In that case do you think she compares to the Soc/sx 9w8 people on that list? And if not, why?Originally Posted by Galen
Edit: (Like Sandra Bullock for ex)
In that case do you think she compares to the Soc/sx 9w8 people on that list? And if not, why?
Edit: (Like Sandra Bullock for ex)
From those typings in the list, the ones I can believe at E9 So/Sx are Adam Sandler, Dave Grohl, Shaun White, and maybe Christina Perri. Dan Avidan of internet fame is likely the same. Their countenance seem very different from Jewel, regardless of them all being XXXp to Jewel's XXXj. More of a direct engagement with their interlocutors.
If you want a better sense of how I think Sx/Sp 9s look, check out Paul Giamatti.
It is a mystery to me how you can possibly tell me what my instinct stacking is without knowing anything about me or my life. Sociotype perhaps and maybe even e-type. But not instinct stackings. Sorry.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Why not?
Last edited by Galen; 07-16-2014 at 05:19 AM.
k, took it and thankfully it calculated for me or I would have had to kill u.Pretty good test since there were fresh questions I hadn't already seen a dozen times.
SX 96
SP 68
SO 47
Mentally I visualize these numbers as some kinda warped staircase I am climbing.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Thanks for sharing, valuable information.
The last test gave me Sx(73)/Sp(70) but there is no way I am Sx first.
I also tried the enneagram test on the same site, again got 4w5, well 47 for 4 and 46 for 5...
So I am either 45X or 54X.
What is your enneatype Olly?
Retook it:k, took it and thankfully it calculated for me or I would have had to kill u.
SX 96
SP 68
SO 47
Mentally I visualize these numbers as some kinda warped staircase I am climbing.
SX- 88
SP- 42
SO- 50
The SX questions seemed more 4 and 7ish though and SO also seemed more SO/SP than SO/SX to me.
Yeah, it may be the bias of the questions. SX seems to have elements of 4 in it such as creativity, originality, unqiueness, etc. I'm not too sure of my enneatype but I used to identify as 4w3. Have you read about the SP 4 subtype?
Ohhh awesome link. I might be 4w5 for good...
"The Self-Preservation Four is the countertype of the Four subtypes, and so it may be difficult to identify this person as a Four."
Sexual ||||||||||||||||||||| 62% Social |||||||||||| 38% Self Preservation |||||||||||| 38%
+1. That's exactly why I don't dare to type anyone's instinct stacking over the internet .
Omg stahp it, it's so cruel, why you people even type other people on TYPOLOGY forum. That's so inhumane ;[[[
I agree, instincts are very internal... It's not abt personality traits it's about inner, instinctual preoccupation. It doesn't show on the surface so readily.
Last edited by Ron Mexican; 07-17-2014 at 12:18 AM.
I think 1w9 for him.
And you probably won't agree with these typings, but he's curiously similar to the exemplars in the 1w9 sx sp list in this thread:
http://personalitycafe.com/type-1-fo...e-1-video.html
Yeah, it's a bit easier doing this offline for numerous reasons but hey, weren't you trying to tell me why I wasn't sx/so though?
Yeah, instinctual preoccupation is a good way to put it. You think it doesn't show on the surface so readily? That makes sense but perhaps the secondary is sometimes more visible to others than the primary since we're less self-conscious and exploratory with that? I hear we may use it more in conversation.
I think it can show in live interaction/observation more, but definitely not off text interactions...
I think it can def show in text.
i.e. so has a more "airy" flavor, anything so-last is more "closed."
you can also see it in volume of text and what people are driven to reveal, or when they choose to engage, etc.
I think positive outlook E types are more airy. And Fe users can be seen as revealing and engaging, that doesn't mean they can't still be so-last.
I think it's just abt what a person pays attention to - not how they act.
the airiness I meant is something in the quality of the texture of speech, not content.
agree.
I don't see a real resemblance b/w him and any of the 1w9 sx/sps on that list. He has nowhere near the same rigidness in presentation as any sort of E1.
The only Sx E1 I've typed is Ken Watanabe. Compared with Giamatti they both have similar styles of emotional reactivity and fidgetiness, but Watanabe's countenance is a lot stiffer and self-controller than Giamatti's.
Dude's also a spitting image of the aforementioned Sx 9 friend, not like that's relevant to you though.
if it doesn't show in VI (as you seem to think), it shows in the kinds of topics you approach as well as in general interaction with folks (intensity, groundedness, bellicosity etc.).
Last edited by Amber; 07-17-2014 at 02:15 AM.
If you mean VI as in pictures, then no that's not what I meant. I meant observing a person irl or at least on video and how they interact and what their affect is like.
I just don't get a nine vibe from the Giamatti guy
Here's all the people listed as 9w1 sx sp in the same link: http://personalitycafe.com/type-9-fo...e-9-video.html
none of them come off as self controlled and rigid and "tight" as that guy.
Ken Watanabe comes off more like 1w2 (going along with the thesis that he's e one - I haven't analyzed him enough to be sure myself)
and the Paul guy as 1w9.
My brother is 1w9 and through getting to know him you see that past the 9 wing's apparent calmness or withdrawn-ness is a calculating, exacting, high standard having critical core.
I get the same vibe from this guy as my bro a bit.
Anyway, at this point we can go back and forth all day on celebrity typing disagreements, but I just wanted feedback to see if my mind on Sx 9 would be changed. Just wanted to challenge my own view. I appreciate the feedback!
Probably because that list is crap. Not sure what you see as "tight" in any case. Giamatti comes off as pretty lively to me.
Does this mean nothing's changed then?Anyway, at this point we can go back and forth all day on celebrity typing disagreements, but I just wanted feedback to see if my mind on Sx 9 would be changed. Just wanted to challenge my own view. I appreciate the feedback!
yep
Ummmm....yeahYeah, it's a bit easier doing this offline for numerous reasons but hey, weren't you trying to tell me why I wasn't sx/so though?That was just the impression I got from talking with you. Forget about it
I agree with lemontrees on this very much actually, it's just that it can quickly become a slippery slope especially in people who have stackings in similar ratios or none particularly stands out.
i am still trying to get an idea of instinct stackings.
in that test i was high in sx and equal on so and sp. in real life i feel like i used to be more social than i am now.
i feel that being social is kind of a distraction, but it can be useful. and i consider myself to get backlogged with sp things.
sp seems like something i have to deal with minimally to be reasonably comfortable and not think about though. like if i
don't have money then i feel ilke i can't do anything even i know that's not true
For example merc here is a perfect example of a difficult kind of person to typei am still trying to get an idea of instinct stackings.
in that test i was high in sx and equal on so and sp. in real life i feel like i used to be more social than i am now.
i feel that being social is kind of a distraction, but it can be useful. and i consider myself to get backlogged with sp things.
sp seems like something i have to deal with minimally to be reasonably comfortable and not think about though. like if i
don't have money then i feel ilke i can't do anything even i know that's not true
For the record, I think you're so first.
Yeah so do I. so/sx. Because that's what I decided ages ago. And I can social, but I can also not be social. And if I say I'm not very social, then I can not relate/connect well.For example merc here is a perfect example of a difficult kind of person to type
For the record, I think you're so first.
That said I don't like being part of groups, I like being on my own, and connecting with others but not for too long. And I like trying to keep a little social balanced, but I'm not
Yeah, being social doesn't necessarily mean you have to be sociable or anything. You're just preoccupied with the social. This can still manifest as being antisocial, having social anxiety, being misanthropic, being a loner, etc, even more so because you're preoccupied with the social. It doesn't have to manifest as being outgoing, sociable, warm and liking groups.Yeah so do I. so/sx. Because that's what I decided ages ago. And I can social, but I can also not be social. And if I say I'm not very social, then I can not relate/connect well.
That said I don't like being part of groups, I like being on my own, and connecting with others but not for too long. And I like trying to keep a little social balanced, but I'm not
Also, I'm leaning towards so/sx for myself (for now) and never score as anything but sx/so even on a paid instinctual test (the results weren't close either). I think maybe a lot of social questions are better suited for So/Sp types or at least one's core enneatype can skew the results. Like 5s may score higher on SP, 4s on SX, 3s on SO, etc.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tual-Stackings
thank you
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Single word descriptors tend to not do much for me, regardless of how many single words there may be. They're too prone to confirmation bias and cherry-picking.
I still don't know if I buy the syn-flow/contra-flow dichotomy. The descriptions sound more like someone in the syn-flow talking shit about people he doesn't like.
But Galen didn't use the same frame when he listed his facial composites...?
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ace-Composites
I believe that was Silke's doing. All I did was make the composites and post them; she organized them like that. Don't know why that article is listed under my name, probably because I did most of the heavy lifting.
Exactly
I can see where I can be a combination of all of these but only in short bursts of energy, before returning to my secret lair. I do appear sx/so, at times, but I don't think my motivations line up with the motivations of sx/so but someone suggested I look at it anyway.
The different descriptions is where it seems to get confusing because yeah I may come off as that sometimes but it is not my driving force to be social. Maybe I just juggle the position of sp and so to suit my needs. I feel more aware of my self than the descriptions suggest but that may have come from experience and spiritual practices I adhere to.
I don't think I am sx/so or sp/sx even though I do have magic in my head... I tend to bring things into my reality when I am driven to and I don't just sit around fantasizing. If I really want it,I risk it all to have it sometimes. Heh, it's all about wanting people to take action if they want to do something and not just dream about it except when I don't really want that action imposed on me. Then I become a victim of the fires I started and the only option sometimes is to run.
sx/sp
Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.
This is perhaps the most internally conflicted of the stackings, and potentially the most inconsistent in behavior. This may occur as a blockage of the sexual instinct which can be redirected as a more generally brooding and troubled personality. They may isolate themselves for long periods of time before reemerging. They live according to a strictly personal outlook and are not particularly concerned with the approval of others outside of their immediate concern. They seem to be searching for something, the missing piece. If they find a soulmate they will unite without fanfare, forming a secret bond, dealing with formalities as an afterthought. Powerful sexual impulses facing inner resistance may manifest symbolically in the psyche, giving way to soulful interpretations of the unconscious. Under periods of stress severe sexual tensions may manifest as erratic, impulsively destructive behavior. Can seem restless, torn between the comforts of a stable home life and the urge to wander. May be prone to self-medicating.
- Expression: intense, self-absorbed expression
- Energy: intense energy expressed calmly, steadily, assertively
- Behavior: intense, assertive, troubled and self absorbed
- Mindset: "If I can make (us) have an orderly & pleasing lifestyle, I can keep up and escalate all this merging/intensity."
- Blind spot: Likely to neglect their desire to maintain physical saftey, comfort, and an orderly lifestyle for the sake of their primary concern of seeking intense connections and experiences, in average-healthy levels. May not have an awareness of the need to connect in a broader sense with the world, of a sense of security or in groups or of the need to seek it, or even of the need to foster approval, support, and understanding of themselves within groups they are connected with, often causing misunderstandings with allies, supporters, friends, and family members.
sx/so
Motivation: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.
This is the type that exudes the most raw charisma and sexual energy. They may identify so strongly with whatever they're involved with that they often become the symbol of its core essence, and sometimes its lead agent for change. Hardly content with the status quo, this sub-variant seeks to alter the fundamental structure of something while at once embodying it's purest or most extreme form. Possibly attracted to radical views on politics, philosophy, spirituality or creativity that reflect their penchant for testing boundaries. They enjoy pushing other's buttons, especially those resistant to their modes of expression. It's not uncommon for them to have a pet social, political or spiritual cause which they're able to support with heartfelt conviction. May exploit and seek to redefine sexuality to reflect their own colorful and uncertain understanding of it. While prone to exhibitionism, they are strongly attracted to grounding influences which can anchor them and provide stability. Failure to satisfy an especially intense desire for connection may cause this sub-variant to spite others at the risk of jeopardizing the need for an equal, stabilizing force. Can feel pulled between wanting a life of maximum intensity and reassuring episodes of peaceful convention.
- Expression: intense, outer-focused
- Energy: intense energy expressed outwards, assertively
- Behavior: intense, assertive, sultry and aggressive
- Mindset: "If I can maintain position and inclusion in the group/world, I can keep up and escalate all this merging/intensity."
- Blind spot: Likely to neglect their desire to build their sense of personal value, accomplishment, and security of place with others for the sake of their primary concern of seeking intense connections and experiences, in average-healthy levels. May not have an awareness of the body's need for food or sleep, or of the need to accumulate wealth for reasons of security, or of the need to manage time or resources to establish an orderly lifestyle.
sp/sx
Motivation: to live in a secure, comfortable environment where they can pursue their private interests in depth.
These people often have an earthy, mysterious quality to them. They are quietly intense, but to others may seem oblivious to the greater social world around them, instead favoring personal interests. They are slow to commit, but once they do it is with an attitude of life commitment, to the establishment of an impermeable bond. Others can be taken aback by how suddenly and completely this type can lock into them, and by the depth of understanding of the other's condition. They attach to others at an organic, root level, in contrast to the other subvariant's surface formality. Somewhat hesitant to enter new relationships, they instead preserve the select few enduring bonds they carefully form along the way. The sanctuary of home is of paramount concern, and this type takes particular delight in decorating their spaces to reflect their cherished sense of taste and depth. Depth and discrimination characterize this stacking.
- Expression: wistful self-absorbed expression, sighing, magic is in their head
- Energy: calm, steady energy expressed intensely, withdrawing
- Behavior: withdrawn, calm, wistful and self absorbed
- Mindset: "I can have merging/intensity without having to leave my orderly & pleasing lifestyle." (imagination, safe people and relationships, when the safety of these are challenged they withdraw)
- Blind spot: Likely to neglect their desire to seek intense connections and experiences for the sake of their primary concern of maintaining physical saftey, comfort, and an orderly lifestyle, in average-healthy levels. May not have an awareness of the need to connect in a broader sense with the world, of a sense of security or in groups or of the need to seek it, or even of the need to foster approval, support, and understanding of themselves within groups they are connected with, often causing misunderstandings with allies, supporters, friends, and family members.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Aylen, as I said before, I'm pretty pretty sure you're sx/spI can see where I can be a combination of all of these but only in short bursts of energy, before returning to my secret lair. I do appear sx/so, at times, but I don't think my motivations line up with the motivations of sx/so but someone suggested I look at it anyway.
The different descriptions is where it seems to get confusing because yeah I may come off as that sometimes but it is not my driving force to be social. Maybe I just juggle the position of sp and so to suit my needs. I feel more aware of my self than the descriptions suggest but that may have come from experience and spiritual practices I adhere to.
I don't think I am sx/so or sp/sx even though I do have magic in my head... I tend to bring things into my reality when I am driven to and I don't just sit around fantasizing. If I really want it,I risk it all to have it sometimes. Heh, it's all about wanting people to take action if they want to do something and not just dream about it except when I don't really want that action imposed on me. Then I become a victim of the fires I started and the only option sometimes is to run.
@Aylen, to explain: I can see so blind spot in you - you seem kinda in your own world, more self-absorbed, like in your own magical bubble, intensly connecting with things that interest you but at the same time kinda not well aware on your impact/standing in a vaster group dynamics - I hope I explained this somehow understandably
Yeah, but it is always interesting to get someone else's perspective isn't it...Aylen, as I said before, I'm pretty pretty sure you're sx/sp
It's because the instincts seem to be truly hidden sometimes beneath a need to express something in the moment that to some looks like the description of sx/so but I think the most telling difference for me is this:
>>>Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.
this
Which is often a byproduct of my motivations and not the goal...sts. It is not that I want to impact or challenge others but it does happen. I am not as concerned with the impact I have on those I do not have a bond with or could form a bond with. If that makes any sense.Motivation: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
@darya
Yes.
We were saying the same thing at the same time...
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
