ENTjs/LIEs as Enneagram Type 7
I've recently being contemplating this.
Since Brad Pitt and QT (I think) have been cited as LIEs, and since they're both 7w6s, and since Salawa, an LIE and a 7w6, and since Fabio, a 7w8 who relates to LIE could be LIEs, why can't 7s be LIEs? Is it hard to believe that a 7 could have Te as a leading function?
No it isn't, if you put it in those terms. But is it all there is to LIE, and to 7?Originally Posted by Ezra
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
But that's the fundamental thing; whether or not a 7 is capable of having Te as a leading function. Are they? That's a question I'd like to know the answer to. Or have Pitt and QT been mistyped, either socionically or Enneagramatically? Are Salawa and Fabio misguided?
The simple and correct answer is no. Of course they can't. Type 7 is clearly an irrational type, and the most typical 7s are extraverted Ne types. It doesn't make sense to suppose that a leading Te type can ever be a 7.
Yes, why not? That is the most simple and the most likely answer.
I don't know about Salawa, but FDG is most likely either not a LIE but an EP 7w8, or an LIE 8w7. I think that FDG:s behavior, based on his posts on this forum, fits type 8 pretty well. Another enneatype that I would suggest him to investigate in depth, if he hasn't done that already, is type 3. But maybe that type can be dismissed on not too obvious grounds that I am not aware of.
How does the motivation 'to be satisfied' conflict with Te as a leading function?
I disagree that Fabio is an 8. And ask those who have met him what they make of him. And ask Fabio; he's pretty well versed in the Enneagram (more so than me), so his opinion is the best.I don't know about Salawa, but FDG is most likely either not a LIE but an EP 7w8, or an LIE 8w7. I think that FDG:s behavior, based on his posts on this forum, fits type 8 pretty well. Another enneatype that I would suggest him to investigate in depth, if he hasn't done that already, is type 3. But maybe that type can be dismissed on not too obvious grounds that I am not aware of.
I see a lot of Se with Fabio. I think he's been mistyped.
And you really think that the 7 would sacrifice their personal life?
Maybe. I don't know. I certainly don't get the same vibe from Joy as I do from you and Expat, however. I don't think 5 is a possibility for her. In fact, I could very easily see 7w8 as a possibility for Joy. I could see 8w7, but I don't get the forceful energy from her; I see a playful, light-hearted side that isn't willing to combat anyone. However, after having met Expat, his behaviour is akin to a 5, and he has convinced me that he could be an 8w9. 8s can very easily look like 5s. I'll go into more depth later if you're really interested by this.Ezra -- this may be significant as you have previously insisted that LIEs are probably 5s and that you thought Expat, Joy and I were all 5s.
Expat gives off the vibe of a 5w6 or a 6w5. He's very knowledgeable, very 'rambling' (this is something I actually admire as much as the connotations are negative; I get on very well with NTs, because they share my will in never getting tired of talking about systems like socionics amongst other philosophical ideas), and generally emotionally reserved. Now, where I and Expat differ is in my belief that LIE can be correlated with the 5. He doesn't think so. I think we'd both agree that an NT can easily be a 5, and is probably the epitome of a typical one. However, while he believes 5s cannot be EJs, I disagree. Nothing on this page contradicts a potential 5's behaviour. It's very easy to find examples of LIE 5s; Bill Gates being the best example. I also think that Te as a base function is akin to a 5's 'thirst for knowledge'. Again, Expat has problems with this, but I don't fully understand them, so perhaps he can explain them when and if he reads this. Now, I believe Expat could be an 8w9, but I think 5w6 is more likely.
As for you as both an LIE and a 7w6, I have two problems with the correlation, and one problem concerning your being a 7w6. Firstly, while NT 7 fits nicely, EJ 7 does not, not because of the external behaviour of an EJ (this fits perfectly with the 7) but because of this:
"EJs are both dynamic and rational, so they see reality as in continuous, gradual, often imperceptible change. At the same time, an EJ has his own views of what reality "should" be. This inclines him to be quick to take action, normally using his leading function, in order to make sure things will remain, or become, as they should be, before change can get too far."
To be honest, I don't think a 7 is that concerned about what things 'should be', and they certainly don't have a problem with change. On the contrary; they revel in it. Also, one thing that I agree with which Phaedrus does say and which I think is pertinent here is that a 7 is, by nature, irrational. Although he doesn't explain why, which is a pisstake, he states it. I have never, ever encountered a 7 who has a view of how reality 'should be'. And I know a hell of a lot of 7s. On top of this, I doubt Brad Pitt has this view of reality. And I really doubt Fabio does.
Secondly, shit, I've forgotten. I'll get back to you when I remember.
The problem with your being a 7w6 is that 7s are confident people who cover their flaws, and make a show of their successes and skills. I know this because I live with two, and practically a third. My mother, brother and best friend are all not just 7s, but 7w6s. You'd think they'd be less confident than the 7w8, because they have the confident 8 as their wing as opposed to the doubting 6, but you'd be wrong. They're all very confident people. Now, I've spoken to you before, and you've posted several undermining topics about yourself, and you don't exude an air of confidence to me.
Now, onto Joy. She's a bit of a mystery to me. From the pieces I can gather about her, she's certainly an interesting character. First off, I wouldn't be surprised if she was an Assertive. Secondly, I can see NT for her quite easily. I doubt she's an NF or ST, and SF is unlikely. I see no clear reason to doubt her being an LIE. Now, as for her being an 8, the fact that she's not that commanding or particularly dominating on the forum makes me doubt she is one.
On 5s looking like 8s, there's a passage in Helen Palmer's The Enneagram in Love and Work that basically talks about how an 8 can easily defy the typical 'gutsy' stereotype. Many reports have been made of 8s who like to spend hours alone in their room intellectualising and following pursuits which require one's head. They behave like 5s. However, the fundamental concern - to protect themselves and determine their own course in life - is there. It is not a desire to be capable. This is the 5's desire, not the 8's desire. To me, Expat gives the impression that he would much rather be capable than protective of himself. All LIEs do. To me, the SLE exudes more of a care for protection of themselves. They want to be at the top because they love power, and they love power because this guarentees their protection. Anyway, for a good example of this 8 that looks like a 5, look at me. I used to spend hours in my room, and I still do love to think and follow ideas. But it is not in order to be capable in the world. It's just a hobby. I enjoy it. A 5 might study socionics so that they can become more capable in the art of relationship handling. An 8 would study it because they enjoy it.
This doesn't mean 5s are limited to their inner world. They are actually often forced out of it, especially in the professional world. At the same time, EJs learn from the outside world. So do 5s. Where's the conflict?
Hey cool I am a LIE and 7 too.
ENTj ~*
Based on what arguments? How do you falsify the claim that you are more likely an 8w7?
The main argument for that claim is that type 7 is very clearly the group of EPs, or even more accurate the group of ENXps. Type 8 is slightly less clearly but even so rather clearly the group of leading Te types, at least that is obvious from Richard Rohr's book on the Enneagram, and it is also in line with most of the type descriptions we find on the Internet. And since she claims to be a LIE she is probably not a 7. If she really is a 7, she is not a LIE.
I don't know. If you read type 7 descriptions and all their planning orientation...there is nothing that strictly suggest that a 7 can only be a P type, as opposed to the very clear indication of 4 being a F type for example.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I haven't claimed that she is more likely an 8w7. I asked her for her arguments for HER claim that she is a 7 (given the premise that she is a LIE), and I have indicated that IF she is a LIE, THEN she is more likely an 8w7. Since I don't know anything else about her, I obviously cannot have an opinion on her most likely type(s) in general. Maybe she is none of those types.
Based on Richard Rohr's understanding of the Enneagram, these type correlations strongly suggest themselves:
Type 1: Ti leading. Typically rational type. IJ temperament rather than EJ. ISTj is the best fit. Maybe a possible fit with some other types too, for example ISFj, but that is not altogether clear.
Type 2: Fe leading. ESFj is the best fit.
Type 3: Se leading. ESTp is the best fit.
Type 4: Ni leading fits functions descriptions best, but INFx is not clearly ruled out.
Type 5: Te creative. INTp is the best fit. INTj is not clearly ruled out, however. The ISTp would have to be put in here or in type 9 -- tough choice.
Type 6: Fi leading. ISFj is the best fit.
Type 7: Ne leading. No clear preference for F or T.
Type 8: Te leading. ENTj is the best fit.
Type 9: Si leading. Very clear IP temperament. ISFp is without doubt the best fit.
I disagree. I think the likelihood that you'll find a Judging 7 is the same as finding a Thinking 4.
However, that's just in MBTT.
Are you talking about socionics or MBTT? In MBTT, perhaps, but in socionics SLE.
Of course I am talking about Socionics. But on the other hand it's the same in MBTT. For some obscure reason you seem to think that Te is different in Socionics and MBTT, but it's not. You have got it all wrong. Read Jung in order to see the similarities, that's my advice to you. You are totally on the wrong track at the moment.
Yeah I generally agree with those correlations except for type 3 probably, I'd say that it's just as likely to find a Fe type up there as 3w2.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
@Ezra
I don't understand the value of arguments like this:
You are simply taking for granted that the typing of Bill Gates as 5 is correct, just because someone typed him as 5? Or is that your typing? If so, based on which information? Especially taken into account the following:
I agree with what Salawa said with regard to this; honestly, this seems like a cop-out to me. Of course 5s - just like any introverts, or anyone really - can be "forced out of it". But the point is that LIEs, as EJs, do not need to be "forced out of it" in their usual state.
And are you saying, then, that Bill Gates "had to be forced out of his inner world" rather than having done it himself? Based on what evidence?
There's the conflict, to answer your question.
The further answer is that Bill Gates is LIE but not a 5. I think you're illustrating one of the blind spots of the enneagram, or of your understanding of it.
Maybe I should have made it clear that I don't want to suggest that any leading Ni type can be a 4. I think we agree that type 4 is an ethical type.
Do you see any problem with ESXps as 3s? Or do you see that as a natural fit?
Phaedrus, have you not read any of what Expat and I have been talking about? Socionics and MBTT have different spins on Jung's original functions (Te in MBTT is Se-infused and Se in MBTT does not emphasise the power play which is so prominent in socionics Se) so, logically, the functions will be different. Hence, you can be two different types. Obviously it's unlikely that you'd find someone who, for example, was both an INFP in MBTT and an LSE in socionics, simply because their characters are too opposed. But SLE and ENTJ, like in the case of me, makes perfect sense because of the deviations.
And, FTR, Myers was more faithful to Jung than Augusta was, so while there may be similarities, socionics will be undoubtedly different to Jung's original descriptions. And, also FTR, I have read Jung's description of Extraverted Sensing, and it is very much like Myers' version, and very little like Augusta's.
No, I made sure that I checked what he is cited as. I refuse to correlate without firm evidence. You simply can't do it. This is why I haven't typed Matt Damon - I don't know his Enneagram type. And I place a fair bit of faith in Enneagram and socionics correlations, because there are certain types which I could just never see as certain Enneagram types, such as an LSE 4w5, or an IEI 8w7, or an LII 2w3.
What if he is a 5 and not an LIE? What if I am wrong about 5s needing to be coaxed out of hiding to cooperate in the world? What if, because of this, he can be both a 5 and an LIE? After all, I know my best friend, an LII 5w6, has often taken risks and made moves in areas of his life which even I am cautious or lazy about. Surely this is evidence that, while rare, there is such a thing as a 5 who will be proactive. Anyway, the 5's desire is to be capable and competent. For this, you have to be proactive. 5s love applying their knowledge to the world, practically; in arguments and in practice. Otherwise they'd be nothing. How does this conflict with an EJ? Okay, there's a danger of the 5 becoming too cautious about entering the social arena, but don't Te leading people always make sure their knowledge is up to scratch before they debate a topic? Is this not heavily in line with the 5's way of being?I agree with what Salawa said with regard to this; honestly, this seems like a cop-out to me. Of course 5s - just like any introverts, or anyone really - can be "forced out of it". But the point is that LIEs, as EJs, do not need to be "forced out of it" in their usual state.
And are you saying, then, that Bill Gates "had to be forced out of his inner world" rather than having done it himself? Based on what evidence?
There's the conflict, to answer your question.
The further answer is that Bill Gates is LIE but not a 5. I think you're illustrating one of the blind spots of the enneagram, or of your understanding of it.
Anyway, if Bill Gates isn't a 5, what possibilities do you see? And please don't say 8w9, for the love of god. He is not an 8w9.
The way SLEs are correlated with Oldham's Confident style on the typesview page makes them look like 3s. Indeed, I think SxEs can easily be 3s, and this is often a common match. However, I think they're more likely to utilise Fe and have that as a leading function. It just seems to be many of their natural inclinations to do so.
1) The way you described 5s seems to contradict what I have read so far about them, which makes them clearly "thinkers who are introverted" as per Jung's Introverted Thinking type;
2) I think that everyone has a socionics type; I don't think that everyone fits well into one Enneatype. Call it "bias" if you must, that's how I see it.
3) Therefore, I think Bill Gates is LIE. I don't know which enneatype he would be, given the framework of the discussed above.
No. The idea is insane. If only you would calm down and take a fresh look at the basics without your theoretical glasses on, you would realize that.
It doesn't fit me. I am 7w6.
I am not aggressive like a 8 is and do not have their "heaviness." I am in the mental triad for sure not the instinct triad. I am more hyper and restless like the 7, always making plans, always needing things to do. I tend to be a bit scattered like the 7. I have a great many interests. I have a constant need to be happy and excited. The paths of integration and disentegration are like me. When I stressed I get very critical and into self-improving like 1, when I am at my best I become very focused and creative like 5.
Is this enough or do you want more?
ENTj ~*
Just out of curiosity, do people on Enneagram sites/forums demonstrate a better understanding of the Enneagram than here? Seeing how hard it is to figure out socionics, maybe the Enneagram is similarly difficult? In which case trying to find your Enneagram type could be a long and painful process like socionics often is. On one level you may see one type, on another -- another type. How do you determine what "really" drives you most of all?
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
It is interesting to consider and I have thought on this some. My view on Enneagram is that it is about what an individual's basic motive in life is. Such as for a 7 one can say it is "To be happy" or "To avoid pain." For an 8 it is "To be strong" or "To be independent." And then the basic motive becomes a theme of their life coloring much of what they do and it comes out in many different ways. For instance it becomes rooted in many of our defense mechanisms as well. Such as for 7s it is said they use "rationalization" and "reframing" a lot to try and mentally transform a negative situation into a positive one. They are very future-oriented too, always focusing on plans and goals and fantasies of what they are going to do. They cannot stand stillness in their minds because they are afraid of negative thoughts entering. So it is like they are always perpetually in motion attempting to stay ahead of any possible pain that could enter. Also there has been a connection made between Enneagram type and Object Relations (Karen Horney's work) as well. For example the 7 is said to be "cut off from the mother figure" and feeling at some level that they did not get enough of the nurturing they needed as children. Then in adult life there is always a fear of never getting enough to be happy and always wanting more. They have a hard time becoming content people.
I think if one can see these things in themselves then what Enneagram type they are becomes clear. The neat thing is that there is many different ways it can be deduced because Enneagram comes out in so many things about a person. There is a good page at www.9types.com with many type descriptions by different Enneagram authors. If you have not looked there yet then I think you would find it very informative. Many of them outline the essential features that make each type what it is. I reccommend the one by Keyes the most. So in deciding one's Enneagram type it is best to look for which set of essential features all converge as true for you. That seems to be the best way I think.
I have spent many years learning about Enneagram. I can probably answer many questions you have and offer insight if you'd like. Feel free to ask.
ENTj ~*
I am not satisfied yet. If the above is an accurate description of you, how do you know that you are an ENTj? And how do you explain the contradiction between the EP temperament of type 7 and the EJ temperament of the ENTj?
I do not see what is contradictory of being 7 and EJ. Both are extraverted, both focus on goals and make many plans. If you think all 7s just run around like wild cocaine maniacs all the time then you need to adjust your views. This seems to be the common stereotype.
Now if that is not your view I would like to hear what you say further.
ENTj ~*
I've browsed Enneagram sites in the past, but I'm frustrated that I can't tell where the descriptions are coming from, and I don't clearly identify with any of the types above the others. Are the types just based on common consensus? Or is there some overall theory behind it? Is this it? http://www.9types.com/writeup/Theory20.htm
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
You can get an introduction into its history even at the Wikipedia article.
I think that at least some of the types were strongly influenced by Jung's types - at least as to the understanding of their psychology:
4: a "less wacky" version of Jung's Introverted Intuitive type
5: pretty much as Jung's Introverted Thinking type
8: at least influenced by his Extraverted Thinking type
I think it was pretty much invented by those guys, Ichazo and Naranjo.
It even has +/- !
There's also the 'compulsive' category-building, only this time with groups of three instead of dichotomiesAh the fun.
I would have to say this time around that the 7 sounds closest, but it's not a perfectly neat fit. But then neither were socionic descriptions until I started looking at Model A and saw how all the relationships fit together.
It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.
But type 7 is very clearly described as a type with an EP temperament, and every ENTj has an EJ temperament, and it is impossible to have more than one of the four socionic temperaments. So far you have described yourself as a person with a likely EP temperament, so naturally I wonder how you can be sure that you are an ENTj. What are your main arguments for that claim? Why do you refuse to answer that question?
Fair enough.
Now, two questions, based on this. Addressed to all.
1. (Off-topic) Which do you think is more correspondent to the 8 - Se or Te, and why? (Long analyses welcome.)
2. (On-topic) Do you believe a 7 can be Te leading? Again, why/not?
I'm inclined to agree with you there. While I think some people find their Enneagram type much more easily than they do their socionics type, it would be ridiculous to assume that no one doesn't fit into an Enneagram type, because the evidence is there, in front of one's eyes: you. Salawa. And I'm sure there are more people who feel the same way.I think that everyone has a socionics type; I don't think that everyone fits well into one Enneatype. Call it "bias" if you must, that's how I see it.
6w5 is the next closest. He's not a 2, 4, 7 or 8. I find it highly unlikely that he's a 9. Since you think he couldn't be a 5, that leaves 1, 3 and 6.I don't know which enneatype he would be, given the framework of the discussed above.
Sometimes you know what someone isn't by looking at their behaviour. However, when there's a close call, only they can decide. You'd have to physically do the RHETI test with him.
What, and put my Phaedrus glasses on? No thanks.
Do you know what I find interesting, Phaedrus? The fact that you're 100% dogmatic. You're all hot air. You have no rationale for why I am incorrect, but that I should 'go back to the study chamber' and that I am 'simply incorrect'. You don't try to falsify any of my claims, you merely criticise my methods, or at least attempt to.
Expat, I find it extremely hard to see Phaedrus as my dual, or even as my activation partner.
You just have to meet and everything will be clear.
It's through self-study, Rick. Normally people take the RHETI test, which questions their beliefs, values, behaviour and thought-processes (depending on the quality of the test). I personally found it a lot easier and it took me far less time to determine that I was an 8 than the time, effort and reading it took me to determine that I was a Beta ST. People tend to struggle to find their type, but IMO it's actually as hard to find a basis for type in the Enneagram as it is in socionics. I think the problem is that the Enneagram is quite abstract, whereas socionics is relatively concrete. Identity is technically a Shame triad (2, 3 and 4) issue and yet it seems that 6s and 9s, and to some extent 3s, have most difficulty determining their type. The worst is when you get 6s who have no idea whatsoever of their type because they want to be certain types, and when they decide what they are, they want to be something else at the same time. Sometimes 9s identify with all of the types to some extent.
I think what people believe drives you in Enneagram circles is reflected in your behaviour. For example, an 8 is confident, decisive and forceful; they push the world. This is because a) they want to maintain control of their destiny in life (which is why I see the 8 as most like the SLE, who wants top spot every time) and b) they are afraid of being hurt, controlled or betrayed. A type's behaviour is essentially driven by the type's basic desires and fears. For a 5, their fear is of essentially being useless, so they will do everything in their power to avoid it. This is why a typical 5 is bookish; they're basically preparing themselves for the world and they want to learn about how to face it. Being able to apply one's knowledge to the world is greatly satisfying for a 5.
Why, do you think I'd get on well with him?
Reply With Quote
