Does Enneagram Type 4 = INFp?

[joseph]

http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/Typefour.asp

I definitely identify with both strongly. Enneagram just isn't as clear a system to me.

[strrrng]

Neither type necessarily implies the other, but 4 is definitely the most common E-type for INFps (and vice-versa). I'd say about 90% of INFps are some 4 variation, with the remaining 10% being 6's (9 seems somewhat possible, but I haven't encountered one yet).

[Jarno]

1. Enneagram is pseudo science (=bullshit)
2. To answer the question, yes INFP correlates very much with E4.

[strrrng]

1. Enneagram is pseudo science (=bullshit)

And socionics isn't? Enneagram is a helluvah lot more accurate in terms of describing natural processes. Maybe you need to look into it more.

[Jarno]

And socionics isn't? Enneagram is a helluvah lot more accurate in terms of describing natural processes. Maybe you need to look into it more.

I concluded that Socionics is a more reliable theory, since it explains the interaction between types in a logical way, and a person can only be 1 type based on logical reasons.

That is were Enneagram fails. It's more like Oldhams styles. Both are close to real life observations, and on the right path, but just can't explain underlying phenomena. Socionics however does this very well.

Concerning natural processes, I don't know precisely what you mean by that, so I can't comment on that.

[Khola aka Bee]

I am possibly the exception to this rule. Or not, depending on who I'm dating.

[joseph]

I'm with Jarno- Socionics makes logical sense while ennegram is associated with new age stuff like this:

http://www.eclecticenergies.com/chakras/

[JRiddy]

I'm with Jarno- Socionics makes logical sense while ennegram is associated with new age stuff like this:

http://www.eclecticenergies.com/chakras/

While I agree that the Enneagram can get very conflated with some new-agey weirdness, it actually has more explanatory and predictive power than Socionics does. While it doesn't necessarily say a lot about relationships, it does seem to point out a lot of inner personal issues.

I was very skeptical of Enneagram at first for some of the same reasons that you have mentioned. There is a lot of "mystic" sounding stuff that is brought along with it, but you can ignore the greater portion of it and cut straight to the meat of what it describes, which is reactionary fixations of the personality. In my experience, the kinds of "fixations" that it describes are awfully close to some of the aspects of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy, which is a much more widely accepted psychological therapeutic approach.

Oh, and in my experience, yes most INFps are 4s, although 6s and maybe a few 3s are not uncommon. You might get a 5w4 or something like that every once in a while. Other sociotypes that I have seen be 4s are ISFps (guessing about 1/2 of Fe subs and about 1/3 of Si subs) and a few odd INFjs. I'd consider INTp and INTj 4s a theoretical possibility, but I've never encountered one, and I certainly wouldn't consider those types likely to be 4s.

[Shazaam]

Again,

Socionics is better at understanding your relationship with others, enneagram is better at understanding your relationship with yourself. If you want to study how to improve the self, learn your enneagram type and how to rise to the healthy levels. And I've found out, especially in America, as long as you improve yourself- other people will like you enough, at least they'll be off your case so you can then pursue the type of relationships you want with others.

They all have their different uses depending on your individual circumstance and what you're trying to accomplish.

[leftylib]

http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/Typefour.asp

I definitely identify with both strongly. Enneagram just isn't as clear a system to me.

its not clear its approximate. i think its really about typing people's potential mental illnesses ...maybe even attachment style...something i just learned about from an ISFP friend of mine online. Here's a little test for it: http://www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl

[joseph]

BullittsandDoves got it right. I think I've spend too much time thinking about the interpersonal aspects of information elements, and not enough on what the ennnegram tries to get across. Anyone know a site thay explains the real deal?

[lefty]

Again,

Socionics is better at understanding your relationship with others, enneagram is better at understanding your relationship with yourself. If you want to study how to improve the self, learn your enneagram type and how to rise to the healthy levels. And I've found out, especially in America, as long as you improve yourself- other people will like you enough, at least they'll be off your case so you can then pursue the type of relationships you want with others.

They all have their different uses depending on your individual circumstance and what you're trying to accomplish.

well in america you have to want to strive to improve yourself so you can be marketed a spiffy clean all american attitude and appearance that you have to buy (brought to you by lack of american jobs and work conducted without human rights laws or environmental welfare restrictions) we're still pretty puritanical and other countries value things like art and socialism and they dont have to improve so much because their history isn't one of ruthless disregard for equality. americans go off trying to "improve" other countries, too, and that's also related to financial gain.