...ESTJ is Enneagram 1...
...ESTJ is Enneagram 1...
A lot of types are E1. There is no direct correlation -- just constraints and probabilities. So, an E8 has a strong possibility to be an ESTp or ESTj, among others. Therefore... people could be receiving a lot of their perception from both of these seemingly similar E8 possibilities. See?
...Sorry, but that's wrong. Are you going to tell me that there are ISFp 1s? An ESFj 1? ESFp 1? No...Types on socionics correlate specifically to certain types on the enneagram.
And as for E8, ISTp is between 9 and 8. ESTp is 8.
Post a thread and invite LIIs and ESIs this forum has to offer, LIIs and ESIs self-typing E1. By that kind of reasoning those two shouldn't even exist which is fine with me, although I still don't know whether E-type commands sociotypes to oblige or is the other way around. So you tell me.
You never said "only". I got that.
Nice wording, don't let siuntal respond to this.
What is DA's friend, then?
Lol I don't see how posting a picture of minesweeper proves your point, but sure whatever you say.
People shouldn't even be combining socionics with the enneagram anyways. Two seperate theories, and apparently just one of either of them is more than enough for people to handle.
Especially when someone goes and says something like this... "Im LSI Tritype E8w7-637-251 sx/so/sp INFJ RCLUEI Type B Personality"
If you want to combine shit, go read the enneagram carefully, and then come back and read each socionics function carefully. If you have any shred of intelligence and insight, you'd see that everything you people are saying doesn't add up.
ST must relate to the Gut Triad 9,8,1
NT must relate to the Head Triad 7,5,6
NF must relate to the Heart Triad 4,3,2 with the exception of some types that im not sure of, which would probably if anything relate to 6 which is probably the most dominant enneagram type
SF the same as NF
Last edited by Leader; 03-21-2012 at 10:12 PM.
I don't even think enneagram is worth investing in, it's too limited. Sure you can classify people with it to a certain extent, but it's not going to prove much, you have to assume their type is actually suitable and not 'one of the nine types of people.' I agree that all of these specific subtypes going along with Socionics are unnecessary.
I did see your thread on enneagram-socionics correlations and it actually looks the same even though it is "different".
You just bashed yourself saying that but there is a way out, you can always say you're not people as in part of people. Not human.People shouldn't even be combining socionics with the enneagram anyways. Two seperate theories, and apparently just one of either of them is more than enough for people to handle.
Leave that to Aleksei or Gilly.Especially when someone goes and says something like this... "Im LSI Tritype E8w7-637-251 sx/so/sp INFJ RCLUEI Type B Personality"
?If you want to combine shit, go read the enneagram carefully, and then come back and read each socionics function carefully. If you have any shred of intelligence and insight, you'd see that everything you people are saying doesn't add up.
Their isn't a correlation thats set in stone like that^^.. The enneagram is more about instinctual energies and motivations that can't really be tied to functions. Although I do agree that their is a general correlation, I've known quite a few people who disprove the one you've given. Haven't you ever seen an ENFp 7w6? or an ST 6w5? I think tritype plays MAJORLY into things, so even if an ST is a main heart type which isn't common they probably have somthing more earthy or gutsy as a close second.. also sometimes a persons main type is very strong and some people have a more overlapping tritype. Like me I've always had trouble discerning whether I'm 4w5 or 1w9....
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 03-22-2012 at 02:18 AM.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html