User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 74

  1. #21
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    9 has the reputation of being an ambiverted type though.
    Not really, imo.

    People usually think of IFs when they think of 9s.

    They're not thought of as anywhere as ambiverted as 6s.

    They do integrate into extroversion, tho (3EE).

    And the disintegrate into ambiversion (6SS).

  2. #22
    011235813
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Not really, imo.

    People usually think of IFs when they think of 9s.

    They're not thought of as anywhere as ambiverted as 6s.

    They do integrate into extroversion, tho (3EE).

    And the disintegrate into ambiversion (6SS).
    Yup, 6s are way more ambiverted, I don't think there's any doubt about that.

    I just hear the "ambiverted" label a lot when it comes to 9, especially while explaining why an introvert comes across as not being so introverted. I'm very introverted, which is why this hasn't ever resonated with me.

    Also, I think Naranjo correlated 9 with cyclothymia? I don't think I'm making this up (though I might be, can't find it right now.)

  3. #23
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Planetary Walker View Post
    e6? I'm not so sure about that, but I'm glad you have at least some significant impression on me besides being a pretentious douchebag
    I think of things in multifaceted ways, my friend.

    Quote Originally Posted by Planetary Walker View Post
    As for MBTI again, I know I at least use a lot of Ne. When I write I notice I don't pay attention to one single stream of thought, it tends to bounce around and broaden the context with new loosely related ideas. I occasionally use Ni but it doesn't feel natural at all so that would rule out xSxP. I scored higher on Te than Ti too, so I can definitely see xNFP, more so INFP.
    Yeah, I don't really question INFP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Planetary Walker View Post
    I appreciate you've had some thought about my enneagram, but what is it that makes me seem like a e6? I own several books, I think three on the ennegram and I don't relate too much to it. I don't doubt it, just not certain of it. I'd also like to know whether you think I'm a 6w7 or 6w5.
    I know this wasn't to me, but, just understand, I didn't identify with most the enneagram 6 descriptions either.

    Which books do you have?

    Are you aware that e6 is considered the most varied of all the types?

    As in, within e6, there is a whole lot of variety -- with some types being almost opposites of the others (they share a common core, tho).

    (The reason they end up/seem like almost polar opposites is because of how the different subtypes react to that common core)

    6s are also one of the two types who tend to have the most difficulty figuring out their e-type (the other being 9s)

    Your e-type would most certainly be counterphobic.

    There are then two different strains of counterphobic 6s (the third strain/subtype being phobic, which you are not).

    I've felt this way for a pretty long time -- never thought e4 or e9 made sense for you, and a lot of your behavior resembles my own.

    (Don't think that when I wrote that bit about you, I didn't also see myself in the description)

    (And the way you responded to it... straight out of my playbook... as in, to. a. tee.)

    Anyway, parts of 'Personality Types' be Riso & Hudson have some good e6 information.

    (Although they do too much switching between phobic and counterphobic types)

    (And do so without dilineating them well at all, nor addressing all three subtypes of 6s)

    The best places for information on 6s are Naranjo's 'Character and Neurosis' and Armando Molina's 'Our Ways: Values & Character'

    The former is, as you probably know (and might already own), the Enneagram Bible, and the latter is, imo, the best book out there.

    The former you can get anywhere, including Amazon; the latter you have to order from a Dutch publisher for ~$50.

  4. #24
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yup.

    It's 9II.

    I'm pretty sure I know an ENTP 9, tho.
    Yea, I know an ESFJ 9. I was a little surprised though when I found out his type. But it makes sense imo, with 9 being the "peacemaker" an all. They share introverted qualities at least. You know, not siding with one person or the other overtly (shows reflection,) not being the overt leader (not necessarily leading, or following) stuff like that....

    And re: ambivert: I think they are more ambivalent when it comes to making decisions....not where thier energy goes.
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  5. #25
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    Yup, 6s are way more ambiverted, I don't think there's any doubt about that.

    I just hear the "ambiverted" label a lot when it comes to 9, especially while explaining why an introvert comes across as not being so introverted. I'm very introverted, which is why this hasn't ever resonated with me.

    Also, I think Naranjo correlated 9 with cyclothymia? I don't think I'm making this up (though I might be, can't find it right now.)
    I believe I did see something not too long ago about Naranjo associating 9s with ambiversion, actually.

    This is a falsehood, tho.

    On the triangle of the enneagram, there is one point that is extroverted, one point that is ambiverted, and one point that is introverted.

    3EE
    6SS
    9II

    And, well, 9 is the introverted point.

    (don't discount the integration to extroversion and disintegration to ambiversion bit, tho: they're the only type on the triangle like that)

    (as in, of all the types on the triangle, their integration and disintegration leads to the greatest degree of extroverting)

  6. #26
    Senor Membrae Eugene Watson VIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    iSFP
    Enneagram
    idk sp
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I think of things in multifaceted ways, my friend.



    Yeah, I don't really question INFP.



    I know this wasn't to me, but, just understand, I didn't identify with most the enneagram 6 descriptions either.

    Which books do you have?

    Are you aware that e6 is considered the most varied of all the types?

    As in, within e6, there is a whole lot of variety -- with some types being almost opposites of the others (they share a common core, tho).

    (The reason they end up/seem like almost polar opposites is because of how the different subtypes react to that common core)

    6s are also one of the two types who tend to have the most difficulty figuring out their e-type (the other being 9s)

    Your e-type would most certainly be counterphobic.

    There are then two different strains of counterphobic 6s (the third strain/subtype being phobic, which you are not).

    I've felt this way for a pretty long time -- never thought e4 or e9 made sense for you, and a lot of your behavior resembles my own.

    (Don't think that when I wrote that bit about you, I didn't also see myself in the description)

    (And the way you responded to it... straight out of my playbook... as in, to. a. tee.)

    Anyway, parts of 'Personality Types' be Riso & Hudson have some good e6 information.

    (Although they do too much switching between phobic and counterphobic types)

    (And do so without dilineating them well at all, nor addressing all three subtypes of 6s)

    The best places for information on 6s are Naranjo's 'Character and Neurosis' and Armando Molina's 'Our Ways: Values & Character'

    The former is, as you probably know (and might already own), the Enneagram Bible, and the latter is, imo, the best book out there.

    The former you can get anywhere, including Amazon; the latter you have to order from a Dutch publisher for ~$50.
    Yes I have the Riso and Hudson book, The enneagram made easy by Renee Baron and Elizabeth Wagele and The Complete Enneagram by Beatrice Chestnut. I also own Please Understand Me II. I will read more into type 6 and see what I come out with. I'm no enneagram expert, that's why I am so open-minded about it mostly, so I'll have to really delve into it.

    How did you figure out you were a 6? I also realize badger055 brought up the issue that so many people get coined as e6 so I'm a little biased, but I'll do some research.
    Myers-Briggs: xsFP

    Enneagram: 9?-4wX?-5/6

    ~ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. ~

  7. #27
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    @gromit , @solipsists and others

    Here is what enneagram institute says about 9's:


    The personality type Nine corresponds to Jung's introverted sensation type.(Si dom) Jung describes what we would regard as average to unhealthy Nines, people who maintain their peacefulness and connection with others not as they are, but through an idealization of them. The other person may feel "devalued," as Jung says, for the following reasons:

    ...he may be conspicuous for his calmness and passivity, or for his rational self-control [especially, for example, if the Nine has a One-wing]. This peculiarity, which often leads a superficial judgment astray, is really due to his unrelatedness to objects. Normally the object is not consciously devalued in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it and immediately replaced by a subjective reaction no longer related to the reality of the object. This naturally has the same effect as devaluation. Such a type can easily make one question why one should exist at all...

    Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences... If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception... Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality-alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula—all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness. (C. G. Jung, Psychological Types, 396-397.)

    And for 5's:

    The basis of their orientation to the world is thinking; personality type Five corresponds to Jung's introverted thinking type.(INTP/ISTP)
    "Introverted thinking is primarily oriented by the subjective factor....It does not lead from concrete experience back again to the object, but always to the subjective content. External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, though the introvert would often like to make his thinking appear so. It begins with the subject and leads back to the subject, far though it may range into the realm of actual reality....Facts are collected as evidence for a theory, never for their own sakes." (C. G. Jung, Psychological Types, 380.)

    Although they correspond to Jung's introverted thinking type, Fives are perhaps more precisely characterized as a subjective thinking type because the aim of their thought is not always introverted (that is, directed toward themselves); rather, it is directed often outward toward the environment, which Fives want to understand so that they can be safer in it. The impetus for their thinking comes, as Jung says, from "the subjective factor," from their need to know about what lies outside themselves, as well as from their anxiety when they do not understand the environment. This is why thinking is the method Fives use both to fit into the world and, paradoxically, to defend themselves against it.

    And if if the words from one of the most professional people in the field of enneagram is not enough, ill quote something about INTP explain:

    "The INTP is above all a thinker and his inner (private) world is a place governed by a strong sense of logical structure. Every experience is to be rigorously analysed, the task of the INTP's mind is to fit each encountered idea or experience into a larger structure defined by logic. For here is the central goal of the INTP: to understand and seek truth."

    Now if someone claims to be an INTP, but cannot agree with this description above, he simply is not an INTP. And if someone says that "yes this is me", but still says that he is enneagram 9, well he better look at other e types(what enneagram calls thinking triad which is 5, 6 and 7), since they fit much better to this sort of thinking personality.

    Just like there is a dominant function in MBTI that doesent change, but from which we develop our whole self and which we learn to let go of to some degree and learn to use other functions aswell. There is similar idea in enneagram, there is one basic type that does not change, but we learn to integrate other types in us aswell(but we still are out basic type, just as we are our dominant function, even if some life circumstances leads us to act like some other type or function, we still are Ti dom or 5 deep down and that does not change according to MBTI or enneagram).
    INTPs core type is in the thinking triad of enneagram, but some INTPs learn that with some situations it is more wise to act like a 9 would act for example, but this does not make the INTP a 9.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #28
    Senor Membrae Eugene Watson VIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    iSFP
    Enneagram
    idk sp
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    @gromit , @solipsists and others

    Here is what enneagram institute says about 9's:





    And for 5's:




    And if if the words from one of the most professional people in the field of enneagram is not enough, ill quote something about INTP explain:

    "The INTP is above all a thinker and his inner (private) world is a place governed by a strong sense of logical structure. Every experience is to be rigorously analysed, the task of the INTP's mind is to fit each encountered idea or experience into a larger structure defined by logic. For here is the central goal of the INTP: to understand and seek truth."

    Now if someone claims to be an INTP, but cannot agree with this description above, he simply is not an INTP. And if someone says that "yes this is me", but still says that he is enneagram 9, well he better look at other e types(what enneagram calls thinking triad which is 5, 6 and 7), since they fit much better to this sort of thinking personality.

    Just like there is a dominant function in MBTI that doesent change, but from which we develop our whole self and which we learn to let go of to some degree and learn to use other functions aswell. There is similar idea in enneagram, there is one basic type that does not change, but we learn to integrate other types in us aswell(but we still are out basic type, just as we are our dominant function, even if some life circumstances leads us to act like some other type or function, we still are Ti about dom or 5 deep down and that does not change according to MBTI or enneagram).
    INTPs core type is in the thinking triad of enneagram, but some INTPs learn that with some situations it is more wise to act like a 9 would act for example, but this does not make the INTP a 9.
    What about all the INTP 9s and INFx 5s? I think that alone is evidence that thinkers don't always belong to the 'thinking triad' and that feelers don't always appear in the feeling or instinctive triad. I think what you're looking at is just highlighting certain MBTI types that commonly score as them. You said something about INTPs belonging to the thinking triad, and while I agree with 6 and 5, I don't see many 7s around. You would find more 9s than 7s.

    I am just anticipating all the exceptions to your statement to come in and refute it. There are a lot of people on here that would disagree with you.
    Myers-Briggs: xsFP

    Enneagram: 9?-4wX?-5/6

    ~ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. ~

  9. #29
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Planetary Walker View Post
    What about all the INTP 9s and INFx 5s? I think that alone is evidence that thinkers don't always belong to the 'thinking triad' and that feelers don't always appear in the feeling or instinctive triad. I think what you're looking at is just highlighting certain MBTI types that commonly score as them. You said something about INTPs belonging to the thinking triad, and while I agree with 6 and 5, I don't see many 7s around. You would find more 9s than 7s.

    I am just anticipating all the exceptions to your statement to come in and refute it. There are a lot of people on here that would disagree with you.
    Havent you noticed that so so many people in typology forums are mistyped because they dont understand type or dont know themselves well enough?

    I dont think 7 fits very well to INTPs either, i didnt say that INTP can be any of the types in thinking triad, i said that INTPs core type is in thinking triad. How can one be a thinker at core, but then again not be a thinker in core? Being a Ti dom means that you are a thinker at core and 9 is not a thinker at core. Ti dom can learn to act like 9(this is what enneagram encourages people to do), but it doesent mean that if a person learns to act like 9, he then becomes a 9. Just like if an INTP learns to use his Si and Fe, and notices that this way of functioning in some situations is better than TiNe, or he finds himself in tough situation in life and dwells deeper into his unconscious acting from his unconscious attitudes(namely Fe and Si to some extend), it doesent make him an ISFJ.

    Here is some basics of the structure of the system(and what i want to point out there is the basic type, as its most relevant to what im trying to say): http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/intro.asp

    Just like people in the field of MBTI say that dominant function develops first and that we grow from there while remaining true to our actual type, the guys at enneagram say the same thing about basic type. The difference really is that while MBTI/Jung says that there is one type that we are and that we develop functions other than our dominant, but the dominant still remains dominant, enneagram says that there is a basic type in all of us from which we develop other types in ourselves, but the basic type remains the same.

    Here is a lot of reasons why someone might mistype himself in enneagram http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/misid/

    As i mentioned INTP can develop his 9(like he can develop his SiFe), but his basic type cant be 9 because it contradicts his MBTI type.

    INTP and basic type of 9 are mutually exclusive, i dont know how else to explain this anymore and i dont understand why people dont see this(maybe its the lack of information or lack of thinking, i dunno, but i have given all the necessary information and explanations that is needed to explain this).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #30
    Senor Membrae Eugene Watson VIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    iSFP
    Enneagram
    idk sp
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Havent you noticed that so so many people in typology forums are mistyped because they dont understand type or dont know themselves well enough?

    I dont think 7 fits very well to INTPs either, i didnt say that INTP can be any of the types in thinking triad, i said that INTPs core type is in thinking triad. How can one be a thinker at core, but then again not be a thinker in core? Being a Ti dom means that you are a thinker at core and 9 is not a thinker at core. Ti dom can learn to act like 9(this is what enneagram encourages people to do), but it doesent mean that if a person learns to act like 9, he then becomes a 9. Just like if an INTP learns to use his Si and Fe, and notices that this way of functioning in some situations is better than TiNe, or he finds himself in tough situation in life and dwells deeper into his unconscious acting from his unconscious attitudes(namely Fe and Si to some extend), it doesent make him an ISFJ.

    Here is some basics of the structure of the system(and what i want to point out there is the basic type, as its most relevant to what im trying to say): http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/intro.asp

    Just like people in the field of MBTI say that dominant function develops first and that we grow from there while remaining true to our actual type, the guys at enneagram say the same thing about basic type. The difference really is that while MBTI/Jung says that there is one type that we are and that we develop functions other than our dominant, but the dominant still remains dominant, enneagram says that there is a basic type in all of us from which we develop other types in ourselves, but the basic type remains the same.

    Here is a lot of reasons why someone might mistype himself in enneagram http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/misid/

    As i mentioned INTP can develop his 9(like he can develop his SiFe), but his basic type cant be 9 because it contradicts his MBTI type.

    INTP and basic type of 9 are mutually exclusive, i dont know how else to explain this anymore and i dont understand why people dont see this(maybe its the lack of information or lack of thinking, i dunno, but i have given all the necessary information and explanations that is needed to explain this).
    I see exactly what you're saying, sorry for the misinterpretations too. But I just think that there are too many people who contradict that rule. Maybe you're right, an INTP is a thinker, obviously, and that enneagram 9s belong to NFs and some xSFJs. But there are just so many exceptions out there, and it's not like we can debunk each one. I would say there are probably more mistyped INTP 9s than actual INTP 9s, but I'm willing to believe they exist. ISTPs are very closely related and can score as 9w8s, so it just seems futile arguing that INTPs can't be 9s either. I would agree 9w8s would probably be non-existent, but there's notorious 9w1s like Abraham Lincoln and from what speculation I've seen, Jeff Bridges too.

    My OP was originally meant to be enquiring on behalf of finding out whether I was INTP or not, which I don't think is true, just a bunch of results from what the internet told me to be or somethin'.

    Now that I think about it, I havn't actually seen a single enneatype 6 INTP on TypC.
    Myers-Briggs: xsFP

    Enneagram: 9?-4wX?-5/6

    ~ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. ~

Similar Threads

  1. [INTP] hey intp, how lonely are you??
    By yasin in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-30-2015, 06:41 PM
  2. So how common are balanced wings anyway?
    By Etherea in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-10-2012, 08:35 PM
  3. [INTP] how are INTP look wise?
    By think2much in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 05-24-2010, 12:02 AM
  4. [E9] What are INTP 9s like?
    By Asterion in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-02-2010, 10:02 PM
  5. How simlilar are INTP'S and INFP'S?
    By Lady_X in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 04-11-2009, 01:10 AM

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