Enneagram Types 5w6 and 6w5 - main differences?

[Expat]

You know what's revealing, XoX?

You type yourself just as if you were typing another person. You don't look inside yourself, inside your own thoughts, with the unique perspective that only we can have about ourselves. You look at yourself from the outside. You type yourself as if you were holding a mirror. It sort of makes sense that you are more confident in typing others than yourself: it's easier to see others from a distance, from the outside, than oneself. Rather than look into your own heart, or soul, to try to see if you prefer Fi or Fe, you look at yourself from the point of view of external behavior, trying to see if you react more like Fi or Fe is supposed to react.

And that is what some others in this forum are also doing, even if they're being less honest about it than you.

That's your answer.

[Ezra]

I won't strike INTp from the list I think it is still a possibility.

I disagree. I don't think you utilise Te effectively enough.

Then I'm not sure if I am reading too much into my lack of but it seems something I can trust.

This is a fundamentally good way of typing. Find the functions you know you are crap with.

[normal]

INFp

[Phaedrus]

I said forget about it, and I mean it. I don't trust that typing at all, and neither should you. Forget ALL your previous typings -- every single one. You must learn the basics first. Only after you are SURE that you have got it right, you can start typing. Now, forget about that "INTp".

Oh I'm sure he is INTp Even if I just changed my mind about the person who have made me very critical about ESFps. I realized he might be a more physical than average ENFp. But the INTp is surely an INTp. I also know a very certain INTj.

Nonsense. If you know how to type those people correctly, you also know how to type yourself correctly. So, what you say cannot be true.

One way to go is of course to start testing as many of your friends as possible. And by that I mean really testing them by letting them do MBTI tests, socionic tests, Enneagram tests, Keirsey tests, or whatever. Then you let them read type descriptions and good explanations of the four scales. After that you can begin to form some hypotheses about their types.

That doesn't sound very practical. It is very difficult to make people do all that unless they do it from their own interest.

Your comment is irrelevant. If you are not willing to do what it takes to learn how to type correctly, you should not believe that you can do it. All of your typings are untrustworthy. You are not a reliable witness of those people's types.

Hmm..another note. I'm not likely ENTp. I spent an evening with Alphas and I just didn't participate in any of their "fun" activities. There is a good chance I am Fi quadra type because there is absolutely nothing in that kind of group "fun" that interests me. I was also very introverted all the time. I practically didn't say anything all evening. This was because there wasn't a single person there who was interested in talking about anything. They were just shouting and running around in circles basically.

Observations like that one add zero to our understanding of your type, because we cannot be sure that they were really Alphas. If you don't start from scratch with a certain, fundamental fact, I will not trust a word you say about people's types.

[Phaedrus]

You know what's revealing, XoX?

You type yourself just as if you were typing another person. You don't look inside yourself, inside your own thoughts, with the unique perspective that only we can have about ourselves. You look at yourself from the outside. You type yourself as if you were holding a mirror. It sort of makes sense that you are more confident in typing others than yourself: it's easier to see others from a distance, from the outside, than oneself. Rather than look into your own heart, or soul, to try to see if you prefer Fi or Fe, you look at yourself from the point of view of external behavior, trying to see if you react more like Fi or Fe is supposed to react.

And that is what some others in this forum are also doing, even if they're being less honest about it than you.

That's your answer.

And that's actually a very good perspective to adopt on typing in general. I have thought quite a lot about those differences in perspective recently. If anything, the fact that XoX shares that attitude is an argument for him being a Te>Ti type of some sort.

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Ezra's comments on what functions you use. He can't see the difference between Ti and creative Te.

[XoX]

I said forget about it, and I mean it. I don't trust that typing at all, and neither should you. Forget ALL your previous typings -- every single one. You must learn the basics first. Only after you are SURE that you have got it right, you can start typing. Now, forget about that "INTp".

Oh I'm sure he is INTp Even if I just changed my mind about the person who have made me very critical about ESFps. I realized he might be a more physical than average ENFp. But the INTp is surely an INTp. I also know a very certain INTj.

Nonsense. If you know how to type those people correctly, you also know how to type yourself correctly. So, what you say cannot be true.

The INTp is pretty much certain. The INTj...not quite as certain but I can't see what else he could be. The ENFp/ESFp is a bit more difficult but could be ENFp in the end. Gives me a new perspective on ENFps. Physical or not I don't think he is an aggressor. So what I say can be true.

One way to go is of course to start testing as many of your friends as possible. And by that I mean really testing them by letting them do MBTI tests, socionic tests, Enneagram tests, Keirsey tests, or whatever. Then you let them read type descriptions and good explanations of the four scales. After that you can begin to form some hypotheses about their types.

That doesn't sound very practical. It is very difficult to make people do all that unless they do it from their own interest.

Your comment is irrelevant. If you are not willing to do what it takes to learn how to type correctly, you should not believe that you can do it. All of your typings are untrustworthy. You are not a reliable witness of those people's types.

Whatever. Your method is still impractical.

Hmm..another note. I'm not likely ENTp. I spent an evening with Alphas and I just didn't participate in any of their "fun" activities. There is a good chance I am Fi quadra type because there is absolutely nothing in that kind of group "fun" that interests me. I was also very introverted all the time. I practically didn't say anything all evening. This was because there wasn't a single person there who was interested in talking about anything. They were just shouting and running around in circles basically.

Observations like that one add zero to our understanding of your type, because we cannot be sure that they were really Alphas. If you don't start from scratch with a certain, fundamental fact, I will not trust a word you say about people's types.

I partially I agree with you. Because they all knew each other and I didn't know any of them too well there is a chance that my lack of "fitting in" could be explained by that. So if I would get to know them better I could fit in better. Still they had some irritating habits which I doubt I could adapt to.

[XoX]

INFp

I like it how you backup your arguments

[XoX]

You know what's revealing, XoX?

You type yourself just as if you were typing another person. You don't look inside yourself, inside your own thoughts, with the unique perspective that only we can have about ourselves. You look at yourself from the outside. You type yourself as if you were holding a mirror. It sort of makes sense that you are more confident in typing others than yourself: it's easier to see others from a distance, from the outside, than oneself. Rather than look into your own heart, or soul, to try to see if you prefer Fi or Fe, you look at yourself from the point of view of external behavior, trying to see if you react more like Fi or Fe is supposed to react.

And that is what some others in this forum are also doing, even if they're being less honest about it than you.

That's your answer.

This is good observation and true. However you could clarify the last sentence

[XoX]

From the way you describe her, she seems too much business-focussed to be an ISFj?
...
So what if you're the ISFj and she's the ENTj No wait, what you said about her focus on Si makes it much less likely.

Did I already answer this? Anyways, I don't think ISFj/ENTj works I kind of think I'm more ENTj than she is in the end. And I don't see her that much as an "enterpriser" but more like an "achiever". I think she works best in a highly competitive environment which places lots of demands for her. She is still a bit of a pawn and not so much someone who would establish the rules. A high achieving follower in a way.

[Ezra]

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Ezra's comments on what functions you use. He can't see the difference between Ti and creative Te.

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Phaedrus' comments on what functions you use. He doesn't know what Ti or Te is.

[Expat]

You know what's revealing, XoX?

You type yourself just as if you were typing another person. You don't look inside yourself, inside your own thoughts, with the unique perspective that only we can have about ourselves. You look at yourself from the outside. You type yourself as if you were holding a mirror. It sort of makes sense that you are more confident in typing others than yourself: it's easier to see others from a distance, from the outside, than oneself. Rather than look into your own heart, or soul, to try to see if you prefer Fi or Fe, you look at yourself from the point of view of external behavior, trying to see if you react more like Fi or Fe is supposed to react.

And that is what some others in this forum are also doing, even if they're being less honest about it than you.

That's your answer.

This is good observation and true. However you could clarify the last sentence

Will it make any difference? How many times have I explained my views to you?

The point is that, from my perspective, you totally lack confidence in self-awareness or self-introspection, or you don't see the point, or regard it as something unimportant. That is associated to a function, in my opinion; it's also easy to see which people here seem to value self-introspection, and those who see it as something unimportant or irrelevant.

But tell me this -- I suspect that what you'd really need, and welcome, is some "strong socionics figure" here -- someone whose views you trust and others seem to trust -- to just say very clearly, even brutally, "cut the crap, XoX. You're INTp, you've always known it, and I am assuring you that you are one. Stop this nonsense".

If that would happen, you'd stop searching, wouldn't you?

[Expat]

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Ezra's comments on what functions you use. He can't see the difference between Ti and creative Te.

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Phaedrus' comments on what functions you use. He doesn't know what Ti or Te is.

Ezra's right.

[XoX]

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Ezra's comments on what functions you use. He can't see the difference between Ti and creative Te.

And, by the way, XoX. Don't listen to Phaedrus' comments on what functions you use. He doesn't know what Ti or Te is.

Ezra's right.

3 x http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[Gilly]

Yeah but only 2x brains.

[Ezra]

And 20x cooler than youuuuuu.

XoX, you're a 6 aren't you?