Say your arguments why a LIE E4 cannot exist

[lavos]

Go ahead (so I can tumble them down).

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

https://philosophy.stackexchange.com...-the-living-ro

[anotherperson]

LIE falls asleep to their assessment of opinions (sleeping superid Fi)

More interested in practical affairs then 4 due to Te program (less likely to be authentic as well, bc of Te networking tactic.)

polr Si means lack of aesthetic awareness (prominent trait of 4), and moreover, less sense of one's presence.

the Te with Ne demo tends to see oppurtunities in people, 4 rarely seems them (they pick people meticilously)

Ti ignore geoes against 4s hidden penchant for analysis (to systemise reality and compare oneself against that system


[i shouldnt say that LIE 4 is 100 percent impossible. but in the same way i cant say that the earth blowing up right now its impossible.]

[Riven]

I actually think any type can be any enneagram, but for certain types the chance is just VERY low. But it can exist.

[Muira]

E4 Profiling; (Credits: Naranjo)


“ I have characterized them as the most sensitive characters, those in which the sense of lack predominates, in contrast with the excessively satisfied character of those who repress their lacking and disconnect from their needing.” (Strong Fi,


“In contrast with EV, which is more intellectual, EIV is more emotional; while EV is retentive of its energy and participation, but unattached to people, EIV is attached to people.”( Fx > Te, as more emotional socio types gain attachments without the help of another feeling type unlike “T” types).
“This character may express envy in a “decapitating” way, according to the prototype of Cain, who competitively hated anyone else who had what he lacked—the rich, the male, the privileged. But there also exists admiring envy that spurs one on in a self-demanding
desire to attain the social values or models which one feels to be deficient. “ (This is much more correlated with weak Se/Te, with those functions being seeked on improving, hence when improved they integrate to E1).


“Another characteristic defense mechanism of the envious person is “turning against the self” (rediscovered by Perls and called “retroflection” in the vocabulary of Gestalt therapy). It is applied especially to the uncon￾scious aggression that becomes self-aggression. In no other human type is self-reproaching, self-hate, and self￾destruction so present.” ( Does this even match up with Te base? Hell no.)


LIE, with its Fi inferior function, seeks to become more emotionally connected with someone, to have a mutual feeling of trust with those around them. However, they struggle due to their lack of awareness of their inner world, how they feel about people(weak Fi), nor are they very expressive of their emotions, he may make a effort to change the atmosphere to boost production “however, are normally low-key and of short duration; it is difficult for him to display emotions more complex or intense than enthusiasm. He is essentially unable to participate in a group atmosphere where intense emotional expression as in loud laughing and mutual jokes are prevailing.” (weak unvalued Fe).


LIE is lead by Te; “He capably calculates his actions so as to be economical. Being engaged in industrial activity he easily translates his thoughts into reality, it is better to put waste to use than to throw it out. Can conceptualize the optimum method of making use of space so that no room is wasted. Thus he precisely comprehends which task is major and which is minor. He attempts to determine the precise order of his preferences: so that minor trifles should not prevent him from carrying out what is deemed the most important task/goal. He applies these same abilities in the realms of his hobbies: should he find something to be impossibly immense hes able to reasonably limit himself.”


With their contrasting socio types, Fi base, and demonstrative (IEI + EIE due to authenticity and creativity); “The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. This makes the individual seem “judgemental” or “self-righteous” to people less so inclined. If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth.


Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual.” (Fi based, sp4 due to rather keeping their emotions to themselves, unlike sx5, they actually embrace their emotions, )


“The individual is quite adept at understanding the interactions in personal bonds between two individuals, even in the absence of an obvious external emotional expression; but he is inclined to regard them as of lesser importance, and less interesting, than the broader emotional interactions in the context of a larger group. Moreover, those personal bonds are perceived as situational and dynamic rather than static.” (Fi demon, very versatile, E4 general due to their ability to express their emotions along with a rich emotional depth that is unlike any other socio-type.)


“This is manifested as a skepticism about, or reluctance to decide on, the status of a deeper personal bond in a relationship between two individuals in the absence of signs in external emotional expression that should reflect that status. For instance, the individual will be inclined to regard as “loveless” or lukewarm the relationship of a couple who do not obviously display their mutual affection and remain rather subdued in their emotions in the presence of others.


The individual understands discussions or explorations of one’s own inner feelings regarding other individuals but finds them less interesting and relevant than those focusing on one’s emotional state in the same situation.” (Fi ignoring, sx4 correlation as sx4 is much more expressive and less inclined to keep their emotions to themselves.)

[lavos]

LIE falls asleep to their assessment of opinions (sleeping superid Fi)

Whatever does this mean? If it leans the way I think it means, I believe you're incorrect. Depends on other factors, but LIE having -Fe role, is acutely aware of and bothered by negative ethical evaluations.

More interested in practical affairs then 4 due to Te program (less likely to be authentic as well, bc of Te networking tactic.)

Not determinant of incompatibility. A LIE E4 would just be less interested in "practical" matters than another E-Type LIE. But they would still have the full Te-related skillset of LIE.

polr Si means lack of aesthetic awareness (prominent trait of 4), and moreover, less sense of one's presence.

This one is a bit hard to maneuver around, but you have to take in mind that most 4's are types that have proficiency with LIE's +Si PoLR. This means that these exponents could probably have formed the popular understanding of E4. But EII's can also be E4, and they suck at +Si the same as LIE's. So if EII can be E4, for this reason, LIE could also be E4.

the Te with Ne demo tends to see oppurtunities in people, 4 rarely seems them (they pick people meticilously)

Huh? 4's if they are a socionics type proficient at -Ni/+Ne can see possibilities with no problems. The ones that are ESI not, I guess

Ti ignore geoes against 4s hidden penchant for analysis (to systemise reality and compare oneself against that system

It would simply result in a more analytical LIE than average. This is possible since LIE can also be E5, who also have a penchant for analysis.

[i shouldnt say that LIE 4 is 100 percent impossible. but in the same way i cant say that the earth blowing up right now its impossible.]

Or the Sun not rising tomorrow...

[lavos]

E4 Profiling; (Credits: Naranjo)


“ I have characterized them as the most sensitive characters, those in which the sense of lack predominates, in contrast with the excessively satisfied character of those who repress their lacking and disconnect from their needing.” (Strong Fi,


“In contrast with EV, which is more intellectual, EIV is more emotional; while EV is retentive of its energy and participation, but unattached to people, EIV is attached to people.”( Fx > Te, as more emotional socio types gain attachments without the help of another feeling type unlike “T” types).
“This character may express envy in a “decapitating” way, according to the prototype of Cain, who competitively hated anyone else who had what he lacked—the rich, the male, the privileged. But there also exists admiring envy that spurs one on in a self-demanding
desire to attain the social values or models which one feels to be deficient. “ (This is much more correlated with weak Se/Te, with those functions being seeked on improving, hence when improved they integrate to E1).


“Another characteristic defense mechanism of the envious person is “turning against the self” (rediscovered by Perls and called “retroflection” in the vocabulary of Gestalt therapy). It is applied especially to the uncon￾scious aggression that becomes self-aggression. In no other human type is self-reproaching, self-hate, and self￾destruction so present.” ( Does this even match up with Te base? Hell no.)


LIE, with its Fi inferior function, seeks to become more emotionally connected with someone, to have a mutual feeling of trust with those around them. However, they struggle due to their lack of awareness of their inner world, how they feel about people(weak Fi), nor are they very expressive of their emotions, he may make a effort to change the atmosphere to boost production “however, are normally low-key and of short duration; it is difficult for him to display emotions more complex or intense than enthusiasm. He is essentially unable to participate in a group atmosphere where intense emotional expression as in loud laughing and mutual jokes are prevailing.” (weak unvalued Fe).


LIE is lead by Te; “He capably calculates his actions so as to be economical. Being engaged in industrial activity he easily translates his thoughts into reality, it is better to put waste to use than to throw it out. Can conceptualize the optimum method of making use of space so that no room is wasted. Thus he precisely comprehends which task is major and which is minor. He attempts to determine the precise order of his preferences: so that minor trifles should not prevent him from carrying out what is deemed the most important task/goal. He applies these same abilities in the realms of his hobbies: should he find something to be impossibly immense hes able to reasonably limit himself.”


With their contrasting socio types, Fi base, and demonstrative (IEI + EIE due to authenticity and creativity); “The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. This makes the individual seem “judgemental” or “self-righteous” to people less so inclined. If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth.


Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual.” (Fi based, sp4 due to rather keeping their emotions to themselves, unlike sx5, they actually embrace their emotions, )


“The individual is quite adept at understanding the interactions in personal bonds between two individuals, even in the absence of an obvious external emotional expression; but he is inclined to regard them as of lesser importance, and less interesting, than the broader emotional interactions in the context of a larger group. Moreover, those personal bonds are perceived as situational and dynamic rather than static.” (Fi demon, very versatile, E4 general due to their ability to express their emotions along with a rich emotional depth that is unlike any other socio-type.)


“This is manifested as a skepticism about, or reluctance to decide on, the status of a deeper personal bond in a relationship between two individuals in the absence of signs in external emotional expression that should reflect that status. For instance, the individual will be inclined to regard as “loveless” or lukewarm the relationship of a couple who do not obviously display their mutual affection and remain rather subdued in their emotions in the presence of others.


The individual understands discussions or explorations of one’s own inner feelings regarding other individuals but finds them less interesting and relevant than those focusing on one’s emotional state in the same situation.” (Fi ignoring, sx4 correlation as sx4 is much more expressive and less inclined to keep their emotions to themselves.)

You are a novice, and you think you've got all this stuff pinned down, which simply is not possible in such a small window of time (even if you are supposedly a gifted individual). You probably are also E1 and not E8. None of those "arguments" proves incompatibility between LIE and E4. For example, everybody can suck at "distinguishing" friend from foe, even ESI. As per the enneagram theory, enneagram fixations result from certain life experiences. If a LIE experiences the childhood experiences that would result in a E4 type, what would happen? Is it what you experience, or how you react to it? Could a LIE not react similarly as an IEI, ESI, EIE, EII, or IEE?

[Muira]

I actually think any type can be any enneagram, but for certain types the chance is just VERY low. But it can exist.

No reasoning? How so? That's not practical. Socionics and Enneagrams isn't science, so the whole "people are way more complex than some basic descriptions" thing wouldn't work. Typology by heart is categorical, it restricts and puts people in a box, and even in different systems, there are categories that can align or oppose. Typology attempts to put something more fluid and unknown into a system that is based on what we know.

Now that we establish that enneagrams and socionics are more simple than real people, we can talk about how certain combos are impossible. (Ex; ISTP 2w3, INFJ 8w7, etc). It's more about people typing based off of what they want to be than what they are, however we can't choose who we are unless we force ourselves to be different, however that would feel very strange and usual. It's like forcing a ILE to be ESI. It makes no sense to ignore and destroy categories with requirements, if the system is used only to categorize.
Just like it makes so much sense for a MBTI type of INFP to be SLE for example, despite it being "two different systems." As INFJ and INFP is heavily dreamy and detached from reality, which contradicts a irrational, impulsive, yet logical type, that is not consciously venerable, and doesn't have much ability in terms of actually understanding the psychological distance between others and themselves, nor are they good at expressing how they feel properly. The same goes for socionics and enneagrams. Once you truly know socionics and enneagrams, all you have to do is read descriptions and realize how ridiculous aligning opposing enneagrams can be.

Enneagrams isn't just motivations, fears, desires, etc. For example, someone could say "I'm so strong and independent, I'm an E8!" when really they are a sx6, which is arguably better because at least sx6 has a reason for being aggressive, less impulsive, etc. So with random instagram posts with shitty descriptions about enneagrams, making them all positive to avoid offending anyone, of course people will relate to a lot of them. However enneagrams are based on behavior, trauma, coping mechanisms, an individual's emotional processes, thought processes, dears, motivations, fixations, reactions and patterns in responses, it's a consistent character. Not just some random vague archetype, but a heavily descriptive one that is not one dimensional, but complex yet restricted. And like socionics, it's very much similar to enneagrams on how it structures it's self around more detailed factors like defense mechanisms, motivations, etc; just logically, it makes sense that some or a lot of types will not be compatible.

1 + 1 = 2, not every other number because it identifies as x, y, z ,etc.

Socionics and enneagrams can be very accurate, but it can also be very inaccurate for a lot of people. So typology isn't a big deal end of the day, it doesn't mean shit.

I can forgive maybe a LIE e4 if it was just another EIE with high Te, but since it is E4, a very emotionally expressive person who uses their creativity to express their emotional depth automatically alone says that the individual is Fx > Tx to at least to a good enough degree.

[lavos]

No reasoning? How so? That's not practical. Socionics and Enneagrams isn't science, so the whole "people are way more complex than some basic descriptions" thing wouldn't work. Typology by heart is categorical, it restricts and puts people in a box, and even in different systems, there are categories that can align or oppose. Typology attempts to put something more fluid and unknown into a system that is based on what we know.

Now that we establish that enneagrams and socionics are more simple than real people, we can talk about how certain combos are impossible. (Ex; ISTP 2w3, INFJ 8w7, etc). It's more about people typing based off of what they want to be than what they are, however we can't choose who we are unless we force ourselves to be different, however that would feel very strange and usual. It's like forcing a ILE to be ESI. It makes no sense to ignore and destroy categories with requirements, if the system is used only to categorize.
Just like it makes so much sense for a MBTI type of INFP to be SLE for example, despite it being "two different systems." As INFJ and INFP is heavily dreamy and detached from reality, which contradicts a irrational, impulsive, yet logical type, that is not consciously venerable, and doesn't have much ability in terms of actually understanding the psychological distance between others and themselves, nor are they good at expressing how they feel properly. The same goes for socionics and enneagrams. Once you truly know socionics and enneagrams, all you have to do is read descriptions and realize how ridiculous aligning opposing enneagrams can be.

Enneagrams isn't just motivations, fears, desires, etc. For example, someone could say "I'm so strong and independent, I'm an E8!" when really they are a sx6, which is arguably better because at least sx6 has a reason for being aggressive, less impulsive, etc. So with random instagram posts with shitty descriptions about enneagrams, making them all positive to avoid offending anyone, of course people will relate to a lot of them. However enneagrams are based on behavior, trauma, coping mechanisms, an individual's emotional processes, thought processes, dears, motivations, fixations, reactions and patterns in responses, it's a consistent character. Not just some random vague archetype, but a heavily descriptive one that is not one dimensional, but complex yet restricted. And like socionics, it's very much similar to enneagrams on how it structures it's self around more detailed factors like defense mechanisms, motivations, etc; just logically, it makes sense that some or a lot of types will not be compatible.

1 + 1 = 2, not every other number because it identifies as x, y, z ,etc.

Socionics and enneagrams can be very accurate, but it can also be very inaccurate for a lot of people. So typology isn't a big deal end of the day, it doesn't mean shit.

I can forgive maybe a LIE e4 if it was just another EIE with high Te, but since it is E4, a very emotionally expressive person who uses their creativity to express their emotional depth automatically alone says that the individual is Fx > Tx to at least to a good enough degree.

You don't have to "forgive" anything, since you are not the officially appointed forum's correctnesss/morality judge. I think she is absolutely correct in what she is saying. EII 8w7 definitely exists (I have one example in mind — two actually: Randy Couture, and Techno Viking).

[Muira]

You are a novice, and you think you've got all this stuff pinned down, which simply is not possible in such a small window of time (even if you are supposedly a gifted individual). You probably are also E1 and not E8. None of those "arguments" proves incompatibility between LIE and E4. For example, everybody can suck at "distinguishing" friend from foe, even ESI. As per the enneagram theory, enneagram fixations result from certain life experiences. If a LIE experiences the childhood experiences that would result in a E4 type, what would happen? Is it what you experience, or how you react to it? Could a LIE not react similarly as an IEI, ESI, EIE, EII, or IEE?

I relate to sx1, however I'm too impulsive, hedonistic, and genuinely fucked up, I rather use injustice as an excuse to punish more than my actual care for enforcing some form of justice. I still very much relate to enneagram 8 in terms of fixation, coping mechanism, ideals, values, views, and flaws. I've been on other sites, and I have simply read typology books a lot of times to recall information right where it originates, which I did learn quickly but, typology is just another hobby because I like categories and connections and not something I genuinely take serious.

Well that LIE would have the opposing reaction to E4, as they rather much get out of that situation by all logical means, even if it meant detaching from their genuine selves. LIE like every other extroverted thinker would be much more in-tuned in being navigated with this world and observing, getting what they want, enforcing their rules for their benefit, etc. While E4 would stick to being themselves, often refusal to change, as they would rather be themselves than fall to defeat of a cooperate world that demands they be everything but themselves. Which EII, IEI, ESI, etc, are very much in-tuned and stubborn on being themselves, hence they sacrifice Te for Fi/Fe as they are aware that they'd be miserable not being themselves; which is ironic when they often fall short to tragedies when they refuse to take a different path even it is set up for failure.

I think you'd be more of a sx5, that can have stronger emotions, but still categorize them rather than embrace them to become authentic. Or you could be a unhealthy E1(disintegration into E4), but for sure you'd have a strong E4 fix in your tritype at least if you were LIE and somehow related to E4.

[godslave]

One could say that E4 is of the Heart triad so de facto a feeling type therefore exclude any socionics counterpart thinking type. LIE is a thinking Type. E4 is hardly compatible with LIE. Indeed, one could say that without being taken for a fool at least I hope so.

That said I don't like to mix typologies and try to find correlations and matchings. However some Enneatypes and Sociotypes mutually exclude themselves that's obvious and logical. For instance an EII E8 is contradictory.

As a side and personal note, the saying which consist of " Enneagram is about motivation and Socionics is about cognition" and stuff like that kinda irritates me. People use that argument so that they can justify any typing in both system as if one typology was a subtypology of the other, I think it's nonsense. Both are standalone typologies which describe certain types of people therefore they overlap in their descriptions unless either one or both come up with descriptions of people who don't exist.

I prefer to treat each typology independently and if anything they should corroborate each other.

[Muira]

You don't have to "forgive" anything, since you are not the officially appointed forum's correctnesss/morality judge. I think she is absolutely correct in what she is saying. EII 8w7 definitely exists (I have one example in mind — two actually: Randy Couture, and Techno Viking).

You did not process a single thing I said, did you?
This has nothing to do with morality, but accurate correlations. Guess it takes a @Braingel to convince you.

Randy Couture is more of a ESI sx6. Techno Viking is no way EII, maybe EIE, which I am open to EIE possibly being so8.

[Muira]

One could say that E4 is of the Heart triad so de facto a feeling type therefore exclude any socionics counterpart thinking type. LIE is a thinking Type. E4 is hardly compatible with LIE. Indeed, one could say that without being taken for a fool at least I hope so.

That said I don't like to mix typologies and try to find correlations and matchings. However some Enneatypes and Sociotypes mutually exclude themselves that's obvious and logical. For instance an EII E8 is contradictory.

As a side and personal note, the saying which consist of " Enneagram is about motivation and Socionics is about cognition" and stuff like that kinda irritates me. People use that argument so that they can justify any typing in both system as if one typology was a subtypology of the other, I think it's nonsense. Both are standalone typologies which describe certain types of people therefore they overlap in their descriptions unless either one or both come up with descriptions of people who don't exist.

I prefer to treat each typology independently and if anything they should corroborateeach other.

The only way someone can be EII 8w7 is if they are heavily schizophrenic and on every illegal drug that exists, which that person probably doesn't exist.

[lavos]

One could say that E4 is of the Heart triad so de facto a feeling type therefore exclude any socionics counterpart thinking type. LIE is a thinking Type. E4 is hardly compatible with LIE. Indeed, one could say that without being taken for a fool at least I hope so.

That said I don't like to mix typologies and try to find correlations and matchings. However some Enneatypes and Sociotypes mutually exclude themselves that's obvious and logical. For instance an EII E8 is contradictory.

As a side and personal note, the saying which consist of " Enneagram is about motivation and Socionics is about cognition" and stuff like that kinda irritates me. People use that argument so that they can justify any typing in both system as if one typology was a subtypology of the other, I think it's nonsense. Both are standalone typologies which describe certain types of people therefore they overlap in their descriptions unless either one or both come up with descriptions of people who don't exist.

I prefer to treat each typology independently and if anything they should corroborate each other.

The descriptions are a bad way to regard the types, since they are based on the majority of the type-havers, disregarding the minority. They are irrelevant. STING (the singer) is LSI-Se, and he is 4w3, so being a logical type is not incompatible with being E4. Most likely, some prerequisites must be met (such as being LSI-Se or LIE-Ni especifically, which have "boosted" ethics) so that the life happenings/reactions to them can result in an E4. Low likehood doesn't mean impossibility.

I believe Enneagram and Sociotype run an "entwined parallel channel", that is, they go independently, but cause effects on the other.

[Muira]

The descriptions are a bad way to regard the types, since they are based on the majority of the type-havers, disregarding the minority. They are irrelevant. STING (the singer) is LSI-Se, and he is 4w3, so being a logical type is not incompatible with being E4. Mist likely, sone prerequisites must be met (such as being LSI-Se or LIE-Ni especifically, which have "boosted" ethics) so that the life happenings/reactions to them can result in an E4.

That's contradicting, their just E5s, which are just as individualistic, but less expressive and more emotionally detached. A lot of those people...are mistyped horribly.

I believe Enneagram and Sociotype run an "entwined parallel channel", that is, they go independently, but cause effects on the other.

They maybe too system, but they have correlating parts, just like how percentiles and percentages are somewhat correlated. Like 55% can be in the 50s percentile, but not the 60s percentile, etc.

[lavos]

The only way someone can be EII 8w7 is if they are heavily schizophrenic and on every illegal drug that exists, which that person probably doesn't exist.

You seem really biased and close-minded.

[lavos]

You did not process a single thing I said, did you?
This has nothing to do with morality, but accurate correlations. Guess it takes a @Braingel to convince you.

Randy Couture is more of a ESI sx6. Techno Viking is no way EII, maybe EIE, which I am open to EIE possibly being so8.

You don't have enough proficiency/experience to be asserting those typings.

[Muira]

You seem really biased and close-minded.

I'm not, I simply used logic and basic information of EII and E8. You don't even take the basic formation and categorical requirements of both systems seriously, nor do you actually use any logical explanation or even any concrete evidence to debunk my statements. I simply think you are typing off of something like truity or another site that doesn't even properly explain typology. I am open minded, but to the confines of what is possible, and only when I can be proven wrong. Using statements that are supposed to insult another ego instead of responding with reasoning is a huge indication you are probably pissed shitless at me, so lets just ignore and don't get pressed over pseudoscience. No need for pathological arguments.

[godslave]

The descriptions are a bad way to regard the types, since they are based on the majority of the type-havers, disregarding the minority. They are irrelevant. STING (the singer) is LSI-Se, and he is 4w3, so being a logical type is not incompatible with being E4. Most likely, some prerequisites must be met (such as being LSI-Se or LIE-Ni especifically, which have "boosted" ethics) so that the life happenings/reactions to them can result in an E4. Low likehood doesn't mean impossibility.

I believe Enneagram and Sociotype run an "entwined parallel channel", that is, they go independently, but cause effects on the other.

Fair enough !

[Muira]

You don't have enough proficiency/experience to be asserting those typings.

Well then I certainly have much more proficiency to actually know what types contradict with another, using labels as they should be used than term them into meaningless words used for a sense of identity.

Ironic. You started this whole thread to debate, you haven't reasoned at all, or explained why I am wrong, but just say that you disagree.

[Muira]

Fair enough !

I feel like you gave up arguing and just wanted it over with. Subtypes still have very small imapct on the differences of the actual socio type.

[godslave]

I feel like you gave up arguing and just wanted it over with. Subtypes still have very small imapct on the differences of the actual socio type.

Everyone has opinions and arguments to substantiate them.

[Muira]

Everyone has opinions and arguments to substantiate them.

Nice and all, until you figure out that opinions can be wrong or just plainly stupid. You have to also gotta look at what is objective.

[lavos]

Well then I certainly have much more proficiency to actually know what types contradict with another, using labels as they should be used than term them into meaningless words used for a sense of identity.

Ironic. You started this whole thread to debate, you haven't reasoned at all, or explained why I am wrong, but just say that you disagree.

If you are suggesting that I don't like you, yeah, I don't like you. I also think you are wrong in almost everything you say, and that you seem to hold a too high opinion of yourself.

[Muira]

If you are suggesting that I don't like you, yeah, I don't like you. I also think you are wrong in almost everything you say, and that you seem to hold a too high opinion of yourself.

And I think you want to continue to live in your little bubble rather than actually look at the basic traits and facts about these archetypes. I read my opinions highly because you never bothered to even provide a single genuine explanation and resorted to insults. It's not personal, it's just going out of my way to try and get you to understand concepts and how they actually correlate. Just because we share different views doesn't mean we should feel any strong feelings against each other, especially opinions about pseudoscience. With that, no one would talk with each other and nothing would get done, no truths would be found, etc.

There is no point in arguing about two systems that are false in itself due to its lack of objectivity. There is no point in throwing insults, which I did eventually insult you, which is my fault, but you did as well. There is no winner in debates, as the purpose is to find the truth(ironic for pseudoscience), not to destroy the egos of others.

While you don't seem to really care for typology, you at least understand how fluid the human psyche is. There is no such thing as thinker vs feeler in reality, there are people who can do both, neither, or just one. That known statement cancels out the validity of pseudoscience.

Hope you have a good day, also I recommend you try to just laugh about this.

[adage]

@lavos
All the 4s I've encountered, or more so noticed, were heavily unhealthy, so annoyingly whiny and envious. You don't remind me of them much, which is a good thing.
Care to share your understanding of more average 4?

[lavos]

@lavos
All the 4s I've encountered, or more so noticed, were heavily unhealthy, so annoyingly whiny and envious. You don't remind me of them much, which is a good thing.
Care to share your understanding of more average 4?

Perhaps this "envious" trait of 4's is not properly understood. The way I have experienced (and is properly described in some sources) is like this: the 4 harbors a deep sentiment of alienation. They feel they are different and unadapted to the prevailing social schema. In this manner, it is not so much that they strive to be different on purpose, but that they truly feel that they are different. Whining comes as a result that they observe people partaking in life in a normal manner, like "normal people", and they seem unable to do the same. I do not think that they actually individually envy traits of a particular person, and if they do, it's not (at least in my case) to demean and devalue the person (which is what "envy" usually results into) but to morph and introject the trait, which a four is capable of doing (which stems more from admiration than envy). What can be seen as "envy" on part of a 4, might in fact be hostility towards certain personality traits, deemed unnaceptable by the 4. 4's actually normally harbor good feelings and a great deal of innocence, much like a 9. Just a bit on how I see these issues you have mentioned.

Take note (I think I have mentioned it before) that there is a great deal of difference between an average to unhealthy 4, to a healthy 4. If you're wondering what I consider myself to be, I guess I'm currently an "unhealthed 4" (that is, a 4 that life circunstance has forced to drop on health levels) but I once was an integrated 4, and as they say, where there was always remains.

Also, those 4's might have been mistyped. Any unhealthy individual can display negativity (and to be honest, many of the bad rap negativity attributed to 4's, fits better on other typological related types — such as an unhealthy 3, 6, or 7, or beta NF 4's who are predisposed due to their nature to their particular brand of negativity). An unhealthy four basically self destructs or ends up immolating themselves (but in the process they can cause lots of damage, like for example 'The Joker' from 'The Dark Knight' movie, who probably also has 8 in his trifix).

[adage]

Perhaps this "envious" trait of 4's is not properly understood. The way I have experienced (and is properly described in some sources) is like this: the 4 harbors a deep sentiment of alienation. They feel they are different and unadapted to the prevailing social schema. In this manner, it is not so much that they strive to be different on purpose, but that they truly feel that they are different. Whining comes as a result that they observe people partaking in life in a normal manner, like "normal people", and they seem unable to do the same. I do not think that they actually individually envy traits of a particular person, and if they do, it's not (at least in my case) to demean and devalue the person (which is what "envy" usually results into) but to morph and introject the trait, which a four is capable of doing (which stems more from admiration than envy). What can be seen as "envy" on part of a 4, might in fact be hostility towards certain personality traits, deemed unnaceptable by the 4. 4's actually normally harbor good feelings and a great deal of innocence, much like a 9. Just a bit on how I see these issues you have mentioned.

Take note (I think I have mentioned it before) that there is a great deal of difference between an average to unhealthy 4, to a healthy 4. If you're wondering what I consider myself to be, I guess I'm currently an "unhealthed 4" (that is, a 4 that life circunstance has forced to drop on health levels) but I once was an integrated 4, and as they say, where there was always remains.

Also, those 4's might have been mistyped. Any unhealthy individual can display negativity (and to be honest, many of the bad rap negativity attributed to 4's, fits better on other typological related types — such as an unhealthy 3, 6, or 7, or beta NF 4's who are predisposed due to their nature to their particular brand of negativity). An unhealthy four basically self destructs or ends up immolating themselves (but in the process they can cause lots of damage, like for example 'The Joker' from 'The Dark Knight' movie, who probably also has 8 in his trifix).

Nice.
That actually helps my understanding of 4s before they go off, it's possible I crossed the beta NF kind more, hard to tell from memory. I think I piss off certain 4s in particular because I think of myself as normal when I'm often called weird, I tend to stand out from the crowd without meaning to but I also fit in somehow like no biggy, that might stress 4s who aren't in the best state of mind.
Tho it's true 6s can go off at people in a similar manner but it "tastes" different, the anxiousness is obvious, even when they claim envy. Not saying they don't feel envy, it's just anxious. Haven't had much trouble with 3s and 7s so far, so I can't compare.

Thanks. Hope you can find better life circumstances soon.

[Riven]

No reasoning? How so? That's not practical. Socionics and Enneagrams isn't science, so the whole "people are way more complex than some basic descriptions" thing wouldn't work. Typology by heart is categorical, it restricts and puts people in a box, and even in different systems, there are categories that can align or oppose. Typology attempts to put something more fluid and unknown into a system that is based on what we know.

Now that we establish that enneagrams and socionics are more simple than real people, we can talk about how certain combos are impossible. (Ex; ISTP 2w3, INFJ 8w7, etc). It's more about people typing based off of what they want to be than what they are, however we can't choose who we are unless we force ourselves to be different, however that would feel very strange and usual. It's like forcing a ILE to be ESI. It makes no sense to ignore and destroy categories with requirements, if the system is used only to categorize.
Just like it makes so much sense for a MBTI type of INFP to be SLE for example, despite it being "two different systems." As INFJ and INFP is heavily dreamy and detached from reality, which contradicts a irrational, impulsive, yet logical type, that is not consciously venerable, and doesn't have much ability in terms of actually understanding the psychological distance between others and themselves, nor are they good at expressing how they feel properly. The same goes for socionics and enneagrams. Once you truly know socionics and enneagrams, all you have to do is read descriptions and realize how ridiculous aligning opposing enneagrams can be.

Enneagrams isn't just motivations, fears, desires, etc. For example, someone could say "I'm so strong and independent, I'm an E8!" when really they are a sx6, which is arguably better because at least sx6 has a reason for being aggressive, less impulsive, etc. So with random instagram posts with shitty descriptions about enneagrams, making them all positive to avoid offending anyone, of course people will relate to a lot of them. However enneagrams are based on behavior, trauma, coping mechanisms, an individual's emotional processes, thought processes, dears, motivations, fixations, reactions and patterns in responses, it's a consistent character. Not just some random vague archetype, but a heavily descriptive one that is not one dimensional, but complex yet restricted. And like socionics, it's very much similar to enneagrams on how it structures it's self around more detailed factors like defense mechanisms, motivations, etc; just logically, it makes sense that some or a lot of types will not be compatible.

1 + 1 = 2, not every other number because it identifies as x, y, z ,etc.

Socionics and enneagrams can be very accurate, but it can also be very inaccurate for a lot of people. So typology isn't a big deal end of the day, it doesn't mean shit.

I can forgive maybe a LIE e4 if it was just another EIE with high Te, but since it is E4, a very emotionally expressive person who uses their creativity to express their emotional depth automatically alone says that the individual is Fx > Tx to at least to a good enough degree.

dude im in literally no condition to neither answer nor read this. if i ever remember to read or to care i might. but basically: it's freaking different typologies. you can have a certain kind of cognition and have been traumatized in either of the 9 types to get a certain enneagram.

[Muira]

dude im in literally no condition to neither answer nor read this. if i ever remember to read or to care i might. but basically: it's freaking different typologies. you can have a certain kind of cognition and have been traumatized in either of the 9 types to get a certain enneagram.

Just because you have the same trauma as one archetype doesn't mean you behave like a certain archetype. Also why answer when you can just wait later on when you are in the mood?



Yeah. They do measure and describe different personality traits, processes, facets, but no one was arguing on that. MBTI is just solely cognitive functions, while socionics is a combination of behavior, and mbti and values, etc, while enneagram unveils one's pathological motives. However a E5 fits INTj/INTp way more than a SEE, that's because E5 is the complete opposite of SEE. Another example is LSI is mostly compatible with high Te users in MBTI. That these correlations exist, we simply have to acknowledge that theories are always going to have strong connections. These systems still use similar words, have similar origins, etc, and basic traits and archetypes that heavily align. Like saying that EII can be E3, etc. These counterarguments is to simply state that these correlations are then completely false, directly or indirectly.

Lastly impossible correlation is a correlation judgement still, funny because it's correlation of having no correlations or concrete connections.

Goodnight, I am too annoying.

[Riven]

Just because you have the same trauma as one archetype doesn't mean you behave like a certain archetype. Also why answer when you can just wait later on when you are in the mood?



Yeah. They do measure and describe different personality traits, processes, facets, but no one was arguing on that. MBTI is just solely cognitive functions, while socionics is a combination of behavior, and mbti and values, etc, while enneagram unveils one's pathological motives. However a E5 fits INTj/INTp way more than a SEE, that's because E5 is the complete opposite of SEE. Another example is LSI is mostly compatible with high Te users in MBTI. That these correlations exist, we simply have to acknowledge that theories are always going to have strong connections. These systems still use similar words, have similar origins, etc, and basic traits and archetypes that heavily align. Like saying that EII can be E3, etc. These counterarguments is to simply state that these correlations are then completely false, directly or indirectly.

Lastly impossible correlation is a correlation judgement still, funny because it's correlation of having no correlations or concrete connections.

Goodnight, I am too annoying.

DRUGS THAT'S WHY I ANSWERED. Took benzydamine since I'm a pussy so I won't ever get any illegal shit so I went for something OTC. But I drank too little got no hallucinations just insomnia and got awkward

goodnight

[Sol]

When a behavior is based on different principles (typologies in this case), even when it has a similarity - it has different reasons. Hence, there is possibly to be any match of different principles. As those can be totally or partly independent.

Any E-type and Jung type can be thought as co-existing, as this is highly possibly and there is nothing objective to be assured in opposite.

For example, while E-9 has a lot with introverted behavior - it's possibly to be extraverts by Jung types with E-9. Mb I even saw such (ESE E9 and other).

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

EII 8w7 definitely exists (I have one example in mind — two actually: Randy Couture, and Techno Viking).

@Northstar @Rotkiv

[Expansion]

Overall we are emotional people, emotions are behind every decision that is made. It gives an impression of feeling good or feeling bad in a calculus that we went through before, so it informs future decisions, albeit unconsciously. So the question is, is why cannot a type be driven by fear in innateness and motivate us to be all 9 types?

In another forum i'm acquainted with two woman, ENTP and ENFP, they typed as 4, and they are indeed special people in their blogs. Speshul and spezial, and they are focused on the self a lot, so you have an ENTP mid 30s who is not a debater, is very emo, quite extraverted, very ENTP. Has the Fi PoLR thing in worrying about distance in relations, and if i did the wrong thing, etc. This runs contrary to 4 being in an extraverted state, but here is that evidence, though anecdotal.

Having an ego of wanting to be loved, Fe agenda, like her, could span in all 9 types. If you had a 1, they reform, two: to be your friend, 3: achiever, 4 basic fear: identity.

None of it contradicts the ego drive. If we are like hardware and software, or function switches, and limbic emotional flows, what would be contradictory here, is my question. In other words if i want to be loved, there is nothing contradictory in the 9 types.

I think the problem here is thinking the functions are you, as they do generate decisions for a 1/16 type, for a direction say Te, but your fears also generate what you do in that Te direction. If the cognition is set with Te, unconsciously, you just look at the world thru Te eyes, unaware of that, but you also consciously move in a direction with a specific fear motivation.

[Northstar]

@Northstar @Rotkiv

I do not understand, am I EII 8w7?

[The Reality Denialist]

Enneagram 4 seems Ni introverted to me so yes all that despair is possibly handed over to lower feeling to metabolize as I see it or could other ways around for EII too. I think one could make a case for 3w4 LIE. 3 sounds Te or Se extroverted hat want to prompt image so a LIE could easily be 3w4.

I can't really justify myself as one type. I'd be high on 2, 7 (I think 7 core is actually not case for me... I do not shy away from negative emotions so...) at least one could add 4 too and 9 although that is like masochist 4ish adjunct. But that's me and my graphs.

[Muira]

DRUGS THAT'S WHY I ANSWERED. Took benzydamine since I'm a pussy so I won't ever get any illegal shit so I went for something OTC. But I drank too little got no hallucinations just insomnia and got awkward

goodnight

I did kinda think you were on something because it's kinda usual for you to be tired 24/7, but I didn't want to assume. Sleep well, abandon that shit, go sky diving if you want a hell of a high.

[BrainlessSquid]

Judas is the new Aushra

[Muira]

Judas is the new Aushra

I mean I did study socionics for awhile, but also I pay a lot of attention to the alignment of socionics and enneagrams. I am also working on my own system that focuses more in terms of mindset, behavior, open to change, and relationship with oneself and others around them.

[anotherperson]

Whatever does this mean? If it leans the way I think it means, I believe you're incorrect. Depends on other factors, but LIE having -Fe role, is acutely aware of and bothered by negative ethical evaluations.

i'm not sure if this contradicts my earlier point. but 4 does not really care about negative evaluations. 4 is the most self sufficient type, in the sense they dont need or even really want others opinions. but i meant that LIEs do not allows themselves much room for opinions.

Not determinant of incompatibility. A LIE E4 would just be less interested in "practical" matters than another E-Type LIE. But they would still have the full Te-related skillset of LIE.

that would then be unvalued but useful Te. (Te demo?)

This one is a bit hard to maneuver around, but you have to take in mind that most 4's are types that have proficiency with LIE's +Si PoLR. This means that these exponents could probably have formed the popular understanding of E4. But EII's can also be E4, and they suck at +Si the same as LIE's. So if EII can be E4, for this reason, LIE could also be E4.

EIIs value Si at least, even though they suck at it. LIEs (except if their enneagrams are superego types, which 4 isnt [i think its ego]) do not really care much for Si. if they are 1, 2, or 6, they might care somewhat. but then they cant be Four. actually, i dont see much room for even EII 4s. 4s are pretty stubborn, which contradicts Ne's openness.

Huh? 4's if they are a socionics type proficient at -Ni/+Ne can see possibilities with no problems. The ones that are ESI not, I guess

4s prefer Ni to Ne (im not familiar with +/- more then amateur level.) this is because 4s like their lives as a story, which themselves, they are main character. it is congruent with Ni's sense of time, trend, and development. just like a story. if the idea doesnt go anywhere specific as in Ne, you can imagine a 4 would not put many eggs in it.

It would simply result in a more analytical LIE than average. This is possible since LIE can also be E5, who also have a penchant for analysis.

LIEs do analyse, but not for the sake of understanding one and the system. The Te program means its gotta go somwhere. and Ti being ignore, means its very unlikely a Te lead would use it for anything, since they feel indifferent to whatever is going on in the 7th sphere. LIE 5 i can imagine, but not for the same reasoning as yours.

Or the Sun not rising tomorrow...

lets hope it does (:[/CENTER]