If enneagrams work using wing types, why can't mbti?

[Kensei]

I see all these theories about enneagrams involving using tritypes or multiple types, but mbti seems to only allow one type. I thought, why can't people have multiple mbti types as well? The answer are the cognitive function associated with that theory, but the question is, are they really reliable? My theory is all people use all 8 functions at different frequencies, thus not fitting into the mold of the type theory. On cognitive functions tests, I have not seen a single person get all 8 functions in the exact order of their type, or even close. My function go something like Se-Ne-Fi-Ti-Te-Ni-Fe-Si. That does not appease a single theory about mbti. I do think the functions exist, just not in the exact order that they are said to be in. In my point of view, this function theory seems more like a perfect scenario of each type, having the functions split evenly so that the person prefers all four preferences, each in opposite attitudes, literally split evenly in an orderly fashion. In my experience, this doesn't work at all. Nobody is perfect and nobody will ever have even preferences like that. I agree that everyone uses all preferences, but the preferences aren't always four specific attitudes, instead, each person uses all function in a different chronological order, relying on one dominantly, but using the rest when the time comes, usually utilizing the ones that are more preferred first. That's why some people can appear immature and irrational, because they prefer all their perveiving functions over their judging functions. If you don't believe in this theory, take a cognitive functions test yourself and see that they never allign in a particular order. My point is, if you would like to express your personality type based on function, use chronological function order that you get on the function test. If you are going to type yourself based on letter, use the dichtonomy scales and not the functions, because functions cause a great deal of stereotypes and confusion. Also, if you are unsure about your dichtonomy type due to middle scores on the mbti tests, use the temperments. Temperments are a ton more reliable than functions. I've seen some NP's that are 7w8 that use a lot of Se because 7w8 is an fun experience seeking adenturous type. The functions are usually completely unrelated to a persons actual dichtonomy score which causes confusion and chaos. Don't fall for that trap. Use your own heads, and not the brain of someone back in the 19th century before accurate brain maps were made. I've switched my type about 20 times in my life, and I'm sick of abiding by boundries that were disproven probably at least 20 years ago. Don't follow in my footsteps.

 

[Entropic]

And that is because the cognitive function tests are unreliable, not that the system itself is wrong. Just because you've switched type 20 times in your life it doesn't mean others have or will; I think that suggests more about you, your understanding of the theory and your self-awareness than it does other people and their ability to type themselves.

 

[big sexy]

Did Jung or Myers ever say people can't be multiple types or inbetween/balanced on dichotomies? There's a very good reason why most personality systems make use of a continuum rather than than either-or preferences; continuums most accurately reflect the nuances of personality. I strongly relate to both INTP and INFP descriptions. I see no point in trying to explain this ambiguity away. There are very obviously people who are not clearly one or another and MBTI would do well to acknowledge that.

 

[Bush]

not that the system itself is wrong.

Why is this option off the table entirely?

 

[Entropic]

Why is this option off the table entirely?

It's off the table because the system is defined such a way that all people use all the four functions (thinking/feeling and sensation/intuition) and if you consciously favor one, you will repress another. Therefore, a sensing dominant type will repress intuition. If the sensing dominant type also favors feeling, they will repress thinking. If their psyche is primarily extroverted so they become an ESFP, their inferior functions will become NiTe because if the psyche favors extroversion, it will repress introversion.

Questioning the ordering of the functions means questioning the foundation of how the cognitive types work which either suggests a) the system is faulty all together or b) it's not applied properly. In pretty much all cases, people who argue for that the functional order is wrong do so because they do not understand the basis of how the system works so they don't apply it properly.

 

[HongDou]

The systems are different. Enneagram types lie on a spectrum and MBTI types do not. To lay out an example in very simple terms, 2 is 2 because it draws from 1's desire to be good/idealistic with 3's desire to stand out/be admired. I think the closest thing you're looking for is Socionics subtypes.

 

[Xander]

I thought the enneagram was more pointed at motivation where as the MBTI is more about what you prefer to use to achieve your goals?

Oh and I agree about functions. They're often used by those who struggle to understand people in a holistic fashion, sort of conpartmentalising them to where they make sense.

Personally I'm an INTP who often gets mistaken for an ENTP and people really don't get the 9 bit at all. My function order in reality is probably skewed but from a theoretical point of view, that's what it was to make my type. I've modified it since then.

A person is always more than the sum of their preferences.

Speaking of which, I wish people would stop listing 8 of them in a fantasy order. T is T. Where you apply it is another question/scale.

I realise that flys in the face of some authors but as I don't follow Arthur C Clarke I see no reason to accept anyone else without due reasoning either.

 

[Bush]

It's off the table because the system is defined such a way that
[...]
Questioning the ordering of the functions means questioning the foundation of how the cognitive types work which either suggests a) the system is faulty all together or b) it's not applied properly. In pretty much all cases, people who argue for that the functional order is wrong do so because they do not understand the basis of how the system works so they don't apply it properly.

In conjunction with the other post I quoted, it all seems to me to read as "the system itself cannot be wrong, because that would suggest that the system is faulty altogether."

What am I missing?

 

[Jaguar]

In conjunction with the other post I quoted, it all seems to me to read as "the system itself cannot be wrong, because that would suggest that the system is faulty altogether."

What am I missing?

You're missing the possibility that some individuals will say anything to avoid finding fault in a system that created a type they desperately need to identify with. If you shoot holes in the system, you shoot holes in their identity.

 

[miss fortune]

there is no perfect system

 

[Entropic]

In conjunction with the other post I quoted, it all seems to me to read as "the system itself cannot be wrong, because that would suggest that the system is faulty altogether."

What am I missing?

What other post? You've quoted two and both are mine. I think I explained my stance well already and why the op falls under option b) rather than a). I'm all for questioning the validity of the cognitive functions, but suggesting that the order is incorrect because the test results seem incongruent is just suggesting that one doesn't understand why the function order is that way for each type.

- - - Updated - - -

You're missing the possibility that some individuals will say anything to avoid finding fault in a system that created a type they desperately need to identify with. If you shoot holes in the system, you shoot holes in their identity.

Who are you trying to attack with your post?

 

[Entropic]

Did Jung or Myers ever say people can't be multiple types or inbetween/balanced on dichotomies? There's a very good reason why most personality systems make use of a continuum rather than than either-or preferences; continuums most accurately reflect the nuances of personality. I strongly relate to both INTP and INFP descriptions. I see no point in trying to explain this ambiguity away. There are very obviously people who are not clearly one or another and MBTI would do well to acknowledge that.

It's about preference. When one understands that it's about preference it also turns into a continuum. A person isn't 100% N even if you got that on the test, but that you by and large, greatly favor N over S. It doesn't mean you never use sensation but that's not really where your natural focus goes.

 

[Bush]

What other post? You've quoted two and both are mine.

Yeah, I was taking them in conjunction with one another. It read to me as though you thought the system was infallible. I'm glad that I was wrong; that I hear that the cognitive function theory is able to be questioned --

I'm all for questioning the validity of the cognitive functions,

Hell, that's all I was advocating. I actually agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Entropic]

Yeah, I was taking them in conjunction with one another. It read to me as though you thought the system was infallible. I'm glad that I was wrong; that I hear that the cognitive function theory is able to be questioned --
Hell, that's all I was advocating. I actually agree with the rest of your post.

I do think one can question the system but one should question the right things and questioning it by first properly understanding it. If one wants to disagree about the function order one has to understand why that particular order and disagree with that foundation ie if one is conscious the other has to be unconscious.

Otherwise it becomes a matter of why am I such an anomaly? And from there asssess that the theory is wrong which is just very poor methodology since it actually assumes that you are properly typed but if you understood the system you'd realize that you are not. I find that people often want to modify the system to fit their experiences without first understanding it (fwiw I was guilty of this too) and that's simply not sound reasoning to use in order to question the system and how it's built.

 

[Frosty]

From what little I know about typology compared to most people on this site, I would have to say that MBTI is just more rigid of a system. Enneagram ?functions? seem to bounce off of each other more, being if you are a 5w6 than the 6 is more of just an influence on your 5 then it is a stand alone function. It seems like it would be harder to seporate your wing from your ?primary? because it is more of a leechy thing, where as you primary and secondary functions of your MBTI are more two sides of your same coin, each framing a different part of your experience.

At the end of the day I suppose that they are just two completely different systems that behave differently, and are therefore set up in a completely different manner.

I should read at some point more about typology.