Why do most assume I am SLE-Ti?

[Aleksei]

I'd say the stereotypical ESE is more likely 7w6 or 6w7.

[KeroZen]

That doesn't really shut out the possibility of type combinations outside of the normal range existing. It just means they haven't been found yet. Maybe they don't exist, to be sure, but in the world of theoretical possibilities, it's not an impossibility.

We don't care if it's possible if there are no real world cases, don't we?

From what I read about the Big5/SLOAN data for instance, you get 32 data "density zones" but there are no dots in the middle...it's the inter-galactic void somehow!

For Enneagram it's obviously more complicated, like Aiss said.

[Aleksei]

We don't care if it's possible if there are no real world cases, don't we?

Until there actually are. It's still kind of silly to claim that it can't happen. Especially in cases where a comfortable theoretical conception of why it could happen exist (such as now -- there is a perfectly valid relationship between behavior and counterphobic Six behavior).

[KeroZen]

Theorize if you want heh! I find it already complex enough having to deal with 15 real-world types and mine...

[07490]

Only if you assume socionics and enneagram are about the same aspect of personality. For me, I found most "incompatible combinations lists" I met with laughable. One had ESE and 6 as impossible (have they ever heard of Ni-PoLR, I wonder? Not all ESEs are 2s, by the way), someone else tried to explain that only Sensors can be 1s, 9s and 8s, since it's a gut triad, then I keep hearing how 7s have to be extraverts because of "energy levels" (wtf?), or that LIIs can't be 4s (seriously?). Yes, stereotypical ESE is E2, stereotypical IEI is E4, stereotypical LII and ILI - E5. Strong correlations like these are what creates these stereotypes in the first place, and influences type profiles, often by an inclusion of traits which otherwise don't seem related to information metabolism. It doesn't make it set in stone, still. I am not claiming each and every combination exists, and some are hard to imagine. Those I've met with aren't, obviously, which is likely what creates bias in everyone, but it doesn't mean there aren't there.

ESE's are often sixes.

[07490]

That doesn't really shut out the possibility of type combinations outside of the normal range existing. It just means they haven't been found yet. Maybe they don't exist, to be sure, but in the world of theoretical possibilities, it's not an impossibility.

But then you cannot say they exist because the description sounds like it can fit that type. I would believe it if I see it concretely that such socionics type is this enneagram type.

Remember in these two system, you are born with the type, it cannot be changed. I am saying this because if so, it would be less confusing and not If you mold or change your behavior you can score and get test result of different type. like I said, this is something that most people have typed people for a long period of time and really can only find some enneagram types for a specific socionic type. sure there is still possibility, it's not like a math theory which it can be proven by a therom, and at most it can come as close as something that couldn't be proven 100% but its something people have generally come to accept (there is a word in mathematics for that but i forgot whats it called) and if you do actually find a rare enneagram type combination, sure let me know and I will check it out.

[redbaron]

ESE's are often sixes.

my husband is ESE 6w5.

[Aleksei]

That's somewhat odd. Is he Si-subtype?

[Cuddly McFluffles]

ESE's are often sixes.

Aren't sixes horribly common anyway?

[redbaron]

That's somewhat odd. Is he Si-subtype?

yes, I think so.