Torn between two types, very difficult to find answer

[MysticSonic]

"There is one "true" (correct) type for each person and each of the systems are merely classification systems."

This is not true when the typology in question insufficiently distinguishes between two of its classifications.

[anndelise]

If you compare the two systems you will see that there is a link between them. How can any one believe (or even imagine) that there is not? Every typology can be compared with every other typology, and there is always some kind of correlation between them.

If I compare two of ANYthing, I can find a link between them. I mean, how can anyone NOT see the correlations between a cat and a bathtub?
a. They're both in the house.
b. They both use water.
c. They both get dirty.
d. They both trigger a dog's instincts.
e. They both get hair clogs.

And if you know which correlations there are between two different typologies, and you also know that a certain person's view of him/herself is not in line with that correlation, you must reckon with the possibility that the person is mistyped in one or both of the two systems. That is not only a possibility, it might often be very likely that the person is mistyped.

But not the ONLY possibility. Other possibilities include inaccurate typing system, inaccurate descriptions, inaccurate categories, inaccurate interpretations by not only the testee, but the tester and theorist as well.

Considering that neither of the two typing systems specifically involved in this discussion aren't even up to 50% accurate. Also, that Enneagram "types" are capable of changing over time and/or depending on experience/situations. Which is more likely? That people tested wrong, or any 1+ of the other possibilities are in effect?

Not "instead of". There is one "true" (correct) type for each person and each of the systems are merely classification systems. You can classify people in many different ways, but whatever system you decide to use, you have an essential, biological nature that is more or less accurately described in the system (the typology). Since you have the same essential nature you are the same type regardless of which typology you use to describe that nature. Your correct type can have different names in different systems, but it is still the same type, it is still the same structure of your brain that determines what that type is like. Different typologies focus on slightly different aspects of the same types, and they sometimes draw the lines between different groups of people differently. For example, in Socionics and MBTI we differentiate between ENTps and ENFps, but in the Enneagram the majority (or all) of them are put in together in type 7 (Seven).

I'm not sure if all typologies are essentially about biological natures.

Yes, we each are ourselves, a combo of nurture as well as nature. But that does not necessarily mean that each typing system is describing the same things. One can describe proactive measures a person takes, another can describe reactive measures a person can take, one typing system determines personality based on body types, would that mean that there can't be any fat intjs??

Basically, according to your logic, if someone found correlations between socionics and say…astrology. Then, since astrology is the only one that has an actual objective measurement for determining it's types, if a person doesn't fit into the correlations between astrology and socionics, we can therefore assume that they are typed wrong socionically?

[FDG]

Don't aske me too many of those kind of questions you keep asking to every one that does not align with your picture, cuz I find them highly annoying. They come across as you think everybody's stupid except you.

I'm not trying to make other people look stupid. If it seems so, that is an unintended effect. I am trying to get us closer to the truth by whatever means I believe will be successful. But sometimes I find it slightly annoying that so many people on this forum seem to be so sure of their types without having sufficient grounds for their claims. Correct typing is not that easy, whereas incorrect typing often is.

Blah blah. Exactly what I wanted you not to do. I've known for the ennagram for quite a long time, and questioned about my type on forums and crap. So I'm sure.

[pezzonovante]

Ok this thread got way off topic with this whole enneagram argument. Let's try to be more respectful of the fact that different people hold different points of view, and we are here to learn from each other, not prove each other wrong.

Although I would not give the enneagram much credibility compared to socionics, I do appreciate Phaedrus suggesting it as an alternative way for me to distinguish between ENTp and ENTj. However it did not work as I do not see myself as either 7 nor 8. I very strongly identify with the profile for type 3, much more than I do with any profile in any typology system (socionics, mbti, enneagram). The RHETI Sampler Test also indicated overwhelmingly that my type was 3 (8 dots). It gave me an equally weak result for both types 7 and 8 (3 dots each). While there are certain characteristics of both that I can see in myself, I am sure I am not either of the types.

So if I am a type 3, and type 3 corresponds with ESTP, does that make me an ESTP? I highly doubt so. I do see a lot of traits within myself (protective of and wanting to expand physical territory, desiring wealth and power, strong willpower, exhibitionism). However anyone who knows me would see that I am definately not a sensing dominant person. I have trouble learning physical tasks, I don't have a good eye for details, and in the past I often had trouble keeping track of the world around me (something I improved through constant vigilance). I would attribute my characteristics to a strong dual seeking function/hidden agenda if I am an ENTj. If I am an ENTp, then a well developed role function perhaps? I hope that this reply will bring this post back on topic, and we can get somewhere with this discussion.

[Kristiina]

I can't say that I can safely discern a strong hidden agenda from a strong role function. At the very least, you don't sound like a Sensing type (from what you said). And you sure as hell don't sound ESTp (from how you write). :wink:

[pezzonovante]

I agree

[Phaedrus]

@MysticSonic

There is one "true" (correct) type for each person and each of the systems are merely classification systems.

This is not true when the typology in question insufficiently distinguishes between two of its classifications.

You are right about that in a sense, but it seems (if I understand your point here) as though you misunderstand my point. Your correct (real) type is not defined by any system. If a typology insufficiently distinguishes between two of its classifications, we can try to make its descriptions more accurate, we can introduce subtypes etc.


@anndelise

Considering that neither of the two typing systems specifically involved in this discussion aren't even up to 50% accurate.

What do you refer to here? Of course they are more than 50 % accurate.

Also, that Enneagram "types" are capable of changing over time and/or depending on experience/situations.

No, absolutely not. Who have told you that? You might be able to use more of the capabilities that are already "in" your type, but you remain the same type all the time. There might be some Enneagram practitioners who claim that the types are capable of changing, but in that case they have misunderstood the nature of their own theory. You can find such false claims among MBTI practitioners as well, and maybe even among socionists.

Which is more likely? That people tested wrong, or any 1+ of the other possibilities are in effect?

The two most likely possibilities are probably that people are tested wrong and incorrect interpretations by the testee.


@FDG

Blah blah. Exactly what I wanted you not to do. I've known for the ennagram for quite a long time, and questioned about my type on forums and crap. So I'm sure.

Exactly what I wanted you to do -- to explain what grounds you had for your claims. Now you have made it possible for me (and others) to base my understanding and view of your socionic type on the premise that you are an Enneagram type 7w8. That fact makes it slightly less certain that you are an ENTj, but perhaps it is still not impossible that you are.

[aestrivex]

i don't see how enneagram types really relate to this discussion.

it might be fair to assume that MBTI types are equivalent to socionics types. i am not convinced of this, as MBTI's functions and dichotomies are somewhat different from socionics, thus precluding the possibility that some people whose type may be socionics ISFp but MBTI ISFJ (or any conceivable change). nonetheless, MBTI and socionics are fairly similar theories.

when one considers enneagram in comparison with socionics, however, it is no longer fair to say that these theories are similar. in many ways the enneagram describes personality quite differently from socionics, and thus it is not necessarily the case that socionics translates to enneagram very evenly.

for example, as a socionics INTp, i have a certain acknowledged personality. by all accounts i am an enneagram type 5 (probably 5w6, but possibly otherwise). when one considers my socionics profile, there are a lot of elements of 5, but also some of 6, 3, 7 and perhaps also 8 and 9. nonetheless, i wouldn't mistake myself for any of these types since, of these types, the most elements of 5 are present.

similarly, in the case of pezzonovante, ENTx fits fine with enneagram type 3 because the translation is quite inexact and type 3 has plenty of characteristics in common with ENTxs, and perhaps some that don't.

[Kristiina]

I would attribute my characteristics to a strong dual seeking function/hidden agenda if I am an ENTj. If I am an ENTp, then a well developed role function perhaps? I hope that this reply will bring this post back on topic, and we can get somewhere with this discussion.

:wink:


PS! You can use "gamma anything goes" to continue the enneagram/socionics discussion.

[Phaedrus]

similarly, in the case of pezzonovante, ENTx fits fine with enneagram type 3 because the translation is quite inexact and type 3 has plenty of characteristics in common with ENTxs, and perhaps some that don't.

Correct. So, another not unlikely explanation is that pezzonovante is not a 3, even though it might look that way from his perspective. Yet another possible consequence of what you say is that he is not an N type and therefore not an ENTj or ENTp. A typical Enneagram type 3 is without doubt a sensing type, but when I read the descriptions I quoted I realize that they are not that good at making that clear, and there is disagreement among Enneagram theorists, so you have to make your own investigation and separate the valid claims from the invalid. More thorough type descriptions can be found in for example a book by Richard Rohr that I have only read in Swedish (I don't remember the exact title). Maybe this link could be helpful: http://intraspec.ca/ennea0.php

[FDG]

A typical Enneagram type 3 is without doubt a sensing type

Why? I can't think about any clear sing of type 3 being a sesing type. If anything, it's type 8 which symbolizes .

[pezzonovante]

I agree with FDG - honestly socionics and the enneagram are so different that it is impossible to say one is type is equal to another without a doubt. They describe different things about a person, it is like comparing one person's height, and another's width, and trying to figure out who weighs more.

Phaedrus -

The link you stated has a table that equates MBTI and Enneagram types according to a few different authors, and they all have widely differing views. Some say an ENTP is a type 3, some say ESTP, some even say ISFJ/ESFJ. That alone proves you wrong. Type 3 definately can equate to either a sensing or intuitive person. The type might be characterized by -type motivations and desires, but I also have many of those motivations/desires when I am clearly intuitive.

I know without a shadow of doubt that type 3 describes me the best, not only my outward personality traits but also my inner motivations.

However, this is all a rather moot point. I am still not any closer to figuring out whether I am an ENTp or ENTj, if anything I am more confused than ever haha. If anyone has any new insights they would be much appreciated.

[Phaedrus]

The link you stated has a table that equates MBTI and Enneagram types according to a few different authors, and they all have widely differing views.

So what? People disagree on everything.

Some say an ENTP is a type 3, some say ESTP, some even say ISFJ/ESFJ. That alone proves you wrong.

No, it doesn't. The fact that some people (though misguided and wrong) can see ISFJ/ESFJ in type 3 is an argument for ESTP and against ENTP.

Type 3 definately can equate to either a sensing or intuitive person.

Maybe. But nevertheless, the most typical 3 is an ESTp, not an ENTp. The most typical 7 is an ENFp/ENTp (I'm not sure about the F/T here), not an ESTp.

The type might be characterized by -type motivations and desires, but I also have many of those motivations/desires when I am clearly intuitive.

Why? I can't think about any clear sing of type 3 being a sesing type. If anything, it's type 8 which symbolizes .

One might get the impression that you two disagree here. Anyway, it is not that easy to prove these things. At least Rohr's description of the Enneagram type 8 in his book is clearly closer to an ENTj than to an ESTp. An interesting thing, though, is that it seems to be possible to confuse or at least be unsure of the difference between some ESTps and some ENTjs. Some people see Donald Trump as an ESTp, whereas others see ENTj in him. I don't know which type he really is. Maybe he is an ESTp, but I have thought ENTj. Rohr puts Ernest Hemingway in the group 8, even though he probably was an ESTp, so I don't dispute the fact that there are similarities to be found.

I know without a shadow of doubt that type 3 describes me the best, not only my outward personality traits but also my inner motivations.

That is interesting. If we can prove that you are both a 3 and an ENTj, then we have proved that not every ENTj is an 8. But is it absolutely impossible for you to think that you might be an ESTp? We can't rule out that possibibility until we have proven that you are an N type. Which are the strongest arguments for that? I find it somewhat mysterious that you have difficulty deciding between ENTj and ENTp, since for an outside observer the difference between them is usually rather obvious. At this moment I just want to leave it open if a possible explanation for that is that you are neither type.

[Gilly]

Phaedrus.

You are wrong.

There is no direct correlation between Socionics and Enneagram, just as there is no direct correlation between Socionics and MBTI. The factors measured are ENTIRELY different. STOP trying to correlate things that are CLEARLY not analogous.

[pezzonovante]

I am open to the possibility that I am a type other than ENTp or ENTj.

Could I be an ESTP? I have spent the last hour reading ESTP profiles and posts by ESTPs and I have come to a conclusion. I possess many ESTP traits, I have many motivations and desires, but none of the actual sensing talents. A lot of my friends have in their ego block, and my abilities are very obviously different from theirs. I simply cannot be someone who is dominant. Period.

[Phaedrus]

There is no direct correlation between Socionics and Enneagram, just as there is no direct correlation between Socionics and MBTI. The factors measured are ENTIRELY different. STOP trying to correlate things that are CLEARLY not analogous.

No offence, Gilligan, but you obviously don't know what you are talking about. If you have investigated the matter you haven't done it enough, and if you have not investigated the matter, you should not have an opinion about it.