A combined MBTI and Enneagram test

[anndelise]

Extroverted (E) 50% Introverted (I) 50%
Intuitive (N) 58.82% Sensing (S) 41.18%
Feeling (F) 58.62% Thinking (T) 41.38%
Perceiving (P) 63.64% Judging (J) 36.36%

Your type is: ENFP

Type 1 Perfectionism |||||| 23%
Type 2 Helpfulness |||||||||| 33%
Type 3 Image Awareness |||||||||| 40%
Type 4 Sensitivity |||||||||||||||| 66%
Type 5 Detachment |||||||||||| 43%
Type 6 Anxiety |||||||||||||||| 70%
Type 7 Adventurousness |||||| 30%
Type 8 Aggressiveness |||||||||||| 43%
Type 9 Calmness |||||| 26%

type score type behavior motivation
6 21 I must be secure and safe to be happy.
4 20 I must avoid painful feelings to be happy.
5 13 I must be knowledgable and independent to be happy.
8 13 I must be strong and in control to be happy.

You scored as Type 6 : Sixes are overly alert and anxious. They are sceptical of the status quo but are also fearful of being on their own.

Your variant is self pres: sp/so/sx : Overall, you score highest on withdrawn traits (sp), followed by compliant traits (so), and lowest on assertive traits (sx).

[Phaedrus]

There's nothing empirical about this. It's a 3rd party test that's been arbitrarily hacked together on the basis of the designer's own personal whims. Idiot.

I was not referring to the test. As I have said repeteadly I don't trust test results very much. The empirical evidence is all those things I have said and explained in countless of posts on this forum. I have put some of the most important arguments together in the poll about my type. Read it and reflect upon it.

tell us why you unconditionally reject the possibility that socionics and MBTI and enneagram types may not possess a definite correlation.

I haven't said that there is a definite one-to-one correlation between socionic/MBTI types and the Enneagram types. But that there is a one-to-one correlation between the socionic types and the MBTI types is obvious when we start to compare the type descriptions between the models. Not many (if any) of you have done that on more than a very superficial level. I have done it, though, thoroughly and extensively, and it is cristal clear that everything fits my view of it -- if we compare the type descriptions, the temperament descriptions, the descriptions of E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P, and the socionic dichotomies found in General discussion.

And you do seem to have some issues here, because you think your right and everyone else is wrong.

Yes, I am convinced that I am right, because all the many, many pieces of evidence suggest that, every piece fits in the puzzle, with every new information input my case gets more and more corraborated, and no one, I repeat, NO ONE has been able to counter ANY of my arguments in a satisfactory way.

Unfortunately, your reference point is not as good as it could be, and that sort of implies you are wrong (I know you will take that personally, but try not to). That's the trouble with ... but it's your responsibility to update and change your viewpoints.

It's a matter of learning how much to consider others reactions. They may not be important, but it's a good way map your bearings with reality.

That applies to all of you. Start doing it then! IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO UPDATE AND CHANGE YOUR VIEWPOINTS. (Good way of putting it, UDP II. I couldn't have said it better myself.)

By the way. You seem to be a very clear-cut INTj, UDP II, based on V.I. and what you have said so far about yourself. You and I don't look alike. I look like an INTp, you look like an INTj. We get different test results, and if you bother to look at what I have written in the poll Phaedrus you will realize that we can't be the same type (unless you turn out to be an INTp, too, looking like an INTj ...)

[anndelise]

My enneagram results were there. Just a bit differently formatted. In this test the order was
6, 5, 7, 3, 1, 4, 9. 2 and 8 didn't get much support. I usually score 5 though but this time it was 6w5.

But anyways if 2, 3, 7, 8 are extrovert then I was relatively high in 7 and 3 but very low on 2 and 8. Eh Can you see any rule that would split 2 and 8 extroverts from 3 and 7 extroverts?

I more or less agree with FDG here. The typical 2 is an EFj, the typical 8 is an ENTj in my opinion. Type 7 is clearly Ep and type 3 is perhaps both J and P as he suggests, but at least you can find a lot a P types there.

You scored highest on type 6. The typical 6 is an ISFj, which means that here we have another Enneagram type that correlates with the IJ temperament. The type 6 is a bit problematic, but in my opinion every 5, without exceptions, is an introvert. And every 5 is also a T type. There is very strong correlation between type 5 and IT.

6 according to this particular test does NOT correlate with IJ temperament.

I seem to recall (though I may be wrong) that the Enneagram is not a set type...but that people can cycle through at least a few of them.

[Expat]

I seem to recall (though I may be wrong) that the Enneagram is not a set type...but that people can cycle through at least a few of them.

If you look at the very detailed Enneagram type descriptions - including motivations, and the stackings - you recognize set types.

[UDP]

That applies to all of you. Start doing it then! IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO UPDATE AND CHANGE YOUR VIEWPOINTS. (Good way of putting it, UDP II. I couldn't have said it better myself.)

no comment, at this time

[aestrivex]

I haven't said that there is a definite one-to-one correlation between socionic/MBTI types and the Enneagram types. But that there is a one-to-one correlation between the socionic types and the MBTI types is obvious when we start to compare the type descriptions between the models. Not many (if any) of you have done that on more than a very superficial level. I have done it, though, thoroughly and extensively, and it is cristal clear that everything fits my view of it -- if we compare the type descriptions, the temperament descriptions, the descriptions of E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P, and the socionic dichotomies found in General discussion.

the theories are similar, but they are not exact. this applies to type descriptions as well as all other parts of the two theories. however, focusing solely on type descriptions is enough to produce clear contradictions:

briefly looking over the MBTI types, the best example of a type which has somewhat different features when considered between MBTI and socionics is the ISFJ/ISFj.

consider the following aspects from the ISFJ description at typelogic.com:

ISFJs are characterized above all by their desire to serve others, their "need to be needed." In extreme cases, this need is so strong that standard give-and-take relationships are deeply unsatisfying to them; however, most ISFJs find more than enough with which to occupy themselves within the framework of a normal life. (Since ISFJs, like all SJs, are very much bound by the prevailing social conventions, their form of "service" is likely to exclude any elements of moral or political controversy; they specialize in the local, the personal, and the practical.)

all of the above is entirely untrue in ISFjs i know, and almost all of it goes against the functions of Fi and Se. however, this seems to be a very good description for an ESFj. Fi types would not "need to be needed" as Fe types might (rather, they need morals (?) and human contact). No ISFj, furthermore, would shy from moral controversy, as this description implies.

... Being SJs, they place a strong emphasis on conventional behavior (although, unlike STJs, they are usually as concerned with being "nice" as with strict propriety); if any of their nearest and dearest depart from the straight-and-narrow, it causes the ISFJ major embarrassment: the closer the relationship and the more public the act, the more intense the embarrassment (...) Needless to say, ISFJs take infinite trouble over meals, gifts, celebrations, etc., for their loved ones--although strong Js may tend to focus more on what the recipient should want rather than what they do want.

more behavior characteristic of ESFjs more than ISFjs. note the strong Fe which appears to be present (which is ok as MBTI ISFJs have creative Fe) with the following of conventional social norms, and the attempt to please others through sensory delights (meals, gifts, celebrations, etc.)


compare this to a brief passage from this site's ISFj description (which, incidentally, is copied from dmitri's site)

He perfectly remembers both good and evil, and considers it necessary to “repay” for them (...) He does not reveal emotions much, and so appears cold-blooded. Often he does not look directly into his interlocutor’s eyes, as though in order not burn him down. A complicated ethical situation inspires him.

comparing this to the ISFJ, the ISFj DOES have involvement in moral issues (i.e. necessary to repay for good and evil). the ISFj with Fi is more reserved than the ISFJ with Fe.

Friends are those who accept his ethical norms. He submits his emotions to the emotions of the others

again, lacks the conservative features of the ISFJ who demands acceptance of society's norms.



not all features, of course, of the ISFJ are inapplicable to the ISFj. it is also true that there are some other types in MBTI who are very similar to their socionic counterparts (EXFPs come to mind).

these inconsistencies just illustrate the fact that there is no direct correlation between the two theories. the fact that they may coincide in one place does not mean that they do so entirely.

[Phaedrus]

the theories are similar, but they are not exact. this applies to type descriptions as well as all other parts of the two theories.

I have never said they they are "exact". I have said that they describe the same groups of people (the real, empirical types). Their type descriptions sometimes focus on different aspects of the same type.

however, focusing solely on type descriptions is enough to produce clear contradictions:

briefly looking over the MBTI types, the best example of a type which has somewhat different features when considered between MBTI and socionics is the ISFJ/ISFj.

Well ... let's see about that. But remember, describing somewhat different features is not the same thing as a contradiction.

ISFJs are characterized above all by their desire to serve others, their "need to be needed." In extreme cases, this need is so strong that standard give-and-take relationships are deeply unsatisfying to them; however, most ISFJs find more than enough with which to occupy themselves within the framework of a normal life. (Since ISFJs, like all SJs, are very much bound by the prevailing social conventions, their form of "service" is likely to exclude any elements of moral or political controversy; they specialize in the local, the personal, and the practical.)

all of the above is entirely untrue in ISFjs i know, and almost all of it goes against the functions of Fi and Se. however, this seems to be a very good description for an ESFj. Fi types would not "need to be needed" as Fe types might (rather, they need morals (?) and human contact).

Then you don't know them well enough, or they are not ISFjs. I am quite familiar with ISFjs, considering that I have lived with, and still do, an ISFj for many years. I also know other ISFjs, both females and males. All of the above is true of ISFjs, but it is slightly misleading, since some other traits tend not to be mentioned in the MBTI descriptions. In general I find the socionic descriptions of ISFjs more accurate than the MBTI descriptions of ISFJs, but there are no contradictions.

No ISFj, furthermore, would shy from moral controversy, as this description implies.

... Being SJs, they place a strong emphasis on conventional behavior (although, unlike STJs, they are usually as concerned with being "nice" as with strict propriety); if any of their nearest and dearest depart from the straight-and-narrow, it causes the ISFJ major embarrassment: the closer the relationship and the more public the act, the more intense the embarrassment (...) Needless to say, ISFJs take infinite trouble over meals, gifts, celebrations, etc., for their loved ones--although strong Js may tend to focus more on what the recipient should want rather than what they do want.

You are wrong. Some real life ISFjs shy away from moral controversy in the way described here. And it is true of most ISFjs that they "take infinite trouble over meals, gifts, celebrations, etc., for their loved ones".

more behavior characteristic of ESFjs more than ISFjs. note the strong Fe which appears to be present (which is ok as MBTI ISFJs have creative Fe) with the following of conventional social norms, and the attempt to please others through sensory delights (meals, gifts, celebrations, etc.)

If you compare real life ESFjs with real life ISFjs you will find many similarities of the kind you have described. That is no contradiction either.

He perfectly remembers both good and evil, and considers it necessary to “repay” for them (...)

That is an expression of the IJ temperament, something that is not often mentioned in the MBTI profiles -- but there is no contradiction.

He does not reveal emotions much, and so appears cold-blooded. Often he does not look directly into his interlocutor’s eyes, as though in order not burn him down.

Can be found in more than one introverted type. No contradiction.

A complicated ethical situation inspires him.

It is not very accurate to say that a complicated ethical situation inspires an ISFj. If you compare with real life ISFjs, you will realize that that statement is as misleading as some statements in the MBTI profiles.

comparing this to the ISFJ, the ISFj DOES have involvement in moral issues (i.e. necessary to repay for good and evil).

And so does the the ISFJ. Read some more MBTI profiles if you haven't found that trait described. That is not a contradiction.

the ISFj with Fi is more reserved than the ISFJ with Fe.

Nonsense.

Friends are those who accept his ethical norms. He submits his emotions to the emotions of the others

again, lacks the conservative features of the ISFJ who demands acceptance of society's norms.

No. Both the ISFj and the ISFJ is described as moral, and that moralism is manifested in the same way. The only difference is how the two models explain the origin of that moral attitude.

not all features, of course, of the ISFJ are inapplicable to the ISFj. it is also true that there are some other types in MBTI who are very similar to their socionic counterparts (EXFPs come to mind).

Every MBTI type is similar to their socionic counterpart. You must be blind not to see that if you have read many type descriptions.

these inconsistencies just illustrate the fact that there is no direct correlation between the two theories. the fact that they may coincide in one place does not mean that they do so entirely.

Overall the type descriptions of both theories describe the same traits, but there are also differences in focus, which means that they complement each other. If you compare with real life examples of the types, you will see that both theories describe the same types correctly. The socionic descriptions are more accurate in most cases, but some aspects of some types are more correctly described in MBTI. A clear example of that is some descriptions of INTps written by INTjs, which (as you know) can be quite misleading. In comparison to them, many of the MBTI descriptions of INTPs are better. Stratiyevskaya's description is the most accurate socionic description of INTps I know of.

[aestrivex]

well, i still don't see it.

almost of the features you seem to be questioning as valid, where you do this came right out of type descriptions. the only one that isn't is my own experience of the ISFjs dealing with moral problems; those that i know certainly don't shy away from them at all, and it makes perfect sense to me that they would attack the problems as a result of their Se.


and, you've pointed out several places where differing information does not lead to contradictions. however, i believe in most cases that the information presented, while it may seem similar, is actually written to project a different idea than the one you seem to be taking it as. i.e. i believe you're misinterpreting some of the information here.

[April]

Introverted (I) 69.7% Extroverted (E) 30.3%
Intuitive (N) 75.86% Sensing (S) 24.14%
Feeling (F) 62.5% Thinking (T) 37.5%
Perceiving (P) 53.57% Judging (J) 46.43%

INFP - "Questor". High capacity for caring. Emotional face to the world. High sense of honor derived from internal values. 4.4% of total population.

Type 1 Perfectionism |||||||||||||| 60%
Type 2 Helpfulness |||||||||||||||| 66%
Type 3 Image Awareness |||||||||||| 46%
Type 4 Sensitivity |||||||||| 40%
Type 5 Detachment |||||||||||||||| 63%
Type 6 Anxiety |||||||||| 33%
Type 7 Adventurousness |||| 20%
Type 8 Aggressiveness |||||||||| 36%
Type 9 Calmness |||||||||||||| 56%

Hmm... I really don't think I'm a 2. I scored lower on 4 on this test than I do on others. I don't know what E-type I am! It drives me crazy when I think about it, so I usually just don't.

[Polly]

Hmmm been staying out of this one but all I got to say is, if you go up to a bunch of people and say something like, "You all suck, your all stupid". Your very unlikely to have anyone even listen to your opinion.

The only thing that could come out of it is that you offend pretty much everyone and look like a big giant ass. So assuming here, the ass really doesn't care about other people's opinions, why would the ass even bother to offer his (considering most won't listen to it because having that poor an attitude does actually affect your judgement and perceptions).

I call that a rather unproductive situation.

OK...NEXT!!!

I actually have to say I related to the results quite well. With the exception of the sexual part. I read that description for a Type 9 and I only relate to a few aspects of it.

For me, its the percentages I actually find most interesting. I can see a definate relation to these percentages.

Example:
Extroverted (E) 56.41% Introverted (I) 43.59%
It really is a toss up whether I will seek out other's input to make a decision. More often than not, I won't. Mostly because there are so many poor decision makers out there.

Intuitive (N) 83.87% Sensing (S) 16.13%
I am VERY disconnected from my environment and live a lot in my own head. The way I find things around the house is I'm a creature of habit. I tend to kick my shoes off after I sit at my computer (so I know my shoes are under my desk whenever I look for them).

Its actually very difficult for me to deal with environmental concerns such as house-cleaning. I am the epitome of a daydreamer.

Thinking (T) 60.47% Feeling (F) 39.53%
This as well. I can definately hold my own with other thinkers but I also have a lot of emphathy too (a lot more in person than in writing). I base my decisions on logic but understand that sometimes feelings are important too. I take other's feelings into consideration (am now just learning to take my own into consideration as well)

Perceiving (P) 77.14% Judging (J) 22.86%

I'm a pretty typical perceiver I would say.


The way I see it is, these percentages can indicate extremes in your personality. Extremes I can do a little something about but in all honesty, its a HUGE struggle. More often than not I'm just aware of how these extremes can affect my outlook and my interpersonal relationships with others.

I find it highly unlikely that I could relate well to someone with a sensing score over 70%. With me being over 80% Intuitive, I would think it would be very hard for us to relate or having any kind of communication we enjoyed.

As for the Type 9w2 Enneagram, again...I can relate. When I see:

Type 4 Sensitivity |||| 16%
Type 5 Detachment |||||||||||||||| 63%

Its a prime example to me of why I have such a difficult time relating to feelers and why, even though I'm a very strong P, I can be actually judgemental over the ethical behavior of people (myself included). I just don't base my ethics on society. I base them on what I know to be healthy and productive vs. unhealthy and damaging.

So...part of my point is this...

Tests I find actually can be a huge help in determing personality. Its not so much the test, as it is the person taking it though. These are the things that I find have a major impact on test results:

1. Mood (if you are very detached and even tempered this is less likely to have an impact)
2. Environment - we all have to survive and sometimes we don't have those around us to help us with your weak points. The longer you are in an environment where you have to use your weak poiints, the more likely you are to start seeing yourself as that person.
3. Fear - Irrational fear that by being honest you are going to somehow give away your deep dark secrets.
4. Ego - Wanting to look good.

How I tell people to approach the tests:

1. There are different types of intelligence. Logical, Emotional, and Sensory are the ones I see as the major ones. Which one is most valued in society changes. I'll even point out how we've gone from a society which valued labor to a society that valued emotional awareness during the counter culture movement to how now we seem to value information more so that logical type of intelligence is more valued. Hopefully some day we'll just be a balanced society.

I do all of this to just make them feel more comfortable with the test.

2. I talk to them about from which perspective to attack the questions.

Rather than how you actually behave, think of it terms of what you naturally would like to do if there were no societal, financial, relationship etc. pressures on you to behave differently.

Think back to your childhood a bit even to how you behaved then before you started to get more self-control, discipline and were taught the 'appropriate' way to behave.

I think this is especially important for those who have the majority of all their scores down the middle. I would like to believe there were that many well-balanced people out there but experience has taught me no.

There are people though who are very good at balancing their behavior out to function and excel in society. But these tests are not about actual behavior. It's how you think not what you do.

[Polly]

I just ran across something kind of interesting and noticed Diana had ENTj results here.

I was going through some of my old graphics and noticed the below Political Compass chart we did (which most baulked at). Anyway, I thought it was interesting how Diana's politics seemed more intune with the ENTj's rather than the left which I somehow kind of thought an INFj would gravitate towards.

Anyway, food for thought...