Enneagram type 5w4s

[Phaedrus]

I know I'm a 5w4 and an INTj, and to be honest I don't know how someone could be an INTj or ENTp without seeing resemblances in 4.

This is new interesting stuff. I know that you have talked about 5w4s in the past, for example on SG's forum, but I had missed that you was so sure that you are a 5w4 yourself. Since it is a proven fact that you are not an INTj (V.I., body type, IP (or maybe EP) temperament, etc.), it has now become even more likely that you are actually an INTp.

Most INTps that call themselves INTp 5w4 aren't INTps.

Every person I know of that calls him- or herself both INTp and 5w4 are also right about it.

For some reason the people here think that INTjs are robots or some stupid shit, in which case mentally they are probably more fluid then the majority of the other types.

They are not as robotic as ISTjs. The INTjs often identify with their creative and are good at using it. But every INTj has an IJ temperament.

Idiosyncratic is the best word to describe an Alpha NT. We analyze , not systematize.

Exactly. And that's why an INTj analyst is not a synthezising 5w4 but instead an analyzing 5w6 (if not a 1).

We sort of have "x-ray vision" as Gulenko calls it. We see things for what they really are, we see through the stereotypes.

But this is absolutely false to say about INTjs. They are known for not seeing things as they really are -- that is the sad nature of leading with creative . The bolded part is a very accurate description of the objective INTps however.

Anyone that thinks that INTjs are systematizing, rule creating type of people need to review their socionics.

Anyone who thinks that INTjs are not the most theoretical and the most systems building of all the types is an idiot. It's all in the socionics material. Everyone with some knowledge agrees that INTjs create theoretical models (often with very little connection to objective reality). And the INTjs want to implement their theoretical models/systems, that's why they are usually rather practically minded too.

[Logos]

Phaedrus, I am glad that the filth that you try to pass for truth is on the non-Socionics subforum where it belongs.

[krieger]

For some reason the people here think that INTjs are robots or some stupid shit, in which case mentally they are probably more fluid then the majority of the other types. Idiosyncratic is the best word to describe an Alpha NT. We analyze , not systematize. We sort of have "x-ray vision" as Gulenko calls it. We see things for what they really are, we see through the stereotypes. Anyone that thinks that INTjs are systematizing, rule creating type of people need to review their socionics.

I agree. Thank you. Very well said.

[redbaron]

I can see INTj and 5w4 for you, Sub. I def. think you're more INTj than INTp. Not that I know you all that well but I find your comments often hilariously random and creatively insightful.

[Phaedrus]

Well, people should be aware of the fact that of the people that is spreading bullshit around here, at least labcoat is not an INTj. It is actually quite possible that no one of the "INTjs" that has posted so far in this thread really is an INTj.

It's a fascinating phenomenon, isn't it? The socionic LII type descriptions seem to function like magnets, attracting other types as well. That is because those type descriptions are misleading and should be improved, but the question is how exactly. Though it is a certainty that this forum has way too many "INTjs" among its members.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

What a mess

[Logos]

Well, people should be aware of the fact that of the people that is spreading bullshit around here, at least labcoat is not an INTj. It is actually quite possible that no one of the "INTjs" that has posted so far in this thread really is an INTj.

It's a fascinating phenomenon, isn't it? The socionic LII type descriptions seem to function like magnets, attracting other types as well. That is because those type descriptions are misleading and should be improved, but the question is how exactly. Though it is a certainty that this forum has way too many "INTjs" among its members.

If you had it your way, you would "improve" it by making all LIIs sound like utter idiots. And what of the people who are incorrectly attracted to the ILI description, like yourself?

[Phaedrus]

If you had it your way, you would "improve" it by making all LIIs sound like utter idiots.

As most of the type profiles now stand they are glorifying the LII in a way that does not correspond with reality. Jung had a correct understanding of , but unfortunately that understanding is somewhat absent in many socionic LII profiles.

And what of the people who are incorrectly attracted to the ILI description, like yourself?

Like so many other ILIs I was at first more attracted to the LII descriptions. The difference between me and some other ILIs is that I did a more thorough research and found out the truth. The only totally obvious and absolutely indisputably clear LIIs on this forum (viewed from my perspective) are tcaudilllg and Huitzilopochtli. There are probably other LIIs as well, but they are not as easy to spot in a crowd consisting of so many mistyped "LIIs".

[Socionics Is A Cult]

I can see INTj and 5w4 for you, Sub. I def. think you're more INTj than INTp.

I also think I'm more likely to be an INFp than an INTp, and yet I think the 5w4 descriptions are more me than the 4w5 descriptions.