• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Which typology do you believe is the most credible?

I

Infinite Bubble

Guest
Out of MBTI, Enneagram and Socionics. If you had to put the three in order from most to least credible in your opinion, what would the order be and why?

Also, do you think any of them will gain a measure of scientific credibility sometime in the future, a la the Big Five?
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Typology is bullshit because it puts you into classes. It limits your behaviour to a certain set of rules and tho things like 'shadow functions' or the all-encompassing socionics want to stir against this inherent failure, it's still a failure.

They all disobey free will and thats why they will always fail.
 

Noon

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
790
The enneagram is the most useful among the three for framing & working through bad psychological patterns.
Socionics IEI describes my personality more accurately than anything in mbti. I like its function ideas better too.
The mbti comes third.

Can't see them gaining scientific credibility but don't believe they need it so long as they remain useful.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Ehh how are we deciding "credible"? Scientifically, none of them.

IMO usefulness to me is Enneagram > MBTI > Socionics. Socionics might have a leg up over MBTI but the Visual ID stuff really kills it for me.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Ehh how are we deciding "credible"? Scientifically, none of them.

IMO usefulness to me is Enneagram > MBTI > Socionics. Socionics might have a leg up over MBTI but the Visual ID stuff really kills it for me.

Thats a bit strange. You basically open two fronts this way: you say scientifically its not valid, but on some different dimension it is.

So you have the following happening: more and more people come to believe to accept something as true because it feels right but dont voice it because it is against reason. So you have a nation of choked spiritualits, who think what they do is wrong because reason is ruling them.

That on the other hand is bad self-confidence. So whats the problem Americans ? Why not admit that you are spiritual people, why always try to hold up the holy grail of reason and develop real life plans in the darkness ? Who said that reason is the all-encompassing truth ? Noone knows that
 

HongDou

navigating
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
5,191
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Typology is bullshit because it puts you into classes. It limits your behaviour to a certain set of rules and tho things like 'shadow functions' or the all-encompassing socionics want to stir against this inherent failure, it's still a failure.

They all disobey free will and thats why they will always fail.

If you feel you're limiting your own behavior by assigning yourself a certain personality type, then you're not mature enough to see how you fit into the system. I don't know who in their right mind would let their actions be influenced by personality type at all really.

Enneagram > MBTI > Socionics.

This is how I see it!
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
If you feel you're limiting your own behavior by assigning yourself a certain personality type, then you're not mature enough to see how you fit into the system. I don't know who in their right mind would let their actions be influenced by personality type at all really.

What is your system then ?
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Thats a bit strange. You basically open two fronts this way: you say scientifically its not valid, but on some different dimension it is.

So you have the following happening: more and more people come to believe to accept something as true because it feels right but dont voice it because it is against reason. So you have a nation of choked spiritualits, who think what they do is wrong because reason is ruling them.

That on the other hand is bad self-confidence. So whats the problem Americans ? Why not admit that you are spiritual people, why always try to hold up the holy grail of reason and develop real life plans in the darkness ? Who said that reason is the all-encompassing truth ? Noone knows that

Ehh I'm not sure I really understand why you're associating the issues you have with my perception with Americans as a whole. While I am certainly American, I feel like I am a fairly poor representative of the average American in terms of spirituality, views of psychology, views of personality theories, and overall background and personality.

I do believe the theories are not particularly scientifically valid, but are nevertheless useful tools. Consider - with the technology we currently have, it is not possible to landscape and categorize the inner workings of our minds in terms of the frequent patterns of cognition we use, but it is evident from shared discussion that we do have patterns that are prominent in certain people and are prominent across certain groups. So it may be in part that technology is just not there yet, but also there is still the mind-body problem to get past. I actually did a literature-based research project tracing the mind-body problem and its history from Descartes to the present, and its implications for neuroscience and other fields. It's a fascinating topic, and one that is still largely unsolved. Where does body end and mind begin, and vice versa? What is the difference? How come we can translate some things but not others? How come we have some degree of influence in either direction but not complete?

So, when we're talking about personality theories, it's sort of an impossible question to ask how credible those theories are. There is no tangible external physical evidence that we can get from the mind thus far, so it's kind of up to each individual how much they see internally coherent reason and applicability within the theories. I find MBTI the most internally valid of the three theories, with its scheme seeming the most balanced and logical, but I don't know if it's the best externally. And I find the Enneagram the most spiritually/intrapersonally useful.

As for the States... I don't find there to be much "choked spiritualism" here. I live in the South, where it is more common to find people who are so spiritual that they are willing to completely disregard scientific evidence when it runs up against religious tradition, rather than historical beliefs or attempting to integrate the two. I also don't find much lack of self-confidence here. If anything, there tends to be too much. Where have you gotten your impressions from?
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Ehh I'm not sure I really understand why you're associating the issues you have with my perception with Americans as a whole. While I am certainly American, I feel like I am a fairly poor representative of the average American in terms of spirituality, views of psychology, views of personality theories, and overall background and personality.

I do believe the theories are not particularly scientifically valid, but are nevertheless useful tools.

Consider - with the technology we currently have, it is not possible to landscape and categorize the inner workings of our minds in terms of the frequent patterns of cognition we use, but it is evident from shared discussion that we do have patterns that are prominent in certain people and are prominent across certain groups. So it may be in part that technology is just not there yet, but also there is still the mind-body problem to get past. I actually did a literature-based research project tracing the mind-body problem and its history from Descartes to the present, and its implications for neuroscience and other fields. It's a fascinating topic, and one that is still largely unsolved. Where does body end and mind begin, and vice versa? What is the difference? How come we can translate some things but not others? How come we have some degree of influence in either direction but not complete?

As for the States... I don't find there to be much "choked spiritualism" here. I live in the South, where it is more common to find people who are so spiritual that they are willing to completely disregard scientific evidence when it runs up against religious tradition, rather than reconsidering historical beliefs or attempting to integrate the two.

I tell you, you have bad self-confidence and you give me a school class lecture about brain physiognomy. Really..
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I tell you, you have bad self-confidence and you give me a school class lecture about brain physiognomy. Really..

:shrug: I tried to address the issues you brought up with my post. If I misunderstood and didn't answer appropriately, I would be happy to address whatever you were after.

I don't think that personally I am super self-confident but I feel fairly competent intellectually. My lack of confidence has more to do with body image issues and fear of looking stupid. Neither of those seem very applicable to my opinion of the credibility of typology theories.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Enneagram is wonderful.

:shrug: I tried to address the issues you brought up with my post. If I misunderstood and didn't answer appropriately, I would be happy to address whatever you were after.

I always have to think of my work colleague. A guy who does not have it all but who is perfectly fine in his life. Well asserted and gets along like the total pro. Yes, I am very envy on him. If I was to tell him about mbti, ennegram or socionics, he'd finally be convinced that I am nuts. And so would be the rest of the world, I know.

Does that mean I know something they dont ? Cant be cause they get along far more well with each other than I get along with them. Does that mean, I am a bearer of special knowledge that I cant use ? Something like that.

I wonder given all these theories; they may be a vindication for a mind that needs substance, but what is their real world application ? Do they really work ? Isnt the real world far more shallow then the deepest of our deep theories may ever grasp ?

Who gives a fuck in the end about you, who knew it. I knew mbti before, I knew it. My intuition is so strong I can interpret shit into the world and back. And what did it give me ? it made me a sarcastic old man, whose best way to not get personal with people is Blitzkrieg.

You folks know nothing about the complexity of spiritualistic half-empiric type systematizing of the world. Not the least bit
 
N

ndovjtjcaqidthi

Guest
I always have to think of my work colleague. A guy who does not have it all but who is perfectly fine in his life. Well asserted and gets along like the total pro. Yes, I am very envy on him. If I was to tell him about mbti, ennegram or socionics, he'd finally be convinced that I am nuts. And so would be the rest of the world, I know.

Does that mean I know something they dont ? Cant be cause they get along far more well with each other than I get along with them. Does that mean, I am a bearer of special knowledge that I cant use ? Something like that.

I wonder given all these theories; they may be a vindication for a mind that needs substance, but what is their real world application ? Do they really work ? Isnt the real world far more shallow then the deepest of our deep theories may ever grasp ?

Who gives a fuck in the end about you, who knew it. I knew mbti before, I knew it. My intuition is so strong I can interpret shit into the world and back. And what did it give me ? it made me a sarcastic old man, whose best way to not get personal with people is Blitzkrieg.

You folks know nothing about the complexity of spiritualistic half-empiric type systematizing of the world. Not the least bit

:thinking:

I find it strange that you quoted me after reading this post.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I always have to think of my work colleague. A guy who does not have it all but who is perfectly fine in his life. Well asserted and gets along like the total pro. Yes, I am very envy on him. If I was to tell him about mbti, ennegram or socionics, he'd finally be convinced that I am nuts. And so would be the rest of the world, I know.

Does that mean I know something they dont ? Cant be cause they get along far more well with each other than I get along with them. Does that mean, I am a bearer of special knowledge that I cant use ? Something like that.

I wonder given all these theories; they may be a vindication for a mind that needs substance, but what is their real world application ? Do they really work ? Isnt the real world far more shallow then the deepest of our deep theories may ever grasp ?

Who gives a fuck in the end about you, who knew it. I knew mbti before, I knew it. My intuition is so strong I can interpret shit into the world and back. And what did it give me ? it made me a sarcastic old man, whose best way to not get personal with people is Blitzkrieg.

You folks know nothing about the complexity of spiritualistic half-empiric type systematizing of the world. Not the least bit

Playing with arcane theories and being considered crazy for it by the realists in life is not new, though. "Magicians", "witches", alchemists, eccentrics. You and I come from a long line of people who search deep because we feel the drive to do so. Who knows why. It makes us unhappy but it makes us satisfied. Would you rather spend life never having ripped apart the fabric of the world and seeing how it works? I think you and I would go crazy if we didn't dig deeper. I think we are just born that way. I think your coworker is lucky but I don't think you and I are like him. There are some people that are happy not digging deeper into human minds... they are lucky in a lot of ways, though they probably dig into other things. And then there is us.

Do the theories work? I don't know. Does it matter? Ultimately I guess the question is whether it makes our lives better. The MBTI gave me the understanding I needed to finally communicate effectively with my dad (INTP). The Enneagram has given me a lot of insight into my own stress. Maybe they are junk... probably they are scientific junk. But like you said, spiritually there's something there.

Tell me more about the complexity if you feel like it. You know Ne is happy to swim in half-systems and complex wholes.


*** General note - this is not a N vs. S thing. I just mean there are people who are happy to live without digging into psychology and there are others who are not.
 

HongDou

navigating
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
5,191
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
What is your system then ?

See what applies to me, go "huh, interesting" then carry about my day as usual until something applicable comes up where I use it as one resource to find most suitable solution.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Playing with arcane theories and being considered crazy for it by the realists in life is not new, though. "Magicians", "witches", alchemists, eccentrics. You and I come from a long line of people who search deep because we feel the drive to do so. Who knows why. It makes us unhappy but it makes us satisfied. Would you rather spend life never having ripped apart the fabric of the world and seeing how it works? I think you and I would go crazy if we didn't dig deeper. I think we are just born that way. I think your coworker is lucky but I don't think you and I are like him. There are some people that are happy not digging deeper... they are lucky in a lot of ways. And then there is us.

I've never managed until today to just be myself. I always play by the rules. I feel ashamed when I once show someone which music I like. I feel ashamed when I share my thoughts. I feel ashamed when I leave the house. And the only way to compensate it, is an overbearing ego that puts down everyone before he gets to close. Which on the other hand led to the fact that I lost any emotion for people. I feel my privatesphere violated the moment someone calls me by my forename.

Why do you people want to digger deeper ? Why cant you just let it be and become shallow citizens like the rest of the world. Life would be a thousand times easier.

I cant tell you about the complexity in life, not more. I have grown so oblivious to the rest of the world, if it would vanish tomorrow I would not care. I am trieing to get in contact again but I dont know how
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Depends on what you mean by "credible".

There are three kinds of truth: correspondential, internally consistent, and pragmatic.

We can sort cross of the second, cuz that just means the systems abide by their own rules, which, well, hopefully they do.

The first means the idea actually corresponds to reality; the third means the idea, for whatever reason, is useful.

Lastly, I should note, that I don't consider MBTI and Socionics separate: they are both Jungian typology, imo.

So, between Enneagram typology and Jungian typology, which do I find more credible?

I used to side with Jungian, and I still think there is plenty of credibility to it.

But over the last 2-3 years, I have come to find the Enneagram so damn useful, I'd have to go with it now.

I made this thread almost 3.5 yrs ago: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38017

At the time, I voted that I identified with my MBTI type more than my Enneagram type.

Nowadays, I'm not so sure which I'd answer -- probably both equally.

I don't think either will necessarily gain scientific credibility.

But I think the Big 5 is a flawed instrument, and not truly scientific either.

It just lends itself more easily to methods that are considered scientifically rigorous.

I think things can be completely 100% true without science really being able to say much about them.

I don't want to say neither the Enneagram nor Jungian typology could eventually be validated or invalidated, to some extent, by science.

But the extent to which they will be invalidated, expressed as a %, with 0% being completely in validated, and 100% being completely validated... I would assume that from an invalidation perspective, it could only really ever get to ~40% (cuz the ideas just don't lend themselves too well to invalidation, I don't think). As for validation, I think they could actually become more validated than invalidated, cuz some of evidence could pop up that is close to undeniable. If some more neuroscience based stuff, a la Nardi's research, 20-30 yrs down the road starts validating some of this stuff, I wouldn't be too surprised.

It also depends on the understanding of type you're talking about: flexible and nuanced and intelligent, or rigid and dumb like [MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION]'s.
 
Top