Questions about enneagram types and wings

Quote:

---

Four With a 3 Wing
Fours with a 3 wing can sometimes seem like Sevens. May be outgoing, have a sense of humor and style. Prize being both creative and effective in the world. Both intuitive and ambitious; may have good imaginations, often talented. Some are colorful, fancy dressers, make a distinct impression. Self-knowledge combines well with social and organizational skills. When more entranced, often have a public/private split. Could conceal feelings in public then go home to loneliness. Or they could enjoy their work and be dissatisfied in love. Tendency towards melodrama and flamboyance; true feelings can often be hidden. Competitive, sneaky, aware of how they look. Some have bad taste. May be fickle in love, drawn to romantic images that they have projected onto others. Could have a dull spouse, then fantasize about glamorous strangers. Achievements can be tainted by jealousy, revenge, or a desire to prove the crowd wrong.

---

Bam.

http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/chwings.htm

SLuxx, tell me if you relate to the type 3 (probably with a 4 wing) and the sx/sp instinctual variant. This is my best guess.

Enneatype Three


Type Description

People of Enneatype Three need the admiration of others in order to feel worthy; indeed at a very deep and largely subconscious level, Threes feel as though they need to see themselves reflected in the eyes of others in order even to exist. At the very center of the type Three fixation then, is a fundamental confusion about the difference between appearance and reality, image and substance, who they are and who they are taken to be.

Threes are people who adopt an ideal of success and attempt to embody it. This ideal frequently comes from their parents, and many Threes unwittingly live out their parents' unlived lives. If the Three is less connected to the parents, or for some reason finds other influences more compelling, the ideal will be drawn from the broader culture. As modern western culture is pluralistic, there are many possible ideals from which the Three might choose. Whichever ideal is chosen however, it is something which, by its very nature, is approximated by just a few. Threes are therefore forced to compete.

Threes tend to pursue their chosen ideal with zest, determination and focus. They believe in their innate abilities and are optimistic about their prospects. They tend to be good networkers and know how to rise through the ranks. They know how to present themselves, are socially competent, often extroverted and sometimes charismatic. Many Threes subtly and even unconsciously alter their self-presentation to appeal to the particular person or audience with whom they are engaging. In the process of doing so, they sometimes lose touch with who they really are.

Threes frequently are successful, at least as defined by their chosen system of values. They tend to be doggedly determined and are not easily deterred by failure. Lance Armstrong, whose success has even managed to be inspirational, is a good case in point. But while Threes do tend to be “successful,” sometimes even extraordinarily so, they are often secretly afraid of being or becoming "losers." It is almost as though they were afraid of being “found out.” Some Threes actually self-destruct when they achieve overwhelming degrees of fame or fortune. It is as if they realize how disconnected they are from their grandiose image, how false and phony it all is, how poorly anyone really sees them, how alone they actually feel even in the company of those who treat them with adoration. Elvis Presley is a striking example of this phenomenon.

It is not surprising then that Threes can sometimes find intimacy difficult. Their need to be validated for their image often hides a deep sense of shame and confusion about who they really are. Having achieved success, Threes can begin to wonder whether they are truly loved for who they are, rather than for what they have achieved or how they appear. Threes tend to be large hearted, generous and likable, but they are often difficult to really know.

Threes get in trouble when they confuse true happiness, which depends on inner states, with the image of happiness that they so easily project. When Threes are out of touch with themselves, it is as if they had an inner checklist to determine the extent of their well being: good job – check, attractive spouse – check, beautiful children – check. Threes can sometimes manage to convince themselves that they are happy because they have achieved the external markers of happiness, such is their disconnect from their true selves. When this occurs, Threes ignore the inner promptings of their heart which tell them that something vital may well be missing. Beneath the façade, many Threes hide a sense of meaninglessness. They are prone to identity crises and are sometimes depressive, although they seldom allow this to show. The attainment of the image never quite satisfies, and the greater the disjunct between the Three's image and who they feel themselves to really be, the more likely the Three is to experience psychological disturbances of various kinds.

Traditionally, Threes are said to harbor the vice of “deceit.” This vice doesn’t necessarily refer to dishonesty in the conventional sense, and certainly many Threes are ethical in that sense of the term, although some, of course, do adopt lying as one means of achieving success. The central deception of the Three however, is that which the Three engages in by mistaking the image he or she projects, for the reality of an inner life, and for seducing others into making that same mistake.

There is an important sense in which the core fixation of enneatype Three is a part of the universal condition of all human beings, or at least of all who still identify with the ego rather than the essential self, with the images we project rather than the substantial beings we are meant to be or become - virtually all of us that is. The primary types of the Enneagram - Three, Six and Nine, are representative of core fixations at the heart of the human condition and are hence universal. It is the fate of enneatype Three to be forced to confront the question of the true nature of the self most directly and most intimately.

Healthy Threes manage to embody valuable ideal qualities without losing contact with their depths and they inspire and encourage others to live up to their own individual ideals. They are generous with their time and energy and are willing to help others actualize their potential. They take on leadership roles without any desire to dominate or enforce an abstract ideal; they lead from the heart. They have a healthy pragmatism; they enjoy the things of the earth and want others to share in them as well. When they become unhealthy however, Threes can turn into a “human doing.” They immerse themselves in activity in order to distract themselves from their growing sense of inner emptiness. Increasingly cut off from their depths, they become glib and superficial. As they descend into narcissism, they can become cold blooded and ruthless in pursuit of their goals. The once optimistic Three becomes cynical and nihilistic; unable to believe in themselves, they are unable to believe in others.

Threes with the Two wing are warmer and more people oriented than those with a Four wing. They are generous and expansive and usually have a large number of friends and acquaintances. Classic extroverts, they intuitively know how to connect with others at an emotional level; they tend to use this ability to further their personal and professional goals. Threes with the Four wing tend to focus their energy on projects rather than people, although they still have a fair amount of social energy. The introspective energy of the Four wing is difficult for the Three to integrate. Consequently, Threes with a Four wing sometimes attempt to escape it's pressure by way of workaholism. They tend to be more conflicted about matters relating to intimacy than Threes with a Two wing.

Type Exemplars

Many leaders have been Threes. A good case can be made for typing the biblical Moses as a Three, although not Charlton Heston, who’s an Eight.

Pericles was a Three.

The American presidents George Washington and Bill Clinton were Threes. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, former Mr. Universe, is a clear example of a Three who reinvented himself in mid-life when his earlier profession was no long a viable option for him. On the scene more recently, is Condoleeza Rice and the up and coming Barak Obama.

Authors Gail Godwin, Truman Capote and F. Scott Fitzgerald were Threes, with Fitzgerald portraying classic Three concerns in his novels. Andy Warhol was an artist whose work also strikingly demonstrates the type Three concern with the nature of image.

Newscasters are frequently Threes; such are Anderson Cooper, Diane Sawyer, Jane Pauley, Brian Williams and the recently deceased Peter Jennings. Also talk show host Oprah Winfrey.

Many entertainers have been Threes. In addition to the already cited Elvis, Whitney Huston and Jennifer Lopez come to mind, both of whom, like Elvis, suffered emotional crises subsequent to achieving great fame. Also, Madonna, Shania Twain, Paul McCartney and Sting. David Bowie is another, quite versatile and elegant in his presentation.

Ken Wilber is quite a good example of how an intellectual Enneatype Three can be mistyped as a Five. Wilber is far too comfortable with name dropping and self-promotion to be a Five however. The physicist Brian Greene and the late Carl Sagan are also examples of intellectual Threes.

Many actors are threes - Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt and Robe Lowe come to mind, but also Ben Kingsley and Jennifer Connelly.

Many famous athletes are Threes: Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, as well as baseball's Derek Jeter, Hideki Matsui and Alex Rodriguez...heck, half of the Yankee Baseball team are Threes, as is the overall Yankee persona.

Fictional examples include Hercules and Odysseus and Star Trek's Captain Kirk (as well as William Shatner who plays him).

Possible Mistypes

Threes and Ones are both oriented towards an ideal, detach from emotions under stress and can be workaholics. Typically, it is Threes who mistype or are mistyped as Ones. This is especially common when the Three has a Four wing and a strong self-preservational instinct. John Roberts, chief justice of the supreme court, and Jodie Foster are both Threes who could be mistyped as Ones. But Threes are much more comfortable with self-presentation and self-promotion than are Ones who often find these things to be difficult or impossible. Ones are seldom as acutely aware of the image they are projecting than are Threes.

Threes and Twos can mistype, especially if the wing is strong. But Threes tend to be more ambitious than the more other regarding Two and while Twos can be very competent, they have a much harder time putting their emotions on hold to get the job done; Threes can detach from their emotions more readily. Elvis Presley is a Three who is commonly mistyped as a Two because of his generosity and large hearted energy, but his most central problems centered around his concerns with image, and he had difficulties establishing truly authentic intimate relationships because of it.

Threes can mistype as Fours, again, especially if the wing is strong, but Fours are much more introspective and emotionally aware, even emotionally self-indulgent when unhealthy. As Threes become unhealthy, they increasingly detach from their inner states and become less emotionally aware. Both types can suffer from depression, but Threes much less so than Fours, and when they are feeling low, they tend to consider it a sign of weakness and try to work it off. Jackie Kennedy Onassis is a good example of a Three who is sometimes mistyped as a Four, because of her elegance and sometimes even mistyped as a Five, because of her detachment. Both traits can be accounted for by recognizing the fact that she was a Three.

As indicated above, intellectual Threes can mistype as Fives, although Fives recognize their self-consciousness and are unlikely to mistype as Threes. Threes have an exuberant self-confident belief in their own abilities that doesn't come naturally to Fives. They can much more readily take on a leadership role and tend to be more self-promotional then Fives.

Threes and Sixes can both be successful and image conscious, but Threes are far more self-confident and comfortable with self-promotion than Sixes. Sixes are more anxious than Threes and are not as optimistic about future prospects as are Threes.

Threes and Sevens are both outgoing and talented, but Threes generally have an exceptional amount of focus whereas Sevens tend to be scattered. Threes care more about status than Sevens who are far more concerned with enjoyment than are the more serious Threes.

Some Threes, like Eights, are dominating, and both Threes and Eights can be competitive, but Threes are far smoother than Eights who often enough adopt a manner reminiscent of a bull in a China shop. Threes are more concerned with appearance than Eights who sometimes even delight in confounding other's expectations. Some Eights will even deliberately accentuate their crudeness as if to prove that they are unconcerned with other's perceptions. Finally, Threes unlike Eights, are not concerned with domination as such but only as a means of achieving validation.


Threes and Nines can be mistaken if the Nine is unusually successful or the Three unusually depressed. Threes have trouble with authenticity however, whereas Nines have difficulty adopting social poses. Threes are much more self-confident than Nines, who tend to underestimate their own abilities.

Sexual/Self-pres

This subtype can appear almost Four-like. They can be dramatic and appear introspective, especially with the Four wing. There is an on and off quality to these Threes. They can be very emotional and then become very business like. It’s not uncommon to find this subtype in the arts, especially as actors, singers or performers. The outward sexual energy coupled with the secondary self-pres energy can cause these Threes to focus on projecting an image of themselves to the world. They will seek validation in the area of their persona. This type especially wrestles with the authenticity of the persona/image they create. On the one hand, the image protects the real self, but at the same time they hate the image they project. This subtype is likely to be in a constant state of flux when it comes to the image they project and for this reason, they run the risk of burn-out and disillusionment. They are more prone to depression than the other subtypes.

When healthier, these Threes begin to trust their intimate relationships, and begin to disentangle the real self from the flux of partial identities they create. They learn that being vulnerable is necessary if they are to get what they really want, which is to reveal the real self and trust that they are lovable even with their flaws.

Yeah, we've decided on EIDB that she's a 4w3.

Now to move onto the next person. Anyone else got trouble with finding their type?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Yeah, we've decided on EIDB that she's a 4w3.

Now to move onto the next person. Anyone else got trouble with finding their type?

---

EIBD?

And for the record, your typings thus far seem a bit off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

EIBD?

---

Enneagram Institute Discussion Board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

And for the record, your typings thus far seem a bit off.

---

To what typing are you referring specifically?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

EIBD?

---

Enneagram Institute Discussion Board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

And for the record, your typings thus far seem a bit off.

---

To what typing are you referring to specifically?

---

SL is not a type 4. I know the type very well and if anything, she'd irk most 4s. She may have a 4 wing though.

Thunder is very likely 6w5, yet you claimed that she gave no suggestion of being type 6. Read a little deeper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

SL is not a type 4. I know the type very well and if anything, she'd irk most 4s. She may have a 4 wing though.

---

Perhaps you know 4 well, but not SL. No one would dispute that this is the writing of a 4:

And for FUCK's sake, the stupid bitch just deleted her post: "Edited for embarrassment."

Apologies for not being able to come up with the evidence, RTR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

Thunder is very likely 6w5, yet you claimed that she gave no suggestion of being type 6. ! Read a little deeper.

---

No. You tell me why you think she is a 6w5. And I want no 'I just know, kay?' bullshit. I want the facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves.

---

That is bullshit. It is projection. I have time for people who argue their points, not for people who claim that I am unwilling to listen to them without providing me with something to listen to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

and i never said "i just know, kay?"

---

Neither did I claim you did so. I implied that as an ILI you are likely to conjure up some intuitive answer by which I would not be impressed or convinced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

maybe later. i'm off to work.

---

This shows more of an unwillingness to argue because you have absolutely no case whatsoever as opposed to a dedication to something that will take a long time to explain, for which you apparently have no time to do so.

And how weak of you to not stick by your word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves.

---

That is bullshit. It is projection. I have time for people who argue their points, not for people who claim that I am unwilling to listen to them without providing me with something to listen to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

and i never said "i just know, kay?"

---

Neither did I claim you did so. I implied that as an ILI you are likely to conjure up some intuitive answer by which I would not be impressed or convinced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

maybe later. i'm off to work.

---

This shows more of an unwillingness to argue because you have absolutely no case whatsoever as opposed to a dedication to something that will take a long time to explain, for which you apparently have no time to do so.

And how weak of you to not stick by your word.

---

Which word was that? I said "Maybe later," suggesting that I would be willing to provide a detailed argument when I have the time.

And, for FUCK's sake, I deleted my post.

Lol, someone's antagonistic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

Which word was that?

---

The post you deleted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

I said "Maybe later," suggesting that I would be willing to provide a detailed argument when I have the time.

---

In that case, you contradicted yourself:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

And, for FUCK's sake, I deleted my post.

---

You did. Any reason for it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

Which word was that?

---

The post you deleted.

---

i think we both know that's not what you meant by my "word." you imply i had made a promise to do something and then failed to follow through.

[quote]
[quote="reyn_til_runa"]I said "Maybe later," suggesting that I would be willing to provide a detailed argument when I have the time.
In that case, you contradicted yourself:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves.

---

there is no contradiction:

"i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves."

"maybe later. i'm off to work."

first of all, i never actually said that you are the person who only hears himself. secondly, the implication is that it is an issue of time and that maybe later, when i am finished working, i will have time to argue.

you should read more carefully before you accuse me of contradicting myself.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

And, for FUCK's sake, I deleted my post.

---

You did. Any reason for it?

---

well, actually it was because you had changed your post while i was responding so, out of courtesy, i replied to your revised post and deleted the former.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

i think we both know that's not what you meant by my "word."

---

In all honesty, runa, you're mistaken. That's exactly what I meant by 'word'. I have no evidence for this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

you imply i had made a promise to do something and then failed to follow through.

---

So why would I use it against you? It would be illogical and meaningless. Come on, I'm ESTp, you should know that if my true aim was to insult you, I would find the most horrific thing about you and take you down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

first of all, i never actually said that you are the person who only hears himself.

---

Okay, if that is so, why, when I wrote:

Quote:

---

No. You tell me why you think she is a 6w5. And I want no 'I just know, kay?' bullshit. I want the facts.

---

did you proceed to write:

Quote:

---

i don't waste my arguments on people who can only hear themselves.

---

? Naturally, I had no choice but to use my logic to deduce that you were answering me, especially considering you actually quoted me and wrote the above quote of yours underneath this quote of mine. Either you were contradicting yourself, or you were being illogical. Would you rather be a poor arguer or have an ineptitude concerning logic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

secondly, the implication is that it is an issue of time and that maybe later, when i am finished working, i will have time to argue.

---

So why did you even reply with the above? Surely if it was only a matter of time,

Quote:

---

maybe later. i'm off to work.

---

would have sufficed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reyn_til_runa

you should read more carefully before you accuse me of contradicting myself.

---

I am perfectly adept at reading, thankyou. Please take the time to work on your own skills of analysis.

Quote:

---

well, actually it was because you had changed your post while i was responding so, out of courtesy, i replied to your revised post and deleted the former.

---

I changed a single word, yes. Thank you for making the effort to appear corteous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Yeah, we've decided on EIDB that she's a 4w3.

Now to move onto the next person. Anyone else got trouble with finding their type?

---

Hi there, I don't want to know exactly my type, but I want to ask u: Can you explain why 3 and 7 are so similar- and why people tend to mistype them?. I read about scarlettlux and her enneagram type. My first though was 3w4-4w3. But after re-read all your argument, I guess that 7 would be fine too. I don't know what exactly happend after that, I came here and see that she *finally* is 4w3 (something about edited post? on enneagram board?), but it's seems that you get really hard to identify her type for first instance.
This types looks somehow different, but still confuse to me.
Glad u would help.


(about my type? I dunno, Im about 3-4-6-7-8-9-4--65-525-4-4-7-)

3s are mistyped with 7s because they can both charm people. But 7s do it to escape pain or get pleasure, whereas 3s do it to boost their ego/image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

There's not a chance in hell that there could be an ENTp 8 in socionics terms though. Far too avoidant of conflict. Same applies to INTjs.

---

Bull :)

Who the hell are you to talk? You think you're an 8w3, apparently! :lol: :lol:

Read: ENTps avoid conflict, 8s don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimbean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

There's not a chance in hell that there could be an ENTp 8 in socionics terms though. Far too avoidant of conflict. Same applies to INTjs.

---

Bull :)

---

agree with jimbean. entp's most assuredly do not avoid conflict. heh.

8w3???? ROFL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by normal

8w3???? ROFL

---

:o Thats it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Who the hell are you to talk? You think you're an 8w3, apparently! :lol: :lol:

Read: ENTps avoid conflict, 8s don't.

---

Please elaborate. Because as far as I know, enneagram and socionics are two different things.

Don't get me wrong, but you're actually wrong with it. You could be 8w7-8w9, but NOT 8w3.
Maybe you are between 8 and 3 (And you don't know how to put it on), But you can't mix wings from others types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by normal

Don't get me wrong, but you're actually wrong with it. You could be 8w7-8w9, but NOT 8w3.
Maybe you are between 8 and 3 (And you don't know how to put it on), But you can't mix wings from others types.

---

in other words wings are only supposed to be +/- 1 from you're ennegram type.

oh shit, disregard it then.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Since when do ENTps avoid conflict? Hardly.

---

no shit... (see my sig :) )

ENTp's only avoid certain kinds of conflict...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khamelion

ENTp's only avoid certain kinds of conflict...

---

What kind of conflict?

I think the real problem is that ILEs have trouble knowing which conflicts to avoid and which to take on.

::EDIT::

(This is what happens when you stay up too late)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

agree with jimbean. entp's most assuredly do not avoid conflict. heh.

---

Okay, you got me.

So, how could I know if I was ENTp?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimbean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Who the hell are you to talk? You think you're an 8w3, apparently! :lol: :lol:

Read: ENTps avoid conflict, 8s don't.

---

Please elaborate. Because as far as I know, enneagram and socionics are two different things.

---

Yes, they are. But Enneagram is a personality system, as is socionics. You can't say 'I am an ENTj who doesn't experience doubt or hesitation' just so you fit in with 8. It's facts. It's got nothing to do with the fact that they are different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

You can't say 'I am an ENTj who doesn't experience doubt or hesitation' just so you fit in with 8. It's facts. It's got nothing to do with the fact that they are different.

---

Everyone experiences doubt and hesitation. What differs is their attitudes towards it and what they ultimately do in order to deal with it. Don't go making a blanket statement that every 8 *always* knows exactly what decision to make in every situation, just so that you can have an absolute standard.

It is NOT a fact -- it is YOUR perception of the qualities this type. Furthermore, your opinion is highly subjective, since you strongly identify yourself with this type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aka-kitsune

Everyone experiences doubt and hesitation. What differs is their attitudes towards it and what they ultimately do in order to deal with it. Don't go making a blanket statement that every 8 *always* knows exactly what decision to make in every situation, just so that you can have an absolute standard.

---

A-K, what you say is true. But if you claim that someone is an 8, and that same someone rarely shows the skill of decisiveness, it would be foolish to do so. 8s are by definition decisive and confident. Yes, of course they will experience indecisiveness and self-doubting feelings, but this is so rare and so private that one who reveals it openly could never be an 8.

Quote:

---

It is NOT a fact -- it is YOUR perception of the qualities this type.

---

But every theory has factual basis, otherwise it isn't worth studying. With the Enneagram, for example, every type has certain unique characteristics that define that type. If you take away one of these, you take away a part of that type. Not everything is laid down precisely, but there are certain observable phenomena that are fact. With socionics, if you're saying that it's my perception, does that give me the right to argue that the SLE's first function doesn't always mean that they are confident peoplel that they can often experience doubt and feel inferior to others? No, of course it doesn't. If I have misunderstood something here, please, explain to me in detail, what the fuck the ENTj's 6th function is all about?

Quote:

---

Furthermore, your opinion is highly subjective, since you strongly identify yourself with this type.

---

I identify myself with both Oldham's interpretation of ENTj and with the MBTI and Keirsey definitions of ENTJ, much more than I do with LIE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

agree with jimbean. entp's most assuredly do not avoid conflict. heh.

---

Okay, you got me.

So, how could I know if I was ENTp?

---

hmmmm. you're still struggling with this? how come?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

A-K, what you say is true. But if you claim that someone is an 8, and that same someone rarely shows the skill of decisiveness, it would be foolish to do so.

---

That was not my assertion.

Quote:

---

8s are by definition decisive and confident. Yes, of course they will experience indecisiveness and self-doubting feelings, but this is so rare and so private that one who reveals it openly could never be an 8.

---

Enneagram, as it is understood in its current format, is posited as a tool for self-knowledge and growth. If you conveniently overlook this in your attempt to identify with a static type, you miss the point of the system. The reason I found it interesting that you don't bother to understand type 2, your integration point, is that indicates you aren't interested in "growing" according to the enneagram model. You'd prefer to just stop at the point of identification.

Yes, typical/average 8s, when they experience indecisiveness and self-doubt, do not reveal this openly. However, the integration line of 8->2 indicates that the goal of growth for an 8 is to LEARN how to be more open with feelings and to admit self-doubt rather than seeing these as forms of weakness. The strength of type 2 is the ability to disclose freely and gain strength and interpersonal bonds from this activity. Interdependence. That's one of the lessons for Type 8.

Quote:

---

But every theory has factual basis, otherwise it isn't worth studying. With the Enneagram, for example, every type has certain unique characteristics that define that type. If you take away one of these, you take away a part of that type.

---

Characteristics that are identifiable in a particular mode of behavior and reaction to stimuli. Present to a larger degree. Not really "unique" for one type.

Quote:

---

Not everything is laid down precisely, but there are certain observable phenomena that are fact. With socionics, if you're saying that it's my perception, does that give me the right to argue that the SLE's first function doesn't always mean that they are confident peoplel that they can often experience doubt and feel inferior to others? No, of course it doesn't. If I have misunderstood something here, please, explain to me in detail, what the fuck the ENTj's 6th function is all about

---

?

I'm not exactly sure why you always seem to come back to an "all or nothing" proposition. I tend to believe that every personality model has a bit of give naturally built-in for the variability of individual personality in reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

agree with jimbean. entp's most assuredly do not avoid conflict. heh.

---

Okay, you got me.

So, how could I know if I was ENTp?

---

hmmmm. you're still struggling with this? how come?

---

Not struggling. Thinking about.

Because I am not sufficient in my knowledge of socionics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aka-kitsune

That was not my assertion.

---

And I did not claim that it was. I gave an example of a plausible mistake one may make when attempting to type someone.

Quote:

---

Enneagram, as it is understood in its current format, is posited as a tool for self-knowledge and growth. If you conveniently overlook this in your attempt to identify with a static type, you miss the point of the system. The reason I found it interesting that you don't bother to understand type 2, your integration point, is that indicates you aren't interested in "growing" according to the enneagram model. You'd prefer to just stop at the point of identification.

Yes, typical/average 8s, when they experience indecisiveness and self-doubt, do not reveal this openly. However, the integration line of 8->2 indicates that the goal of growth for an 8 is to LEARN how to be more open with feelings and to admit self-doubt rather than seeing these as forms of weakness. The strength of type 2 is the ability to disclose freely and gain strength and interpersonal bonds from this activity. Interdependence. That's one of the lessons for Type 8.

---

In many ways you're right. In many ways a lot of the people on this forum do exactly as you say - they stop at the point of identification. I put this down to their superficial interest in it; they are much more concerned with socionics.

But there is something that must be addressed. I'm not concerned with 2 because the goal of 8 is to become healthy, not become a 2. When 8s are healthy, they will show some positive characteristics of the 2, giving the appearance of a healthy 2. But they are not 2s. 2s are a mixture of what the 8 has potential to become and of what the 2 has potential to be when unhealthy or average. What you have to understand is that I feel all that is necessary to grow and develop are suggestions made my people like R&H e.g. self-restraint, generosity, moderation, development of trust etc. I don't feel that it is important to study 2 in depth, because they are a different type that I am not interested in. Understand?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

But every theory has factual basis, otherwise it isn't worth studying. With the Enneagram, for example, every type has certain unique characteristics that define that type. If you take away one of these, you take away a part of that type.

---

Characteristics that are identifiable in a particular mode of behavior and reaction to stimuli. Present to a larger degree. Not really "unique" for one type.

---

They are, A-K. A 5 does not have an almost insatiable lust as the 8 does. A 7's way of being is not the same as a 4's way of being. Every type reacts differently to different stimuli; that's why there are 9 types and not 4 or 5. Some can mirror other types' natural behaviour or can look similar, but they are never the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

But there is something that must be addressed. I'm not concerned with 2 because the goal of 8 is to become healthy, not become a 2. When 8s are healthy, they will show some positive characteristics of the 2, giving the appearance of a healthy 2. But they are not 2s. 2s are a mixture of what the 8 has potential to become and of what the 2 has potential to be when unhealthy or average. What you have to understand is that I feel all that is necessary to grow and develop are suggestions made my people like R&H e.g. self-restraint, generosity, moderation, development of trust etc. I don't feel that it is important to study 2 in depth, because they are a different type that I am not interested in. Understand?

---

I see. You think it's adequate to just infer growth and development for type 8 based on your understanding of descriptions of healthy 8s. No necessity in actually venturing into foreign territory when just looking over the fence is sufficient.

Quote:

---

They are, A-K. A 5 does not have an almost insatiable lust as the 8 does. A 7's way of being is not the same as a 4's way of being. Every type reacts differently to different stimuli; that's why there are 9 types and not 4 or 5. Some can mirror other types' natural behaviour or can look similar, but they are never the same.

---

Seems like you're just emphasizing my point here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ezra

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diamond8

agree with jimbean. entp's most assuredly do not avoid conflict. heh.

---

Okay, you got me.

So, how could I know if I was ENTp?

---

hmmmm. you're still struggling with this? how come?

---

Not struggling. Thinking about.

Because I am not sufficient in my knowledge of socionics.

---

know thyself. if you built it he will come, lol, :wink: