Enneagram type 5 considered only for introverts

[mu4]

Have you met some E7 ILE's, they're terribly unhealthy and absorbed by all sort of vices, fanciful ideas and failed ambitions. Introtim and extrotim are different than introversion and extroversion, and the terminology in socionics is differentiated. While SEI is quite a extroverted type, ILE is quite a introverted type.

The issue of attachment in ILE lies in the vulnerable function and not in the ego. Having as a vulnerable function, they have a weakness in this and can conscious seek to avoid it. Individuals are as much defined by their weakness as their strength. However, it is in our creative and role function that we deal with the world, as these are our contact functions.

In socionics the functions that defines us, the ones we make our strongest judgements and have the most stubborn ideas are the 1/4/5/8 evaluatory functions. Two being introverted and two being extroverted.

However our 2/3/6/7 functions are our situational function as they are neither our strongest or weakest area, here we adapt to the situation and interact with the world.

In the enneagram descriptions of the 5 in terms of childhood development

Avarice began to manifest in us when, as small children, we lost contact with our essential natures, and consequently felt small, tiny, and helpless in a vast, uncaring universe. This left all of us, and Fives especially, terrified of life and doubting our ability to function in the world. Thus, Avarice leads Fives to feel that they must retreat from reality or defend against it, while trying to restore the feeling that they are capable and competent to deal with this overwhelming situation. It leads to an emotional attitude of rejection and detachment—a turning away from the world as if one were not part of it. Avarice causes us to feel as though the universe has rejected us, so we better find a way to make do with our wits and with a minimal of support and resources.

I find this is already incompatible with Socionics as the very development of a enneagram type is imo unrelated to this sort of situation. Also terminology such as lost contact with our essential natures seem to be out of place as far as socionics concepts. I think it's diffucult to deal with trying to come away with some hard rules for enneagram and socionics, as they're conceptually too different.

[MensSuperMateriam]

Have you met some E7 ILE's, they're terribly unhealthy and absorbed by all sort of vices, fanciful ideas and failed ambitions. Introtim and extrotim are different than introversion and extroversion, and the terminology in socionics is differentiated. While SEI is quite a extroverted type, ILE is quite a introverted type.

I used introversion and extroversion in jungian terms of attachment/detachment respect to the desired object, not sociability. I do not deny that ILEs moderately social introverts, anyway.

The issue of attachment in ILE lies in the vulnerable function and not in the ego. Having as a vulnerable function, they have a weakness in this and can conscious seek to avoid it. Individuals are as much defined by their weakness as their strength. However, it is in our creative and role function that we deal with the world, as these are our contact functions.

In socionics the functions that defines us, the ones we make our strongest judgements and have the most stubborn ideas are the 1/4/5/8 evaluatory functions. Two being introverted and two being extroverted.

However our 2/3/6/7 functions are our situational function as they are neither our strongest or weakest area, here we adapt to the situation and interact with the world.

Using PoLR for justifying detachment is too forced, methinks. And if this kind of reasoning applies to ILEs, it should apply to other types as well, making all extratims detached and all introtims attached, which does not make much sense.

[Creepy-male]

I would argue that the fundamental basis of extroversion and introversion in socionics is not entirely reconcilable with the notion of directional theory in the enneagram (withdrawl being one of three directional orientations <-,o,+>,<minus,neutral,plus>).

I would agree that there is some compatibility, but it's definitely not one to one.

Socionics is based on the concepts of information metabolism and the Jungian functions, it is this that determines a person as introverted or extroverted. In a very objective way we could say that an extrovert in socionics is merely one who has a base function that is extroverted.

In Enneagram, withdrawl is a cycle that is linked to integration and disintegration. When withdrawled types (4,5,9) are stressed signficantly they will undergo a period of withdrawl to regenerate, then proceed towards being more assertive. These cycles work differently and have different motivations based on the type.

9's withdrawl to preserve peace, when stress and conflict mount, it's typical for e9's to withdrawal to find inner peace
4's withdrawl out of melancholy, when stress mounts and negative feelings build in one, they withdrawal to reshape their identity and develop healthier attitudes
5's withdrawl out of fear, when stress mounts in the world they cut back and simplify to control their environment in a manageable way, they withdrawal to gain control, perspective, and the like

9's will assert themselves when they are at peace until conflict arises
4's will typically under go hyperactive phases of asserting themselves and enjoy/savoring life until it turns sour
5's will typically assert themselves until they feel things are too much to deal with or chaotic

In a way enneagram is worlds apart from classic introversion/extroversion as it defines these entire cycles and motivations. Withdrawal isn't merely an individual that is always shy or introverted, or private or the like. It's a flag used to communicate a very specific pattern or cycle those types undergo that is distinguished from two other styles and fits in a system based around patterns of 3.

Also withdrawal in the enneagram isn't just a personality trait, it defines a strategy to dealing with stress, and its part of the underlying fears and motives of a type. The progress of undergoing several cycles of asserting and withdrawaling for a type builds experience and allows the type ability to be more effective. Other types may not withdrawal in their cycles but likewise the cycles they undergo develop them in ways as well that are characteristic. Withdrawal in the enneagram isn't supposed to be looked at as "the shy or private ones" but more so as a technique used to mitigate stress on the pathway to development of character through the process of remedying certain thematic conflicts and fulfilling thematic motivations.

[MensSuperMateriam]

I find this is already incompatible with Socionics as the very development of a enneagram type is imo unrelated to this sort of situation. Also terminology such as lost contact with our essential natures seem to be out of place as far as socionics concepts. I think it's diffucult to deal with trying to come away with some hard rules for enneagram and socionics, as they're conceptually too different.

I agree. I do not think there's a 1:1 correlation (for example, almost any type could be E6). But there are certain combinations that I see highly unlikely.