User Tag List

First 891011 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 101

  1. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp
    Socionics
    INFj Ne
    Posts
    783

    Default

    @Animal That is true, tell this to all of the other misinformed idiots. I was talking about romantic passion.

  2. #92
    Blood of the Exile Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noll View Post
    @Animal That is true, tell this to all of the other misinformed idiots. I was talking about romantic passion.
    Gotcha. Same thing though. Just becuase someone is LOOKING for romantic passion in an instinctual way, and feeds energy from it primarily, doesn't mean they love their partner more. In many cases SX-firsts confuse themselves by jumping head first into something that feeds them energetically, only to realize later that the love didnt have depth. I'm sure you know that too.

    I see that we agree, btw. I wrote the post as a response to yours, not a criticism.
    Art is the blood of the Exile
    4w3 6w7 8w9 ~ Sx/Sp ~ ISTP ~ LSI-Se

  3. #93
    brainheart
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noll View Post
    @Animal That is true, tell this to all of the other misinformed idiots. I was talking about romantic passion.
    I totally agree. I think so/sp fours can be the most romantic of the fours.

  4. #94
    Senior Member Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    583 sp/sx
    Posts
    920

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brainheart View Post
    I'm with you on this. Maybe that's the sx second talking?
    For me, the "watch me endure pain" part doesn't fit with the "want to be seen as strong and resilient" part. If I let other people see that side of me, then it would be harder to appear stoic and unaffected. Choosing to suffer doesn't strike me as virtuous, either. That could be another reason I don't like this part of the description. I keep my feelings to myself so I don't bother anyone, so I can't be humiliated for feeling that way, so they feel less urgent, and so I can be comfortable.

    Self-containment is a priority for me. Descriptions that emphasize drama, expressiveness, and unrestrained aspects of 4 don't resonate with me for that reason. The profile you posted in #5 is much closer to what I feel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Do the 4 Sp folks relate to the above description?
    A tiny bit. Sp-first makes the most sense to me, although I've wondered about Sx/sp for 4, 5, and 6. Sx seems to deal in intimacy, intensity, and connections in ways that I don't.

    Why do sp 4 descriptions often ignore or flip the sp aspects, anyway? Comfort and security are incredibly important to me. I can easily see how the sp instinct manifests in my daily life, and that might be what drew me to 5.

    Quote Originally Posted by decrescendo View Post
    do other sp 4s relate or is this really out there?
    I don't think it's really out there. None of it clicks for me except for the Southern Kross quote. I might be misunderstanding some of it, especially the sections about annihilation anxiety and trying to trigger something "that makes us feel alive and reconnected."

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I emotionally detach like a 5 so that the person I like cannot "read" me and possibly humiliate my intense emotions, leaving me to wallow in melodramatic suffering alone without reciprocation and the courage to open up.
    This sounds familiar. It doesn't even have to be someone I like.

  5. #95
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp
    Socionics
    INFj Ne
    Posts
    783

    Default

    I Am a Rock by Simon & Garfunkel always makes me think of sp 4w5's. Makes sense because Paul Simon was 4w5 sp/sx.
    4w5-9w1-5w4

  6. #96
    brainheart
    Guest

    Default

    I also like this one:

    Self Pres Four, "Creative Individualist"

    Survival is viewed as more symbolic than literal. What's key is surviving and transmuting the pain of "something missing" into creative expression, often via self-abandonment. Are tenacious and self-contained but not materialistic. Emotional sensitivity hidden behind a practical manner. Accent on creativity in home and garden. ...Artisans, poets.
    From http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/a...f_subtypes.pdf

  7. #97

    Default

    Firstly, just to quickly chime in on the MBTI stuff that's been discussed in this thread, I agree with @brainheart that an introvert is an introvert and an extravert is an extravert. I use dichotomies more than functions, so it doesn't make sense from that POV to make a distinction between social extraversion and cognitive extraversion. But it doesn't even make sense if you're going by the functions, even if you want to go right back to Jung because, as brainheart said, Jung begins his explanation of the types by describing the differences between introverts and extraverts. So if someone's an extraverted intuitive (Ne-dom) the implication is that they're an extravert, in the usual sense of the word. Jung's extraverted intuitive type was basically a "subtype" of the extraverted type, rather like the Enneagram subtypes. So when @Sanjuro says:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sanjuro View Post
    Moreover, there would be ABSOLUTELY NOTHING other than type 4 that I could POSSIBLY be based on her work. Every word of it burned. I think anyone who's dealt with rejection and bad self-esteem would see themselves in her description, however....yet, examining my actual mindset, where my attention goes, and what my ego ideals and super-ego all tell me I SHOULD be, I am clearly not a core 4.
    The same logic applies to the relationship between the functions and the I/E dichotomy. In other words, you can no more be an Ne-dom who's actually an introvert than you can be a self pres 4 who's actually a core 3 or a 5 or whatever.

    Getting back to the actual topic of the thread, I find Chestnut's descriptions (I haven't read the book, so I'm going on what's been posted in this thread) quite one-sidedly negative. I'm not suggesting that anyone should pretend that people don't have issues, and I think type descriptions should be honest about the weaknesses of the types, but her description isn't as complete as it could be because she doesn't say much about the positives. Take that Sx 4 description, for example. When I read it, I get the impression they're people who have a victim mentality and anger management issues. But is that really what's at the core of their personality? What positives do they bring into the world? Honestly, when I read MBTI descriptions, even if I'm thinking "that's describing the kinds of people I always clash with", I can at least acknowledge that each type brings something valuable to society. But sometimes when I read Enneagram descriptions by people like Chestnut and Naranjo, I find myself thinking, "the world would be better off without people like that". I mean this as a totally impersonal critique of the descriptions, and not an insult to anyone of any particular type. I'm not at all a "positive" person, but I have more faith in human nature than Naranjo and Chestnut seem to.

  8. #98
    brainheart
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Octavarium View Post
    Getting back to the actual topic of the thread, I find Chestnut's descriptions (I haven't read the book, so I'm going on what's been posted in this thread) quite one-sidedly negative. I'm not suggesting that anyone should pretend that people don't have issues, and I think type descriptions should be honest about the weaknesses of the types, but her description isn't as complete as it could be because she doesn't say much about the positives. Take that Sx 4 description, for example. When I read it, I get the impression they're people who have a victim mentality and anger management issues. But is that really what's at the core of their personality? What positives do they bring into the world? Honestly, when I read MBTI descriptions, even if I'm thinking "that's describing the kinds of people I always clash with", I can at least acknowledge that each type brings something valuable to society. But sometimes when I read Enneagram descriptions by people like Chestnut and Naranjo, I find myself thinking, "the world would be better off without people like that". I mean this as a totally impersonal critique of the descriptions, and not an insult to anyone of any particular type. I'm not at all a "positive" person, but I have more faith in human nature than Naranjo and Chestnut seem to.
    In the core type section she does go into the positives of the core four, so there is that- even if it isn't much.

    I do agree, however, that her and Naranjo's descriptions give an unbalanced picture. It's typically the type at it's worst, and it seems like the sexual four is one of the most negative descriptions of all the subtypes (the ones are pretty awful too). Ironically, the advice she gives to fours to help them get out of the four trap is to focus on their strengths, so you'd think there'd be some more focus on that.

    Have you ever read The Positive Enneagram by Susan Rhodes? She too got tired of the negative spin on personality so emphasizes the strengths. Interestingly, she types herself as a four so apparently she followed the same course as Chestnut's advice. She also has a book called Archetypes of the Enneagram which is about the 27 subtypes. I haven't read it but I would like to. (The last post with the other self pres description is from her website). I believe her list of films related to the themes of the subtypes is from the book. The themes tend to focus on the strengths of the types (although are some of the weaknesses). http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/a...emes.pdf#start

  9. #99
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    That's a pretty good list, showing actual examples of different themes in the subtypes. That's one thing irritating about many type descriptions is that they don't provide actual examples to help illustrate what is meant, or to help differentiate types better. I must say I have not watched most of the Sp 4 films mentioned*, but I can certainly relate completely to the themes mentioned.

    *Seems most of the films I watch are in the 1,6,8 categories. *shrugs*

  10. #100
    Senior Member Sanjuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    MBTI
    Ne
    Enneagram
    468 sx/so
    Socionics
    :-( None
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Octavarium View Post
    The same logic applies to the relationship between the functions and the I/E dichotomy. In other words, you can no more be an Ne-dom who's actually an introvert than you can be a self pres 4 who's actually a core 3 or a 5 or whatever.
    Well, just call me the ISTP soc/sp 4 then!

    Getting back to the actual topic of the thread, I find Chestnut's descriptions (I haven't read the book, so I'm going on what's been posted in this thread) quite one-sidedly negative. I'm not suggesting that anyone should pretend that people don't have issues, and I think type descriptions should be honest about the weaknesses of the types, but her description isn't as complete as it could be because she doesn't say much about the positives. Take that Sx 4 description, for example. When I read it, I get the impression they're people who have a victim mentality and anger management issues. But is that really what's at the core of their personality? What positives do they bring into the world? Honestly, when I read MBTI descriptions, even if I'm thinking "that's describing the kinds of people I always clash with", I can at least acknowledge that each type brings something valuable to society. But sometimes when I read Enneagram descriptions by people like Chestnut and Naranjo, I find myself thinking, "the world would be better off without people like that". I mean this as a totally impersonal critique of the descriptions, and not an insult to anyone of any particular type. I'm not at all a "positive" person, but I have more faith in human nature than Naranjo and Chestnut seem to.
    Have you read Helen Palmer's stuff? I really like her work because she describes where your mind is and where your attention goes rather than writing specifically about the "problems" of each type, per se. (Worth noting that it wasn't until I became extremely unhealthy I could see myself in Naranjo's stuff at all).

Similar Threads

  1. OH MY GOD
    By Critical Hit in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-04-2011, 02:10 AM
  2. OH MY GOD THE FORUM IS UP!!!!!
    By Totenkindly in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 08:27 PM
  3. Oh my god, I'm so lucky to live in Seattle
    By InTheFlesh in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-17-2010, 09:53 AM
  4. OH MY GOD THERE IS A CRISIS!
    By Antimony in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-26-2009, 09:28 PM
  5. OH MY GOD, WHAT?
    By Atomic Fiend in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-25-2009, 01:58 PM

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