## User Tag List

1. What happens if type is only four preferences? There are only four functions, to separate them by how they are preferred to be employed is to cross pollinate two facets which would erroneously leave you with eight elements.

As for some types being diplomatic and other's not being diplomatic... I think you're either too strict in your definitions or missing something my friend. ENFJ's can be diplomatic and are MUCH better reads on the state of people than INTJs can be. An INTJ friend of mine upset an ENFJ friend and when the latter pretty much snapped at him and stomped out of the room the INTJs response was "Was he upset?.... At me????". Ok so my response as an INTP to laugh and roll around on the floor wasn't diplomatic in the usual sense but it got them talking to each other as they discussed which should kick me first

2. Originally Posted by Xander
What happens if type is only four preferences? There are only four functions, to separate them by how they are preferred to be employed is to cross pollinate two facets which would erroneously leave you with eight elements.

As for some types being diplomatic and other's not being diplomatic... I think you're either too strict in your definitions or missing something my friend. ENFJ's can be diplomatic and are MUCH better reads on the state of people than INTJs can be. An INTJ friend of mine upset an ENFJ friend and when the latter pretty much snapped at him and stomped out of the room the INTJs response was "Was he upset?.... At me????". Ok so my response as an INTP to laugh and roll around on the floor wasn't diplomatic in the usual sense but it got them talking to each other as they discussed which should kick me first
Hulloa Xander. Good to see you.
I do not know anything about diplomacy. Regret.

As for the other question.
Let us have a four-set.

4 = 3 + 1
12/4 = 9/3
124 - 93 = 31
as said 12/4 = 9/3
3 + 1 = 4
12 X 3 = 4 X 9

How many directions?
One.

3. It is good to have so many devoted friends, Xander.

Apropos what happens if type is only four preferences?
It is what happens if the day is only the clockface.

The day is twelve hours, Xander?
It is four and twenty hours.

An illustration.

24 h divided.

4 X 9 = 36

4 X 36 = 24 X 6 = 144

X 10

1440/2
= 720 minutes in the clockface.

1440/1 minutes in a day.

Secondwise

720 + 144 = 864

X 100

3 + 6 = 9
3 X 9 = 27
(T)27 = 2 X 36

check

36 - 9 = 27

Half and half, Xander.

36 X 24 = 24 X 36

36/2 = 18
36/4 = 9
3 X 4 = 6 X 2 = 24/2

Does the roundturn turn in the turnround?

The number does not sign the number.
It numbers the sign.

The sign does not number the sign.
It signs the number.

4. Beep boop deet deet boop?

5. It's not about another side of the clock face however, it is more akin to if it's in the first half of an hour or the last half. It is still part of the same hour, there is merely a divide within it.

A better example would be an apple sat upon the floor. One side is still clean and wonderful, the other is dirty from the floor and bruised from it's drop. Yes the two halves do look different and yes they would taste different and have different appeal but they are still part of the same apple.

It doesn't matter if you prefer to apply T to the external world or prefer to apply it to the internal wonderland, it's still T.

Ergo your calculations would be in error or you'd need to move to a three dimensional grid. Perhaps 4x4x2? Not sure where that shifts your loci too though.

As for friends, everyone is a friend until they do something which deserves a different kind of treatment. Or they're boring... Boring people are associates. You're in no risk there though

6. Originally Posted by Xander
It's not about another side of the clock face however, it is more akin to if it's in the first half of an hour or the last half. It is still part of the same hour, there is merely a divide within it.

A better example would be an apple sat upon the floor. One side is still clean and wonderful, the other is dirty from the floor and bruised from it's drop. Yes the two halves do look different and yes they would taste different and have different appeal but they are still part of the same apple.

It doesn't matter if you prefer to apply T to the external world or prefer to apply it to the internal wonderland, it's still T.

Ergo your calculations would be in error or you'd need to move to a three dimensional grid. Perhaps 4x4x2? Not sure where that shifts your loci too though.

As for friends, everyone is a friend until they do something which deserves a different kind of treatment. Or they're boring... Boring people are associates. You're in no risk there though
Thank you, Xander.

Why T?

2 - 8 = 0 - 6

8 - 2 = 6 - 0

2 + 6 = 8 + 0

68 - 62 = 6 = 46 - 40

62 - 8 = 80 - 26 = (T)45 = 60 - 6

check

144 X 60 = 8640

441 X 6 = 2646

Half in half, Xander.

Dimensionwise.

7. E = 9
The clockface = 12

9 = 12 - 3
12 X 3 = 4 X 9 = 36
720 = (T)2 X 36
72 = 6 X 12 = 3 X 24
36 - 9 = (T)72
as 4 - 1 = 3

(T)72/3 = 9

Say the clock is one. The nine set is one.
E = 1

Four hours late the clock is five.
5 - 4 = 1
The nine set is four. E = 4.

E = 1 at 1
at 5 E = 4

Clockface = 12
Enneagram = 9

12 - 9 = 3
3 X 4 = 12
3/3 = 1

32 is not divisible in the order. Regret.

Our clock strikes 9:
nine set = 7
E = 7. No wings.

Clock 01: Nine set 01
Clock 05: Nine set 04
Clock 09: Nine set 07
Clock 13: Nine set (T)1

(T)1 - 1 = 9
12/3 = 4

8. Originally Posted by wildcat
Why T?
Pessimist
Why not?
Originally Posted by wildcat
62 - 8 = 80 - 26 = (T)45 = 60 - 6
T = 1.2????
Originally Posted by wildcat
144 X 60 = 8640

441 X 6 = 2646

Half in half, Xander.

Dimensionwise.
The point is if you're using numerical replacement to see the pattern then using 8x8 will show you an overly complicated result. 4x4 gives you your sixteen types without recourse to over analysing. In fact if you use a straight analysis of the functions and their order you get 4x2x2. 4 functions, 2 for extrovert and introvert and 2 for judging or perceiving.

Oh and I was reading some publication from the Oxford Psychology Press, it made definitive reference to four preferences for each type not eight. Now that would inevitably lead back to the whole idea that the other four are non preferred and therefore it leads to eight total but I still maintain that such polarised views of people are incorrect at a fundamental level and should not be supported.

That reminds me, a question for you...
If you think of the functions (including their attitudes if you must) then should each function be a distinct scale within a person or are they mixed?
So
F - T say Fe - Ti
or
T - T say Te - Ti
?

Personally I think the former and would go further to state that it supports my thinking on how many functions constitute a persons preferences but I'd appreciate your insight.

9. Originally Posted by Xander
Pessimist
Why not?

T = 1.2????

The point is if you're using numerical replacement to see the pattern then using 8x8 will show you an overly complicated result. 4x4 gives you your sixteen types without recourse to over analysing. In fact if you use a straight analysis of the functions and their order you get 4x2x2. 4 functions, 2 for extrovert and introvert and 2 for judging or perceiving.

Oh and I was reading some publication from the Oxford Psychology Press, it made definitive reference to four preferences for each type not eight. Now that would inevitably lead back to the whole idea that the other four are non preferred and therefore it leads to eight total but I still maintain that such polarised views of people are incorrect at a fundamental level and should not be supported.

That reminds me, a question for you...
If you think of the functions (including their attitudes if you must) then should each function be a distinct scale within a person or are they mixed?
So
F - T say Fe - Ti
or
T - T say Te - Ti
?

Personally I think the former and would go further to state that it supports my thinking on how many functions constitute a persons preferences but I'd appreciate your insight.
Yes, Xander. I know.
A direct analysis of the functions and their order will get 4 X 2 X 2. Granted.
You pointed it out. Thank you.

I did not understand how people can be so blind.
So stupid of me.
John and Linda. I did not get it.

The math may look perfect.
It is does not make it right right when the premise is wrong.

A good question.
It is not one or the other.
A vertical dichotomy parallels a horizontal dichotomy.
Simultaneously.

Is the object turned by the subject?
The subject turns itself.

10. Originally Posted by wildcat
Yes, Xander. I know.
A direct analysis of the functions and their order will get 4 X 2 X 2. Granted.
You pointed it out. Thank you.

I did not understand how people can be so blind.
So stupid of me.
John and Linda. I did not get it.

The math may look perfect.
It is does not make it right right when the premise is wrong.

A good question.
It is not one or the other.
A vertical dichotomy parallels a horizontal dichotomy.
Simultaneously.

Is the object turned by the subject?
The subject turns itself.
The object would be interpreted by the subject but unless interaction happens to the object to change it then the object is the same no matter which subject is put in front of it.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO