aestrivex's enneagram type

[normal]

I thought that, until you really think about it. Think of another type that could possibly be an ILI save 5. 1s, 3s and 8s are NEVER IPs. 2s, 4s and 9s are NOT logical types. And an ILI 6 or 7? I think not.

i could easily see ILIs as 4s or 6s, and possibly 7 or 8. you take these correlations far too literally.

ILI AS 7 OR 8? NO CHANCE.

ILI as a 7 is a good chance. Not much as a 4 or 5, but still a possibility.

[Ezra]

Every 5 is a logical type.

Not necessarily. It is quite common for 5s to be ethical types.

Which type(s)? Can you give one or two examples?

What do you mean?

It's almost impossible for me to imagine any ethical types as a 5. That's why I want to see if you can change my mind. I strongly believe that only a logical type can be a 5. If I am wrong I want to know how that can be. I want to hear your arguments and see at least one example of an ethical type that is also a 5. (For reasons that I have explained elsewhere, snegledmaca is not a good candidate.)

I'm afraid I can't provide you with any members of this forum or RL examples. I can, however, direct you to this site. If you look at the bottom chart, you will see that the author believes that INFP types as 5s are "quite common". This is where I am getting my information from. However, it is not infallible, and thus you may well be right.

Also, Phaedrus, on the side, you do agree that 5s can be LIIs, don't you?

I may imagine the possibility of a 5 being a feeler, but I would quickly conclude that:

1)The description of type 5 does not encompass any quality of feeling types
2)I have never known a feeling type to be a type 5

Based on this, I can understand where you're coming from.

ILI as a 7 is a good chance. Not much as a 4 or 5, but still a possibility.

Actually, yes, I'll reconsider what I said. I think it is. But most certainly not 8.

[aestrivex]

i'm really getting sick of this shit.


your arguments are "you could not be a 7 because ILIs by definition are not 7s." this is such total bullshit and i really can't tolerate hearing any more of it.


i might make a new thread about my enneagram type at some point in the future, which should be kept to relevant details. ezra/phaedrus/FDG: please stay away from it.

[Phaedrus]

I'm afraid I can't provide you with any members of this forum or RL examples. I can, however, direct you to this site. If you look at the bottom chart, you will see that the author believes that INFP types as 5s are "quite common". This is where I am getting my information from. However, it is not infallible, and thus you may well be right.

If you look at the top of that site you will see this completely false statement being made:

Special Note: Please remember that any Myers-Brigg type can correspond with any Enneagram type.

I have seen that site before, and you cannot take anything for granted there. It is an example of the fact that many Enneagram theorists don't seem to understand their own theory.

Also, Phaedrus, on the side, you do agree that 5s can be LIIs, don't you?

Based on the type descriptions, yes probably. But the ILI is a more typical representative of a 5 in most cases.

[Expat]

I do think 5 is generally the type most likely for ILI, but I wouldn't say that a 6w5 can't be an ILI, althought I find it more likely that a 6w5 would be closer to an ethical subtype ESI, the more bookish sort.

It all depends on what bits of the enneagram you give weight to. You have the wings, the stackings, the levels of health, and the arrows. In my own case, looking at everything, I think that 8w9 sx/sp or sp/sx, with a strong arrow to 5, makes the most sense within the enneagram (although not nearly as much sense as LIE in socionics). But when we met in Manchester, Ezra argued that he didn't see me as any member of the "gut triad", but of the "head triad", which means 5, 6 and 7 -- well okay, then 6w5 might make sense, but I really don't see myself ever disintegrating into a 3, or falling down in the levels of health like a 6.

So for niffweed, if the choices are between 6w5 and 5w6, perhaps it's better to look at all this other stuff, the arrows etc, and see if it makes sense -- but in his case, I can't possibly imagine him with any arrow to 3, while arrows to 7 and 8 make much more sense.

Therefore, in my opinion, 5w6 >>>> 6w5.

[Ezra]

I do think 5 is generally the type most likely for ILI, but I wouldn't say that a 6w5 can't be an ILI, althought I find it more likely that a 6w5 would be closer to an ethical subtype ESI, the more bookish sort.

It all depends on what bits of the enneagram you give weight to. You have the wings, the stackings, the levels of health, and the arrows. In my own case, looking at everything, I think that 8w9 sx/sp or sp/sx, with a strong arrow to 5, makes the most sense within the enneagram (although not nearly as much sense as LIE in socionics). But when we met in Manchester, Ezra argued that he didn't see me as any member of the "gut triad", but of the "head triad", which means 5, 6 and 7 -- well okay, then 6w5 might make sense, but I really don't see myself ever disintegrating into a 3, or falling down in the levels of health like a 6.

So for niffweed, if the choices are between 6w5 and 5w6, perhaps it's better to look at all this other stuff, the arrows etc, and see if it makes sense -- but in his case, I can't possibly imagine him with any arrow to 3, while arrows to 7 and 8 make much more sense.

Therefore, in my opinion, 5w6 >>>> 6w5.

I consider everything in the Enneagram, but that which I give least weight to is levels of health. I probably get this scepticism from my father, who also disagrees with the levels of health. However, I think stacking and wing has a big influence, so I consider that. (Dis)Integration I'm unsure about. I see a lot of 5 in me, and very little 2 in me.

[aestrivex]

can somebody explain this arrow stuff to me? i know that it revolves around the sequences 369369369... and 142857142857....

but i've only heard it associated with levels of stress, in that for example an E5 integrates to 8 and disintegrates to 7 (sorry for butchering any terminology that may exist). i'm really not sure what to make of the whole stress levels thing, and before expat's post i was not aware that there was considered to be some more extensive connection between types with arrows (is there?).


also, @ expat, would you say that i'm 5w6 > 6w5 solely on the basis of arrows to 7,8 > 3,9? or do you have some other justification?

[aka-kitsune]

can somebody explain this arrow stuff to me? i know that it revolves around the sequences 369369369... and 142857142857....

but i've only heard it associated with levels of stress, in that for example an E5 integrates to 8 and disintegrates to 7 (sorry for butchering any terminology that may exist). i'm really not sure what to make of the whole stress levels thing, and before expat's post i was not aware that there was considered to be some more extensive connection between types with arrows (is there?).

Stress levels and integration/disintegration are the keys to accessing arrows in enneagram. Enneagram theory posits that E5 tends to be a "head" type/thinker, but less practical about applying ideas. Accessing the line to E8 provides foundation and realization, because E8 is a "gut" type, a doer who applies knowledge, rather than simply getting caught in endless theorizing. E5 is also normally very stable, not prone to anxiety, except when stressed, they access E7, going further into thinking (E7 is another "head" type), often becoming fascinated by endless options/concepts available, jumping from one thought to another without grounding any of them in reality.

Similar process of analysis may be applied to E6 and its lines to E3 and E9.

also, @ expat, would you say that i'm 5w6 > 6w5 solely on the basis of arrows to 7,8 > 3,9? or do you have some other justification?

There are also the "triads" that the 9 types may be broken down into, including instinctive/feeling/thinking, Hornevian groups (assertive/compliant/withdrawn) and harmonic groups (positive outlook, competency, reactive). These are also helpful to consider in determining type.

I know this is addressed to expat, but I'd also say the consideration of "reactive" type (6) vs. "competency" (5) is also another shade of differentiation.

[aestrivex]

can somebody explain this arrow stuff to me? i know that it revolves around the sequences 369369369... and 142857142857....

but i've only heard it associated with levels of stress, in that for example an E5 integrates to 8 and disintegrates to 7 (sorry for butchering any terminology that may exist). i'm really not sure what to make of the whole stress levels thing, and before expat's post i was not aware that there was considered to be some more extensive connection between types with arrows (is there?).

Stress levels and integration/disintegration are the keys to accessing arrows in enneagram. Enneagram theory posits that E5 tends to be a "head" type/thinker, but less practical about applying ideas. Accessing the line to E8 provides foundation and realization, because E8 is a "gut" type, a doer who applies knowledge, rather than simply getting caught in endless theorizing. E5 is also normally very stable, not prone to anxiety, except when stressed, they access E7, going further into thinking (E7 is another "head" type), often becoming fascinated by endless options/concepts available, jumping from one thought to another without grounding any of them in reality.

Similar process of analysis may be applied to E6 and its lines to E3 and E9.

im aware of all of this, but what does all of this really mean? what does a stress level and integration/disintegration actually represent within an individual? is the goal of acting like an 8 and applying one's knowledge something that every 5 should instinctually strive for? why, exactly, is it better for a 5 to go out and apply his ideas like an 8 rather than jump around between concepts like a 7? and how is this related to how "healthy" or "stressed" an individual is?

also, @ expat, would you say that i'm 5w6 > 6w5 solely on the basis of arrows to 7,8 > 3,9? or do you have some other justification?

There are also the "triads" that the 9 types may be broken down into, including instinctive/feeling/thinking, Hornevian groups (assertive/compliant/withdrawn) and harmonic groups (positive outlook, competency, reactive). These are also helpful to consider in determining type.

I know this is addressed to expat, but I'd also say the consideration of "reactive" type (6) vs. "competency" (5) is also another shade of differentiation.

[/quote]

besides the head/heart/gut triad, i never heard of these. care to explain what the other two differentiations are supposed to be?

[Ezra]

There are quite a few triad theories.

The information on the net on the Hornevian triads are very limited, but it is worth knowing of. I can't really direct you to the Reactive, Competent and whatever triads, because I don't know them. But I can outline the Hornevian triads for you.

There are three triads - Assertive triad (3, 7 and 8), Compliant triad (1, 2 an 6) and the Withdrawn triad (4, 5 and 9).

Assertives move against people. When Assertives walk into a room, they subconsciously think "now I am here, things will begin" and "I am the life of the party". 3s will want to entertain and get attention for applause. 7s will inject energy into the room and shake it up. 8s will hit it like a bomb.

Compliants move towards people. When Compliants walk into a room, they subconsciously think "I am better than these people". 1s will think that it is disorganised and will want to sort it out. 2s will think that people need them in some way. 6s will make connections with people they know and may develop an 'us and them' mentality.

Withdrawns move away from people. When Withdrawns walk into a room, their minds are elsewhere. They may have one eye on the room, but in reality they are thinking about other things. 4s may have exaggerated perceptions of those they are talking to, or think exotically about something. 5s will probably go off and read a book in the corner. 9s may smile and nod, but they will be thinking about that lovely dinner they just had, or the fact that they can have a nice bath when they get home.

[Expat]

also, @ expat, would you say that i'm 5w6 > 6w5 solely on the basis of arrows to 7,8 > 3,9? or do you have some other justification?

That would be my main reason, yes. If there is anything to arrows, my understanding is that a 6, in a situation of feeling insecure about specific relationships or simply about things generally, will tend to adopt a 3-like stance of seeking admiration from other people generally as a sort of compensation. From what I perceive of you, I can't see you ever reacting like that, unless I got you totally wrong.

[aestrivex]

this i rather tenuously declare in order to provoke some discussion. people who understand enneagram: bickering may commence.


general questions:

what does 5 sx/so look like?
how does 5 sx/so differ from 5 sx/sp?
what do last sp and last so signify in a 5?

how accurate a picture do the variant descriptions at esper's site convey?
how accurate are those at oceanmoonshine?
how about the non-type specific stacking descriptions at oceanmoonshine? are these remotely useful without considering the type in question? ie can something like the so/sx or sx/so descriptions here be remotely extrapolated to be relevant to E5?



for more background information about why i am confused about my enneagram variant, see this thread. i have edited the permissions so that you can read threads in my personal forum, but unless you are logged in to the workshop, you will not be able to access it from the board index.

[Ezra]

As someone who knows fuck all about subtypes in each specific type, except the Eight to some extent and, very limitedly, the Six, I can't answer specifically any of those questions. To be honest, I don't think anyone on this site knows what they're talking about really when it comes to the Enneagram except Isha. She is more versed than I in more types.

What I can do is give some advice. (To be honest, I think your motivation for starting this thread was because you want to know what subtype you are, so I'll help you in that aspect.) I personally believe that the only way to determine one's subtype is to look at Riso & Hudson's and Palmer's definitions (which you'll find in The Wisdom of the Enneagram and The Enneagram in Love & Work respectively) of the subtypes, and find out which you're best at (hence the first instinct in your so-called "stacking"), and which you're worst at (hence giving you your middle stacking through process of elimination). R&H offer an IVQ (Instinctual Variant Questionnaire/Quiz (can't remember which)) at the Enneagram Institute official site, for $8 I think it is (I once tried to purchase it, but due to credit card limitations (a) I own a debit card and b) I live in the UK), I couldn't. Technically though, if you're independently minded enough, reading the descriptions will suffice. Plus, it's more fun to research yourself than having someone tell you what you are. After all, if you know the inner dynamics of the test, it's actually an inferior method, because it's more rigid than applying personal research.

The oceanmoonshine descriptions of the subtypes are very interesting, but how the hell they got them, I don't know (maybe this is partly why I'm dubious). I have actually praised them for some good descriptions, however. Basically though, what you've got to do is apply the same method to them as you do socionics descriptions when analysing them (although it's harder because the Enneagram is more esoteric than the Enneagram). If it makes sense WRT the type in its entirety, then it is worth trusting. If you don't know why they've included something when you're taking it in conjunction with the whole type, don't trust it. If it says "these people go to bed at 9pm every night", actively think "why does it say this? How does this have bearing on the person's type?" If if all fits, everything's okay; it's worth trusting. If not, throw it out. Finally on subtypes, I think you should ignore the non-specific OM subtype descriptions. I don't even understand why they were included, and especially why they were described to the length they were.

The wing descriptions at Esper's site are by a guy called Tom Condon. I have a book with them in, and they are exactly the same as they are in that book; word for word. They're quite good, and they do offer a nice - different to R&H's - interpretation of each type's wings. What they essentially let you do is look at the fundamentals of each type if you take them in conjunction with R&H's descriptions (which you can only really find in their books). I don't think Palmer has done wing descriptions. Personally, I prefer R&H's wing descriptions, simply because a) I'm more accustomed to them than Condon's and b) they're more detailed. I think theirs and Condon's make equal sense.

Hope that helps. Isha, please join in if you're still here. I want to know your opinions on these descriptions/sites/etc..

[machintruc]

Niff is an Intimate Four.

[Ezra]

Shut the fuck up you useless piece of shit.

[machintruc]

Shut the fuck up you useless piece of shit.

Niff is still -+-

[aestrivex]

Niff is still -+-

i actually think i am -+-. fortunately i haven't seen you stick to these enneagram/phi correlations with quite a level of phaedrusness.

however, if you think that an E5 -+- is not possible, then please follow ezra's astute advice.

[Gilly]

Kioshi I personally think you are a 4w5 sx/sp. For some reason I have a very clear impression of you in this sense.

Niff, IMO you are 5w4 sp/sx or sx/sp. I think so last makes sense for you.

[aestrivex]

I think so last makes sense for you.

why, considering the context of type 5?

[aestrivex]

also, what the hell is an enneagram trifix?

[misutii]

I have no idea, where did you hear about this?

[misutii]

my brain's not working well enough to even begin to comprehend this today

[Ezra]

Yeah, jxrtes has pretty much outlined it well enough.

You're probably 5-3-8, niff. Like me! I am 8-3-5!

[aestrivex]

why?

[aestrivex]

why what?

how did you come up with 5-8-3 or 5-8-4?

what do those mean? in what way am i an 8 or a 3 in the context of what those mean for this trifix?

[aestrivex]

ok this is my question.

what do the other trifixes refer to? is it simply supposed to be the one that i identify with most closely or exhibit the most traits from? or is there something slightly more comprehensive as to what it actually means to be a 8-3 as secondary parts of the trifix? essentially, show me why what the point is and why this is a useful method of classification. because i can give you a list of things about 8,3,4 that might make sense for me, but i'm clearly none of those types. if this were simply a task of "identify characteristics of other etypes that you identify with" i'd start with 4 and 6.

[aestrivex]

i know all of that already.

[aestrivex]

i've decided i'm a seven. i fear pain and boredom and am always looking for new fillips and vicissitudes to avert this adverse sense of tribulation. this type of amerceable decampment is anathema to the vicarious constitution which paradigmatically subsumes the quintessential mien of my ecumenical ostent lol.

[Christy B]

No you are 5.

[aestrivex]

No you are 5.

no. your ratiocination on this matter is unequivocally sophistical; lol.

[discojoe]

Autistic = 5

[unefille]

I don't think adding 'lol' to the end of your sentences makes the argument for 7 anymore convincing...

[Unless you have always 'lol'd and I have simply only begun noticing.]

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[aestrivex]

Autistic = 5

you have effectuated a spurious, casuistrical paralogism lol.

[aestrivex]

I disagree. The many lols have convinced me that it would be shameful and embarrassing not to agree with him. Anyone who says he is other than a 7 should surely be mocked.

the pneuma of your sentiment is commensurate lol.

[implied]

no, you have effectuated a spurious, casuistrical paralogism lol

[unefille]

I disagree. The many lols have convinced me that it would be shameful and embarrassing not to agree with him. Anyone who says he is other than a 7 should surely be mocked.

the pneuma of your sentiment is commensurate lol.

niffweed is a 7!

*thunder sounds in the distance*

[aestrivex]

you have effectuated a spurious, casuistrical paralogism lol

would you care to illume the stipulation of my ratiocinative contrariety? lol

[Christy B]

no. your ratiocination on this matter is unequivocally sophistical; lol.

I take it back, you are a 9.

[Phaedrus]

Yes, here it is: