[Tritype] Am I a type 4, 5 or 8?

[brainheart]

What did you say your instinct stacking was? so/sp? That can make a 4w3 seem more 3-ish, I think.

 

[HBIC]

What did you say your instinct stacking was? so/sp? That can make a 4w3 seem more 3-ish, I think.

Based on the 4w3 profiles I've read, it was So/Sp.

 

[Octavarium]

I just had another look at your questionnaire from an MBTI perspective, since it's been mentioned, and I would agree with [MENTION=7140]brainheart[/MENTION] that INFJ is at least worth considering. This, for example:

I want to be recognized and prized for who I am and my special talents. I want to inspire people to be themselves too, to feel confident and not be afraid of being genuine no matter what the rest of the world thinks.

...is quintessentially NF.

 

[HBIC]

I just had another look at your questionnaire from an MBTI perspective, since it's been mentioned, and I would agree with [MENTION=7140]brainheart[/MENTION] that INFJ is at least worth considering. This, for example:

...is quintessentially NF.

Except for the fact that MBTI isn't about core motivations but about how you interact with the world. Also, I test quite low on F and out of all temperaments, NF is he one I least idenify with. Probably the reason why I keep getting in brawls wih INFJs and ENFPs here on the forum.

 

[johnnyyukon]

I started taking Enneagram tests 3 years ago and have always come up as 8w7.

Sorry, lot to sort through here, have you narrowed it down anymore? Certified 8w7 here.

 

[Octavarium]

Except for the fact that MBTI isn't about core motivations but about how you interact with the world. Also, I test quite low on F and out of all temperaments, NF is he one I least idenify with. Probably the reason why I keep getting in brawls wih INFJs and ENFPs here on the forum.

Here's a brief description of NFs, written by Berens and taken from one of Vicky Jo's sites:

The Catalysts' core needs are for the meaning and significance that come from having a sense of purpose and working toward some greater good. Catalysts need to have a sense of unique identity. They value unity, self-actualization, and authenticity. Catalysts prefer cooperative interactions with a focus on ethics and morality. Catalysts tend to be gifted at unifying diverse peoples and helping individuals realize their potential. They build bridges between people through empathy and clarification of deeper issues. The Catalysts' motto might be Sui Generis (unique, particular, in a class of its own).

By contrast, here's the NT description from the same source:

The Theorists' core needs are for mastery of concepts, knowledge, and competence. Theorists want to understand the operating principles of the universe and to learn or even develop theories for everything. They value expertise, logical consistency, concepts and ideas, and seek progress. They abstractly analyze a situation and consider previously un-thought-of possibilities. Research, analysis, searching for patterns, and developing hypotheses are quite likely to be their natural modus operandi. The Theorists' motto might be Cogito, Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I am).

I don't really understand how it is that you don't relate to the NF temperament; in your questionnaire, you said a lot about your need to have a unique identity, to be authentic, and to inspire the same in others, and that all seemed very NF to me. As I said, I thought there was much more NF than NT in your questionnaire, but even so, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that you didn't entirely relate to that NF description, or that you related at least a little to the NT description. I think it's possible to be in or near the middle on any of the demensions, and if you're an intuitive who's on the T/F borderline, which you may well be, you're probably going to find that you somewhat relate to both NF and NT, but you don't entirely fit into either.

Either way, whichever temperament you most relate to, those descriptions are about core motivations, right?

 

[HBIC]

Sorry, lot to sort through here, have you narrowed it down anymore? Certified 8w7 here.

Main type seems to be either 4w3 or 3w4. It's probable I have an 8w7 fix.

 

[HBIC]

Here's a brief description of NFs, written by Berens and taken from one of Vicky Jo's sites:



By contrast, here's the NT description from the same source:



I don't really understand how it is that you don't relate to the NF temperament; in your questionnaire, you said a lot about your need to have a unique identity, to be authentic, and to inspire the same in others, and that all seemed very NF to me. As I said, I thought there was much more NF than NT in your questionnaire, but even so, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that you didn't entirely relate to that NF description, or that you related at least a little to the NT description. I think it's possible to be in or near the middle on any of the demensions, and if you're an intuitive who's on the T/F borderline, which you may well be, you're probably going to find that you somewhat relate to both NF and NT, but you don't entirely fit into either.

Even so, whichever temperament you most relate to, those descriptions are about core motivations, right?

Your source is Vicky Jo . That's all.

 

[Octavarium]

Your source is Vicky Jo . That's all.

I'm not keen on Vicky Jo either, but I think those descriptions are decent. Anyway, she's quoting from Berens, and you can find similar descriptions in Keirsey's work. I don't think much of the multiple model approach Berens takes either, and everyone on the internet seems to hate Keirsey (I don't think he's as bad as everyone says he is, but that's an issue for another thread). My point is, regardless of what you or I happen to think of anyone personally, or whether we entirely agree with their theoretical frameworks, why not listen to them and quote them on the rare occasions when they do say something insightful?

 

[HBIC]

I'm not keen on Vicky Jo either, but I think those descriptions are decent. Anyway, she's quoting from Berens, and you can find similar descriptions in Keirsey's work. I don't think much of the multiple model approach Berens takes either, and everyone on the internet seems to hate Keirsey (I don't think he's as bad as everyone says he is, but that's an issue for another thread). My point is, regardless of what you or I happen to think of anyone personally, or whether we entirely agree with their theoretical frameworks, why not listen to them and quote them on the rare occasions when they do say something insightful?

Let me know when they say something insightful.

 

[Southern Kross]

...is quintessentially NF.

No. Many other types would say similar things.

Something I didn't mention [MENTION=21109]Look Alive_Sunshine[/MENTION] is how many statements you make in this thread that (IMO) a 4 would never say. You have some 4 traits perhaps, but not the drives. You do sound clearly like an identity centre (ie, 2,3,4), though.

The fact you identified with the Social 4 type (which is what I am ) could just be that 3-ness coming through, because there is some cross-over between 3 traits and the social instinct. You don't really strike me as a social dom either, and certainly not a So/Sp. You seem too direct, where a So-dom would have more diffuse energy. Have you looked at some 3 stack descriptions?

 

[HBIC]

No. Many other types would say similar things.

Something I didn't mention [MENTION=21109]Look Alive_Sunshine[/MENTION] is how many statements you make in this thread that (IMO) a 4 would never say. You have some 4 traits perhaps, but not the drives. You do sound clearly like an identity centre (ie, 2,3,4), though.

The fact you identified with the Social 4 type (which is what I am ) could just be that 3-ness coming through, because there is some cross-over between 3 traits and the social instinct. You don't really strike me as a social dom either, and certainly not a So/Sp. You seem too direct, where a So-dom would have more diffuse energy. Have you looked at some 3 stack descriptions?

I said So/Sp because when I read type 4's subtypes by stacks, that was the one that jumped out at me:

Social (Des. 5): I can describe them this way: They're kind of like the outsiders who wished they fit in. Not the "F you" outsiders, but the "I wanna join but I'm not good enough" outsiders. They wished they possessed all the qualities of 'regular' people (which they feel they lack) so that they can do what they really want to do: participate in society. This is why they're kinda hard to notice, since they're usually innocuous and not all that attention-seeking. To acquaintances they're pretty friendly and generally try to please, but they can get kinda holier-than-thou and reactive with people they know well, esp. when it has something to do with how they are perceived by others. If you challenge their image of themselves they just FLIP OUT royally and will have a hell of a time trusting you. They are VERY aware of social norms and deliberately try to 'stand out' and kinda "wait around" for someone to notice them. They're not very likely to do stuff to get 'any' kind of attention, just 'worthy' attention. Like they're not going to start a fit to get ANYONE's sympathy, they usually direct their acting towards certain individuals/groups. To others they just try their best to act normal so that no one notices that they're not.

so/sp - warm outward focus retreats quickly inward when threatened

The social 4w3 tend to be the quiet ones that hang out in the "alternative" cliques with 3w4s or 7s. They need to be part of a group and express themselves through some kind of interest, whether its raving or theatre plays or whatever. They lack confidence outside their area of expression, though. The SP 4w3 never seems to lack confidence around others and it only comes out in private or with close friends. Otherwise the need to feel "elite" and above the commoners is important, although they do want others to pay attention to them and what they do.

soc/sp - This type is often the most comfortable in group settings, but tends to be a bit formal and awkward in one to one relations.

But I guess that now that I read it again, I can 3's motivation alignig with it.

Just read the info at the link you posted and:

Sexual/Self-pres

This subtype can appear almost Four-like. They can be dramatic and appear introspective, especially with the Four wing. There is an on and off quality to these Threes. They can be very emotional and then become very business like. It’s not uncommon to find this subtype in the arts, especially as actors, singers or performers. The outward sexual energy coupled with the secondary self-pres energy can cause these Threes to focus on projecting an image of themselves to the world. They will seek validation in the area of their persona. This type especially wrestles with the authenticity of the persona/image they create. On the one hand, the image protects the real self, but at the same time they hate the image they project. This subtype is likely to be in a constant state of flux when it comes to the image they project and for this reason, they run the risk of burn-out and disillusionment. They are more prone to depression than the other subtypes.

When healthier, these Threes begin to trust their intimate relationships, and begin to disentangle the real self from the flux of partial identities they create. They learn that being vulnerable is necessary if they are to get what they really want, which is to reveal the real self and trust that they are lovable even with their flaws.

It's picth perfect, word by word.

 

[Animal]

[MENTION=21109]Look Alive_Sunshine[/MENTION]

I'm with [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] on this, at this juncture. I think 3 seems much more likely. I'll break down your posts again soon and explain. As for Sx/Sp, that description REALLY DOES sound like your energy that I've seen so far. You seem to know yourself well. It's refreshing.

Figuring out instincts, it's a bit more complex than a short description. Basically - the first instinct is the one you obsess over, which 'trips you up' in a very conscious way. If you're SX first then whenever you meet a partner you're obsessing over them rejecting you, or becoming insecure about it. IF you're Sp first it's more insecurity about money, resoucres and physical comfort. If you're Social first it's more insecurity about your place in the larger world, or the state of the world at large and where you fit into it, your social network connections etc. The second instinct (for example if you're Sx/sP the second is Sp) - this instinct is what you use to smooth over the first. In other words if I'm Sx/So, I'd be very 'smooth' socially or comfortable with my place in the world at large, so when I'm having Sx insecurity, the way I attempt to resolve it is by thinking wider, or socializing with a larger network to feel like 'i dont need him', staying connected with others too or.. if I have a boyfriend I might introduce him to my social circle. IF I'm Sx/Sp then when I'm insecure I'd attempt to resolve it with physical exercise or bodily pleasures, and if I have a boyfriend I'd provide such pleasures for him.

The last instinct - (the one not listed in the double stack) is more of a blind-spot that you don't think about, but it creeps up to haunt you when you're not looking, and at that point you can feel insecure about it.

That's a very over-simplified (and I'm not sure if exactly accurate) explanation. But I'll write more later. I don't personally have a strong opinion on your instincts yet, but I'm seeing more and more 3 core.

 

[HBIC]

[MENTION=21109]Look Alive_Sunshine[/MENTION]

I'm with [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] on this, at this juncture. I think 3 seems much more likely. I'll break down your posts again soon and explain. As for Sx/Sp, that description REALLY DOES sound like your energy that I've seen so far. You seem to know yourself well. It's refreshing.

Figuring out instincts, it's a bit more complex than a short description. Basically - the first instinct is the one you obsess over, which 'trips you up' in a very conscious way. If you're SX first then whenever you meet a partner you're obsessing over them rejecting you, or becoming insecure about it. IF you're Sp first it's more insecurity about money, resoucres and physical comfort. If you're Social first it's more insecurity about your place in the larger world, or the state of the world at large and where you fit into it, your social network connections etc. The second instinct (for example if you're Sx/sP the second is Sp) - this instinct is what you use to smooth over the first. In other words if I'm Sx/So, I'd be very 'smooth' socially or comfortable with my place in the world at large, so when I'm having Sx insecurity, the way I attempt to resolve it is by thinking wider, or socializing with a larger network to feel like 'i dont need him', staying connected with others too or.. if I have a boyfriend I might introduce him to my social circle. IF I'm Sx/Sp then when I'm insecure I'd attempt to resolve it with physical exercise or bodily pleasures, and if I have a boyfriend I'd provide such pleasures for him.

The last instinct - (the one not listed in the double stack) is more of a blind-spot that you don't think about, but it creeps up to haunt you when you're not looking, and at that point you can feel insecure about it.

That's a very over-simplified (and I'm not sure if exactly accurate) explanation. But I'll write more later. I don't personally have a strong opinion on your instincts yet, but I'm seeing more and more 3 core.

I realize that, but my tests results are all over the place for instincts and reading the type descriptions with stacks it's better than reading the ones without them.

I think that I can say for certain that Sp is the second one. Sexual sounds off in general because I've never obssessed with people in any way and the interaction style usuall described freaks me out. But Sexual 3 sounds about right...

 

[brainheart]

I realize that, but my tests results are all over the place for instincts and reading the type descriptions with stacks it's better than reading the ones without them.

I think that I can say for certain that Sp is the second one. Sexual sounds off in general because I've never obssessed with people in any way and the interaction style usuall described freaks me out. But Sexual 3 sounds about right...

If the sx/sp interaction style freaks you out my bet is you aren't sx/sp. Nothing in your questionnaire answers struck me as sx/sp. Sx/so, maybe, but not sx/sp. (I still think so/sp is probably a good fit.)

Have you read these? In my experience they are very right on.

soc/sx
Motivation: to create lasting connections with those they are interested in - the "best friend."

soc/sp
Motivation: to attain status within their chosen sphere - the "social climber."

sp/sx
Motivation: to live in a secure, comfortable environment where they can pursue their private interests in depth.

sp/soc
Motivation: to attain a position of material and societal security.

sx/sp
Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.

sx/so
Motivation: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.

The link they are from goes into greater detail about the instincts but I often think the essence of something is more universal than the particulars. From here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/133-Instinctual-Stackings

 

[HBIC]

If the sx/sp interaction style freaks you out my bet is you aren't sx/sp. Nothing in your questionnaire answers struck me as sx/sp. Sx/so, maybe, but not sx/sp. (I still think so/sp is probably a good fit.)

Have you read these? In my experience they are very right on.

soc/sx
Motivation: to create lasting connections with those they are interested in - the "best friend."

soc/sp
Motivation: to attain status within their chosen sphere - the "social climber."

sp/sx
Motivation: to live in a secure, comfortable environment where they can pursue their private interests in depth.

sp/soc
Motivation: to attain a position of material and societal security.

sx/sp
Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.

sx/so
Motivation: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.

The link they are from goes into greater detail about the instincts but I often think the essence of something is more universal than the particulars. From here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/133-Instinctual-Stackings

I had it as so/sp while I was sure I was a type 4. Those 4w3 so/sp descriptions resonated with me. But the 3w4 so/sp don't.

Based on these one liners, I'd say sx/so first, then so/sp and lastly sp/sx.

When I said the interactions freaked me out I meant sx doms romantic interactions in general, not sx/sp. The ones I read were about sexual 4's.

This was something about sx dom I had never came across:

This intensity does not have to be met by another person—it can be satisfied by a project, hobby, or special interest. Rather than looking inward or to the group to resolve their problems and challenges, these types tend to look to close relations and activities that can guarantee them an experience of liveliness and intensity.

SX-first people enjoy feeling invigorated. They may fantasize about scenarios that make them feel alive and that are emotionally stimulating. Key words: activation, immersion, charisma, broadcasting displays, fusion, inspiration, volatility.

That was interesting, because usuall they describe sx doms as obssessed with only people, not things.

 

[Animal]

I'm a clear SX dom, according to some the most clear they've ever seen lol… and I'm mostly obsessed with my projects, music, writing and so forth, and sometimes a person.

That being said, even if my projects come to include social issues, the crux of them is always about a person. My songs, stories, everything; people tell me the lyrics are 'intellectual' and make psychological deep points… but I will be the first to confess that even a song that is about people or about myself, or about a social idea… was motivated by a guy I was in love with, either an ex or a prospect or a current…. EVERY TIME. It's always a thought process inspired by an SX connection. But then, over time, the project becomes much bigger to me than the SX connection alone. Like my book now, I came up with the plot 10 years ago and it came from IRL experiences with specific people.. but then their ideals and so forth, stemmed out to "symbolize" something larger.
[MENTION=21109]Look Alive_Sunshine[/MENTION]

 

[johnnyyukon]

I had it as so/sp while I was sure I was a type 4. Those 4w3 so/sp descriptions resonated with me. But the 3w4 so/sp don't.

Based on these one liners, I'd say sx/so first, then so/sp and lastly sp/sx.

When I said the interactions freaked me out I meant sx doms romantic interactions in general, not sx/sp. The ones I read were about sexual 4's.

This was something about sx dom I had never came across:



That was interesting, because usuall they describe sx doms as obssessed with only people, not things.

You seem like you're mostly having an illuminating discussion on what enneagram you are. That's great, BUT I just wanted to say that really, in the end, I think you're the only one that can type yourself.

 

[brainheart]

I had it as so/sp while I was sure I was a type 4. Those 4w3 so/sp descriptions resonated with me. But the 3w4 so/sp don't.

Based on these one liners, I'd say sx/so first, then so/sp and lastly sp/sx.

When I said the interactions freaked me out I meant sx doms romantic interactions in general, not sx/sp. The ones I read were about sexual 4's.

This was something about sx dom I had never came across:



That was interesting, because usuall they describe sx doms as obssessed with only people, not things.

Interesting, you picked all the contra-flow types. This doesn't surprise me, that's what I was figuring for you. Information on contra-flow and syn-flow are on the link I sent you. Yes, sexual doms will be obsessed by whatever or whomever attracts them. As [MENTION=17911]Animal[/MENTION] says, it's typically both. For sexual doms, life is about getting that charge and intensity.

I would think a 4w3 so/sp would identify a lot with 3. Conversely, it makes sense that sx 3w4 would identify a lot with 4. That's why I'd say try to focus on the instincts irrespective of the enneagram type. It might actually help you figure out your core type.

 

[Animal]

[MENTION=7140]brainheart[/MENTION] - I agree with you on that, especially where the dominant instinct is concerned.

I make a decent example of this, I think..

I was lucky in the sense that when I got to personalitycafe, I knew nothing about instincts, and everyone on the site immediately jumped on SX dom for me. I challenged it a bit, but it was just so abundantly clear. This helped me figure out my type. I still managed to mistype at 3 briefly, but I don't relate to sexual 3. I typed myself as Sp/Sx for a week or two, and soon enough I came to my senses and I knew that was the wrong type. (There were also many other reasons it was wrong, but this helped me to see it faster.) But it also might have contributed to my 5 and 8 mistypes, because sexual 5 still made SOME sense and sexual 8 made a lot of sense until I realized how incredibly SHALLOW lust can be. Type 8 Lust isn't about wanting to suck the emotions from someone who you know well, to feed on their soul.. it's about their body, and the conquest of it, the physical thrill. Once I realized how this wasnt' connected to emotion on the endemic level, and actually what I was experiencing was LONGING, thirst, dissatisfaction, "envy" - 4 made more sense. I wouldn't make sense as a social 4, and I needed to understand that difference because it explained why I was different from other 4s who were more vocal about their suffering and less "expressive of intensity" than I. So yeah.. having at least my first instinct quite clear, did help my process tremendously.