.
.
So you admit that you don't know much about the Enneagram ... and yet you have an opinion about what is your dual? Pathetic and disgusting.Originally Posted by Suomea
Phaedrus, when you say type 6 is ethical, do you mean it is a type which is *specifically* for ethical ego types?
Type 6 isleading. You can draw your own conclusions from that.
呱啴喍噐噃嚲Type 6 is
Ok. I have some questions. I think I can see where the Fi would come into it, but perhaps it could represent an Fi valueing type as opposed to just Fi leading? Also..following from that, in terms of the actions of a 6, one could come to there actions through reasoning via T or F ego, do you think? (I take it you don't-ie as you say type 6 is Fi leading)Type 6 is
Complicater-complexer, who you've VI'd as an ISTp, has himself as an enneagram 6. I'm pretty sure he is a 6, and he seems to know enough about enneagram to be correct in his typing. He's probably been typed by practitioners also.
Do you realize that you are an idiot?
Another proof that you are an idiot. You haven't read them. You don't even understand the type you are supposed to be. Pathetic.
No, that's impossible. You should know better, but you don't. So what shall we do about that? Nothing? Are you prepared to live a life in ignorance? Yes, I guess you are.
It is a well-known truth that the imagination of ISFjs is limited, but I didn't realize that it was that limited.
Is that the only type description you have read? It is not bad, but there are other descriptions you should study too before you can call yourself an expert. And how many times have you read it? Well, that is not nearly enough ... Go back and study, and stop acting like a moron.
You fucking pathetic and disgustingly ignorant idiot. So you have read all those type descriptions and understood ... nothing!?
No.
The ISTp has no place in the Enneagram, so it doesn't really matter where you put him. But an ISTp that wants to be a 6 is a pathetic creature.
He does not know enough about the Enneagram, that's for sure.
Irrelevant. Many of those Enneagram practitioners are as bad as most MBTI practitioners when it comes to understanding their own theory.
好嫝圭孶崗
.
diana... let him go.
::smirk::
And this, too, shall pass away.
ILI
*I'm* a 6, that's how I test as. Diana is very different from me, no way she is a 6 too. I am very over-cautious and want to be protected and made to feel safe... and I play the victim in order to do this and dual-seek. Diana? Not so much.
Go fuck yourself, Phaedrus. You are really pissing everybody off lately because you post things that just aren't true. Whatever you need to do to get yourself under control do it, but stop trying to hide the fact that you are an emo drama queen by feigning that you care about 'just the facts.' Whatever. People who say that all the time were most likely either abused or molested.
...
Last edited by Suomea; 09-27-2008 at 11:57 PM.
Suomea
Of course. Do you realize that it doesn't make it false either?
I have studied ISFjs for more than a decade. I know them quite well.
So you dismiss what I say just because I don't provide a proof for it? Do you realize how utterly stupid such a behaviour is? You are not interested in finding the truth, you refuse to study the phenomenon yourself and insist that some other person(s) do all the hard work for you. The truth is in the empirical material. You can check the truth of my statements by yourself. But to dismiss them as false just because you don't bother to analyze and read is a totally unscientific behaviour that deserves no respect.
My statements are true, so your comment is irrelevant.
As usual, people are totally missing the point. You will probably never get out of your ignorance.
Your knowledge of human nature is certainly very limited and prejudiced. But that's just the way it is. The common people seem to love their ignorance. Fascinating phenomenon ...
LOL
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I agree that it's frequent for
I thought you said type is inborn?The ISTp has no place in the Enneagram, so it doesn't really matter where you put him. But an ISTp that wants to be a 6 is a pathetic creature.
How is it sure?He does not know enough about the Enneagram, that's for sure.
You make it out that your the only person who can type someone from reading an enneagram description.Irrelevant. Many of those Enneagram practitioners are as bad as most MBTI practitioners when it comes to understanding their own theory.
LOL!
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Phaedrus...
If everyone were to agree with you, would you be happier then?
And this, too, shall pass away.
ILI
(There is no such thing as an enneagram dual. As such I also disagree with Phaudrus' incessant drive for correlations and so on)
Nevertheless,
Sort of similar to that.
9w1s much more than 9w8.
1s, although they need to be ethical rather than logical
2s, somewhat
3s, probably not.
least compatible: Absolutely no chance with 8 or 5. Probably not 4s or 7s.
My " " " dual range " " " would be between 9w1 and 2w3.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
My happiness or non-happiness is not dependent on what other people believe or don't believe. And my feelings are totally irrelevant here, and it is also totally irrelevant whether people agree or not. The only thing that is relevant is the truth of what I say. People who agree with me for the wrong reasons are of course also idiots.
I can see how what you are saying could be considered true. But if it doesn't matter what they think, why do you attack? if you eally don't care what they think and you know you're right, then what do you get from this? What is the end result?
And this, too, shall pass away.
ILI
Because false statements should be exterminated. The truth matters, people's opinions don't. Opinions are irrelevant, but true and false statements are highly relevant.
To defend what is true, and attack what is false.
After reading through it all, I think I'd get along with sevens the most, and maybe sixes as well. Not sure I could with eights.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
All very well, but only truth is true, no? So only truth can be real, and so there is nothing to attack.
And this, too, shall pass away.
ILI
.
HEEEEEELP!
So you don't understand anything? Well, that was expected, so here is a clarification for you.
1s are ISTjs and INTjs (bothleading). 2s are ESFjs and ENFjs (both
leading). The Dual of an ISTj is an ENFj, and the Dual of an INTj is an ESFj. That wasn't too difficult for your brain to process, was it?
So you are hypersensitive, if you treat that as critique.
I treated it as a redundant comment that would do more harm than good. So I clarified the truth to avoid misunderstandings.
Not as much as your irony.that would do more harm than good
EoT.
The bottom line on Socionics/Enneagram correlations is that people who are same type aren't exactly the same in every way. Also, Socionics and Enneagram typings are not based on the same exact criteria. In other words, the thing that makes someone a particular type in one theory is not necessarily the thing that determines his/her type in the other.
That is true -- but trivial. No one has disputed it.
Correct. It is very obvious that their typing methods are different, that they come to conclusions about people's types from different perspectives and by different means.
False. The conclusion does not follow from the premises. The premises are true, but your conclusion is false. As always, you confuse criteria (of meaning) with reference.
You can look at an object using a certain method to detect the object, to identify it as what it is. You can also look at the exact same object using other methods and even giving the object another name. Most people will not recognize it as the same object, because they know it under one name (and therefore assume that if something has another name it can't be identical to the object they are looking at). They identify the object using their preferred method(s) of identification (and therefore assume that if you are using other methods of identification you cannot detect the same object they are identifying).
The essence of each type is out there in the world. It is independent on our theoretical explanations and our methods of identification. We happen to (think that we) know this essence (but we could be wrong), and the essence is described in Socionics.
Two people that are the same type can not be different types in another system/model unless this difference coincides and is recognized as a relevant difference in Socionics.
For example, an ISTj and an INTj are the same type if we only look at their leading function, but they are different types if we group them according to clubs, where the ISTj is a Pragmatist and the INTj is a Researcher. An ENTp and an INTp are the same type if we look at the clubs, where both are Researchers, but the ENTp belongs to the group of Extraverts and the group of Ne leading types, whereas the INTp belongs to the group of Introverts and the group of Ni leading types. They are also different types if we look at the temperaments where the ENTps is EP and the INTps is IP.
We can group people in many different ways, but the groups (types) in the Enneagram MUST NECESSARILY reflect type relevant differences according to the dichotomies used in Socionics. Otherwise the Enneagram types would not exist, because they would not reflect the real essences of the types that are independent of our theories but described in the true theories. And since we believe that Socionics is a true theory, we cannot allow another theory (such as the Enneagram) to contradict it.
So for every type in the Enneagram we must explain why -- according to which groupings in Socionics -- two different socionic types can be different types in the Enneagram.
Bump. 8w9, but 6w5 is a close second.
8w9 sx/sp or 9w8 sx/sp
PHAEDRUS
6s for me. Maybe because I'm a 1-6-2 so we can understand each other without being too similar.
Phaedrus is wrong. The only definite "enneagram dualism" I have observed is between 5s and 8s. I know two happy 5/8 couples, one dualism one supervision. And it doesn't seem to me that many people want 5s or 8s.
I also think 7s are overrated.
TAKE IT BACK.
I haven't noticed any type-wide correlations between enneagram type and getting along with others anywhere. It seems to be more of a personal thing (and instinctual variants play a big part as well.) I've dated 5w6, 6w5, 1w?. Currently I'm dating a 4w3 sx and we get along famously (but he's also SEI, so there is that.)
The one type I absolutely cannot get along with is 3, though, and I've heard rumors that 3s and 7s are supposed to get along great. I just really, really can't stand them a lot of the time. Usually because of how they present and maintain their self-image. One of my good friends is one, but we have wuite the love-hate relationship where we hate how the other does anything.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
