Originally Posted by
Alonzo
Great, thank you for that. I'm also gonna be honest, from the top: the bolded sentiments, in particular, make my brain go [[SYSTEM FAILURE]]. lol I'm Se lead/Te demo (maximum empiricism), Fi PolR, and Si ignoring > one's subjective point of view (even my own) inherently means very little to me--if anything, I'm somewhat inclined to disregard and disrespect that consideration completely. From my vantage point, "it is what is," the truth is the truth regardless of how anyone feels about it.
IMO, reality should not be shaped solely by someone's subjective, limited purview which might, actually and rather simply, be wrong, misguided, confused, delusional and/or missing some crucial piece of data/info/understanding (which, to be charitable, is what I believe is often the case). Moreover, if ESI is actually your best fit type (who possess 1D Te), then you’d have to concede that it’s certainly possible that you are missing/haven’t quite grasped some of the “actionable information.” I wholeheartedly believe that the "the truth will set you free," and therefore it's worthwhile to scour, excavate, reveal, and dissect until the highest "truth" prevails because that's where I believe actual, long-term, self-sustaining transformative growth is possible. That's my raw, guttural reaction to your "disclaimer."
Having said that, I still do believe that one's subjective experience matters to some extent, has a place, value, and is deserving of some respect, sensitivity, and mindfulness; but I'm so sorry, never will I prioritize that over the objective, empirical reality (data, facts, statistics, logic of actions) for the sake of someone's ego; I believe that the greater, collective "good" (which, for me, is centered on what is concrete and trackable) is more important than any hyper-individualistic, potentially self-serving narrative. Make no mistake: though "messy" and "ambiguous" in quite a few areas, systems like MBTI, Socionics, and Enneagram are fundamentally structured by objective metrics/standards/criterion and in order to function at the highest rate of fidelity for all those using it, it's vital to ensure that everyone is as accurately typed as possible--no "type" exists in a vacuum. I guess this was my "disclaimer."
I want to revisit this comment. Although this was allegedly said in jest, you must believe this to be true in order to justify the belief that ESI can be an E8, because these two types are, in some fundamental ways, negating (4D Fi lead vs 1D Fi PoLR) identities–in order to be an ESI and an 8, that would mean that you were inherently strong (e.g., emotionally self-aware, empathic, deeply in touch with your vulnerabilities) at some of the 8's most fundamental weaknesses, which on its face, is rather absurd and speaks to a critical misunderstanding of the Enneagram and its primary purpose/function.
Each Enneatype has repressed or “unconscious” shadow aspects/blind spots that obscure their ability to fully/holistically see themselves “in 4K”; the Enneagram is designed to be a tool that helps us uncover/recognize/accept these hidden patterns so as to consciously integrate them and, subsequently, become more intentional, purposeful, and whole as people. E8s are “blind” to their physical and emotional vulnerabilities, sensitivities, and weaknesses. This runs diametrically opposed to what makes an ESI (4D Fi and Si), an ESI.
(Speaking of subjectivity, which you started btw, here's some Ti and Si for you) Because I’m an 8 (which, again, perfectly aligns with Fi PoLR), it is not my natural instinct to emotionally self-reflect in order to “put myself in someone else’s shoes,” which is why it’s easy for me to unintentionally bulldoze people and not consider how my demeanor/behavior/actions are impacting them on an individual level. Being Fi PolR grants me the gift and curse of not having to readily consider someone’s personal, subjective feelings, which might otherwise give me “PAUSE” in how I navigated those interpersonal dynamics. This has gotten me into A LOT of trouble throughout my life. Therefore, it’s a bit patronizing and insulting to cheekily imply that you are somehow above and beyond that, as if you are some supernatural, preternaturally evolved 8. No offense, but GTFOHWTS.
You even remotely bringing your Fi/Si into this actually irritates the dog fuck out of me because I do not want to consider that, at all–it registers as an unfair burden. And I hate that someone else’s personal beliefs/anecdotal evidence (which they are entitled to) bothers me. With the utmost sincerity, I am not trying to diminish your feelings or be harmful to you–but I can’t help but to feel “gas lit” and backed into a corner, which speaks to my ultimate point>> Even after all the personal work I’ve done, everything I’ve learned and applied by way of various typology systems, my automatic INSTINCT is to want to discount and rail against your subjective fee-fees (and mine) on the matter. That’s how powerful our “blind spots” are supposed to be–they are deeply ingrained and “hard wired” to the extent that it takes challenging, “painful” work to even acknowledge it, let alone overcome it.
Therefore, if one feels generally unburdened and unencumbered by the 8's greatest weaknesses (which would be the case as an ESI), then what that obviously means is they are not an 8. This premise makes the most theoretical, conceptual and practical sense.