number of categories, one cannot hope reasonably in all cases that "every" measure (Reinin, forms of cognition, Jungian dichotomies) will say the same thing empirically even if they all can be said to be meaningfully equivalent in some theoretical formulation. In other words, I'd say that socionics has an independent foundation, which is being used for practical diagnosis by way of admixture with Jung. The independent foundation is the potential energy to work conversion formula. I'd say the most meaningful way to reduce socionics to 16 categories is to take the forms of cognition and multiply it by the 4 quadras. Said differently, isolate your quadra and isolate your form in context of that quadra's values. This will not necessarily get you the same as a Jungian dichotomies diagnosis, but it strikes me as the correct sociotype formula. This is not how most practical diagnosis appears to occur, however; I think rather, the diagnosis appears to occur more on account of a mixture of quadra values and Jungian dichotomies mixed together. But it strikes me that if this is the methodology, one should not expect the sociotype formulas like polrs to necessarily work. The polr is actually a consequence of the process/result formulation as I understand it - it's the "end of the cycle" of information transformation, and this cycle is given from forms of cognition....ok really it was there before forms ever was described, but I think forms is the most descriptive version of what the cycle gets at.
The upshot is that enneagram's feeling triad bears unmistakable similarities to how Jung talked of feeling, and similarly for the thinking triad, so as far as empirical diagnosis, often it'll make sense for an enneagram feeling type to be a feeling type otherwise (unless one buys into these twists like "E9 is out of touch with instincts and E3 often out of touch with feelings" which I really find is a convoluted way of looking at things personally, and have my reasons why it can be avoided).
However, as sociotype is not founded quite on Jung's dichotomies, but rather on another foundation, I'm not sure it'll always quite agree with this. Hopefully though, at least the dominant function agrees.
I would say that the weakest link in Jung being usable (rather than just a body of ideas unfit for direct application, which is BTW how I see them) is not empirically fitting the kinds of observations he made about the functions in real people, and having to proceed by guesswork what the closest approximation is. The weakest link in socionics application is when one tries to bring things back to 16 types that look like Jung's types to any measurable degree, which invariably happens if one attempts to understand quadra values in terms of the constituent functions.
Last edited by chemical; 11-17-2014 at 06:30 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote