Fe vs Positive Triad (279) vs SO vs General Friendliness

[Merced]

I'm curious about the difference between Fe inclined people, enneagram 2s, SO-doms, and people who are friendly due to something unrelated.

I recently saw a post on Tumblr that emphasized the difference but I can't find it... It really highlighted the similarities to Te and explained the rationality involved with the function. Shame that I can't hunt it down. When looking at definitions of functions, I notice that Fe tends to be explained with examples moreso than the others. Fe vs Fi is a common thing to discuss, but I am really intrigued by Fe vs Te.

A certain section of this page on instictual variants emphasizes the importance of not mixing definitions of different personality systems:

Those who have spent some time studying MBTI, socionics, and enneagram types usually notice that they overlap in several traits, making it easy to mis-attribute traits from one system to another. Here are a few common "crossroads":​

​

• SO-first need for connection with the greater social scene may be mistaken for extroversion. SO-last stackings, to the contrary, highlight traits commonly attributed to introversion.​
• Social instinct is sometimes mistaken for Fe, ethics in general, and "Aristocratic" trait in socionics. This is because stackings with SO instinct have a proclivity to interpret events within socio-cultural context and may exhibit a pronounced interest in 'soft' sciences.​
• Social, inclusive, friendly, and sometimes bubbly nature of SO-firsts and SX/SO can lead them to be taken for Ethical types.​
• SX-first craving for enlivening, intense experiences and sometimes lowered barrier to confrontation can be mistaken for extraverted sensing (Se) and extraverted feeling (Fe). SX-firsts may inadvertently draw attention to themselves in a way that overlaps with socionics Fe-HA. SX/SO stackings often exhibit contarian, revolutionary attitudes that is often confused for belonging to Beta quadra. On a more rare occasion SX emphasis and insistence of their personal preferences, likes and dislikes, is also mistaken for preference for Fi.​
• Self-preservation (SP) instinct's focus on practical and pragmatic matters may be easily confused for sensing and logic. Income and salary concerns, planning, scheduling, budgeting, can be mistaken for strong sensing orientation, Si/Se, as well as extraverted logic, Te. In particular SP/SX's interest in things that serve as common denominators of life (family, food, daily activities and chores, etc.) can lead them to consider themselves to be Sensing types.​
• The dry sobriety in communication of SX-last stacking can lead them to view themselves as Logical types. This is further reinforced if their main enneagram type is within the head triad.​
• Eneagram's head triad, 5-6-7, can be mistaken for T-preference.​
• Adventurism and search for more satisfying experiences of type 7 can be confused for extraverted sensorics, Se, resulting in erroneous typings of ENxPs and ENxJs - as ESxPs.​
• Focus on emotional needs, friendship and family bonds, and social obligations of type 2 can be mitaken for preference for extraverted ethics (Fe)
  ​

This also leads me to ponder about whether other types have a naturally assumed friendliness about them. Like, can an INTP 1w9 sx/sp be deemed friendly or are would that word just not applicable because of their motives and functioning? Then again, I am also learning that people have different interpretations of MBTI and Enneagram. I view functions as how people prioritize things as they process while others might see it as how people respond to their environments. (Things like this is probably why there is such an awkward divide between people who prefer cognitive psychology vs behavioral psychology.) So going back to this fictional INTP I present, what would make them friendly? Their thoughts or their actions?

So those were the main things that spawned this question and in turn this thread. I would really really really like to hear your thoughts on this.

 

[Yama]

I mistyped as sp-first for a long time because I'm an introvert. I mistyped as sx-last for a long time because I'm not intense or sensual. I mistyped as a 2 fix for a long time because I'm Fe.

Going from typing as sp-first to sp-last still seems pretty fucking crazy to me. I had to actually look at the instincts beyond the basic stereotypes. It helped me a lot to look at oceanmoonshine's blog and read about how the different instincts and stackings interact with type 6 rather than just in general, too. Without it I might have wrongfully labelled myself as so/sp (lol like I'm fucking contraflow), but in reading about so/sp vs. so/sx type 6, it was really obvious to me that my drive for connection is with individuals that I give my loyalty to rather than in institutions (like an so/sp would).

I also didn't question my 2 fix for a long time but eventually was confronted about it and ended up switching it to 4. It's easy to see 2 in a person who's Fe (or Fe in a person who's a 2) because they do have a lot in common on the surface, but in the end, you have to look at their motivations and how they work. 2 is driven by a need to be needed/loved. Fe is driven by a sort of "people efficiency" similar to Te (the Je commonality). Looking more closely at the core fears and motivations of the enneagram, and relating that back to my own observable behavior (such as in my first private blog on this forum) it became easier to separate the two.

As for general friendliness... I dunno. I'd consider myself a friendly person in that I can get along with literally anyone. But I'm also very shy and private until I begin to feel more comfortable around someone and feel safer opening up about myself. I think that's just more of an individual thing than a type thing, though.

 

[á´…eparted]

Well, @Magic Poriferan is our resident INTP-1 (which is a rather rare combo as well) so he might be able to offer insight into your example.

Your reasonings here do quite well at showing how different combinations can lead to mistypings or people seeming off with their typings. I actually fit that example quite well. I am an ENFJ, and when people see my thought processes put into practice, it's obvious. I'm also very very extroverted. However, if that's not seen, people will frequently mistake me for an ESTJ. Why? Because of my enneagram. I am a 1w2 and very focused on making sure things are right. I am very rigid and focus on logic. I also put a premium on precedent and rules. Very Te-esque stuff on the surface. As is to be expected for a 1. I am also sp first and sx last. This makes for a distant/cold presence and presentation. With how I operate, I am both very warm, and very distant/cold at the same time. My priorities are focused on making sure things are right, fair, going smoothly, and making sure things are good. It all fits, but the combination makes one side look different than the other.

 

[Merced]

...people will frequently mistake me for an ESTJ. Why? Because of my enneagram. I am a 1w2 and very focused on making sure things are right. I am very rigid and focus on logic. I also put a premium on precedent and rules. Very Te-esque stuff on the surface. As is to be expected for a 1. I am also sp first and sx last. This makes for a distant/cold presence and presentation. With how I operate, I am both very warm, and very distant/cold at the same time. My priorities are focused on making sure things are right, fair, going smoothly, and making sure things are good. It all fits, but the combination makes one side look different than the other.

This raises a question for me and I am curious about it on a forum wide scale:

Can you accurately type someone purely through strict observation?

At the moment, I know I cannot. My method for typing people has always been a combination of calculated pushes and process of elimination. Ask a question, see how they react, see how they respond, rule out the outrageous stuff.

 

[á´…eparted]

This raises a question for me and I am curious about it on a forum wide scale:

Can you accurately type someone purely through strict observation?

At the moment, I know I cannot. My method for typing people has always been a combination of calculated pushes and process of elimination. Ask a question, see how they react, see how they respond, rule out the outrageous stuff.

I can type people through observation higher than chance would. I'm not good at it, but I am also not bad at it either. I typically observe over time, and eventually it will click.

 

[Yama]

This raises a question for me and I am curious about it on a forum wide scale:

Can you accurately type someone purely through strict observation?

I know you didn't ask ~me~ but I wanna answer anyway. I don't think it's possible at all to ever be able to type someone with complete accuracy through observation. The only person who can get inside someone else's head is them. But at the same time, the person being typed is subject to their own biases when trying to type themselves. Can it be done strictly through observation with complete accuracy? No, but with extensive enough observation you can get pretty accurate. Can it be done strictly through the subjectivity of the person? It depends on how self-aware the person is and how biased they are about themselves/their functions/etc as well as both the subject and observer's knowledge base, so in both cases I would say no, never 100% accurate. But you could get close. It takes more than just observation to type someone accurately, but it takes more than lone wolf self-typing, too.

 

[Norrsken]

I wonder if a person who is a hardcore sx-first may appear to be very extroverted to other people upon casual observations?

 

[Merced]

I know you didn't ask ~me~ but I wanna answer anyway. I don't think it's possible at all to ever be able to type someone with complete accuracy through observation. The only person who can get inside someone else's head is them. But at the same time, the person being typed is subject to their own biases when trying to type themselves. Can it be done strictly through observation with complete accuracy? No, but with extensive enough observation you can get pretty accurate. Can it be done strictly through the subjectivity of the person? It depends on how self-aware the person is and how biased they are about themselves/their functions/etc as well as both the subject and observer's knowledge base, so in both cases I would say no, never 100% accurate. But you could get close. It takes more than just observation to type someone accurately, but it takes more than lone wolf self-typing, too.

No, no, no! I didn't mean to make it seems like you couldn't respond!! I wanted your response too! OTL

I agree with this. Both subjective and objective aspects have to be factored in.

 

[Merced]

I wonder if a person who is a hardcore sx-first may appear to be very extroverted to other people upon casual observations?

I'm an hardcore sx person but I'm also extroverted. This raises a really cool question. If I (or you) find any sx-dom introverts, please tag em.

 

[iwakar]

I'm an hardcore sx person but I'm also extroverted. This raises a really cool question. If I (or you) find any sx-dom introverts, please tag em.

*raises hand*

We're all over the place.

 

[Merced]

*raises hand*

We're all over the place.

Tell me, where do you think the line is drawn between SX and Extroversion? I also see you are Fe oriented. How does Fe play out in your life? Do you know your enneagram? Have you been mistyped before and if so, why?

 

[entropie]

"Fe vs e2 vs SO vs General Friendliness"

spoken of categorical thinking, I wonder, when you start putting life together like pieces of clothing, when do you loose control over it all and what happens if you take lsd and colors start to merge..

 

[Merced]

"Fe vs e2 vs SO vs General Friendliness"

spoken of categorical thinking, I wonder, when you start putting life together like pieces of clothing, when do you loose control over it all and what happens if you take lsd and colors start to merge..

Are... are these song lyrics?

 

[Tilt]

I am Fe dom with SO last and no 2 fix/wing. On the surface, I have more of a cat-like personality, reserved, aloof, technical. I am friendly... but from a distance. I say what's on my mind and I am pretty blunt... but I still have certain innate social finesse that TJs tend to struggle with.

 

[thoughtlost]

It's still hard for me to know my instincts.

I value sp-dominant ideals, but I cannot fulfill them on my own. I want to be smarter with money and take care of myself better (I am a big germophobe) and go grocery shopping more often, but it's really nice to have help with that stuff ...because the only thing I am okay at is washing my hands incessantly lol. I am also not that independent in the sense that you can dump me in the wild and I will survive just fine. It's strange that I value self preservation, but I don't actually think I am good at it naturally.

I am warm and friendly (I know this is a shallow way of looking at SO), but I know that I get frustrated/depressed when my connection with people are superficial. Like, for my labmate's birthday, me and our lab (we're actually pretty good friends) went to a bar, and of course I liked everyone there... but it was so lonely for me. It was just a group of 5 - 6 people (so it wasn't large), but that's not my preferred way of "hanging out" because you can't really get into depth in the conversation and I feel like no one in particular is interested in talking to me specifically. call me an attention whore, but it's really enthralling when someone picks me out of a crowd. At times, I can have intense energy at social events and I am not necessarily a wallflower ... I don't know why that happens because I am not necessarily trying to liven up the group ...I simply just have a lot of energy at that moment lol.

And for SX ... I can relate to it, but at the same time I am not sure what they mean when they say they go out of their way to do fun things. It makes me think of people who go backpacking for longs periods of time and then I am like "...but I like my couch and knowing when and where I will be showering...." I mean, I am sure I can do fun things if it meant staying at a luxurious hotel. ...And I guess I'd go backpacking if a friend really wanted me to go (but having the drive to do that on my own just sounds tedious/alot of work since I have to figure out the logistics on my own).

 

[magpie]

I'm an sx introvert. I think I can come off as ambiverted in social settings. I will strike up conversations with strangers in the elevator, for example, and I have a tendency to not think before I speak when I'm interacting at that level. Usually I think a lot before I speak. I like big parties but I prefer to dance rather than to socialize. I don't know how much of this is sx rather than Se to be honest. I think sx in me is most apparent in my need to get very close to people at an emotional level. I relate to the sx idea of merging and intensity.

Also, I just really love people.

 

[Star Atlas]

This raises a question for me and I am curious about it on a forum wide scale:

Can you accurately type someone purely through strict observation?

I think this is a very interesting thread.

In regards to this question in particular, I think it can be a bit dicey. So much of our growth in life revolves around finding ways to smooth our edges and be more palatable to the society as a whole. To survive one must adapt and one must create personal ways to do such adaptions.

So what we may see in others on the surface through strict observation will merely be one facet in a three dimensional object moving through the 4th dimension of time and thus will most likely be quite changeable.

I imagine observation over time combined with purposeful interaction meant at winkling out the truth, versus one's personal vision of the truth, may be the best way to go? Possibly. Ultimately I think the internal workings input from the person will weigh more than any outside observations.

One example I can think of was Stephen Colbert doing a segment about his MBTI type, INFP. At first glance seeing someone in that spotlighted position of much attention it can be easy to assume that one such as he is some flavor of extravert. But upon hearing his analysis and seeing his own conclusions, the INFP glints shine through the adapted persona.

 

[fetus]

Let's keep this thread going because I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Merced]

Tagging [MENTION=25763]Enthusiastic_Dreamer[/MENTION] because this is a relevant conversation

 

[Lord Lavender]

I feel as i can comment due to me being a So dom with a strong 2 to me. I would say that the relationship between Fe and the ennergram dynamics is similar to the relationship between different colors. A red coin even though it doesn't have blue in it all (Someone who doesn't use Fe but is so dom or 2) will have quasi-blue elements to it due to being influenced by the blue looks more blue than most reds.Likewise someone who uses Fi but is a 2 So dum will have quasi Fe due to the influence of it all even though like the red coin has no blue int it.