Type 6 or 9?

[Snow Turtle]

This is why I think MBTI and Enneagram don't mix well - they overlap far too much, and people end up getting a fuzzy understanding of both systems.

Hmm.... I guess theoretically there's nothing wrong with misanthropic and Fe being combined together... I suppose it'd just mean that the individual has slightly contrasting attitudes that would combine together to form something else. This happens all the time if we were to look at the ideas of astrology. In fact, when I think about it now... it'd just mean that the 6w5 IFJ would more likely to be balanced in their expressiveness etc.

the 6w7 turns outward for a sense of security, thus they tend to be friendlier and more loose. by contrast, the 6w5 does not view the world as a source of security and instead retreats to their mind and to impersonal systems for security. they tend to want to build a "fortress" so to speak and only let in those they trust. think Jason Bateman vs Ebeneezer Scrooge)

Thanks. That's a better description of the difference that don't really involve F nor T looking behaviours. Think you might have just confirmed 6w7 for me, even though I identify more with 5 stand alone than I do with 7.

One question regarding the difference between the two:
Would 6w7 be more interested in creating a security system in the outside world in order to create a secure and peaceful mindset within.
While 6w5 perhaps is more likely not to bother with the external world as much. By focusing inwards security first, they'll create a secure external environment? Just how would this work with functions like Fe for example.

Guess ultimately the goal of most 6 is to create a good environment internally and externally. So I wouldn't be surprised if there were people who believed in both approaches... since they affect each other anyway.

 

[Elfboy]

Hmm.... I guess theoretically there's nothing wrong with misanthropic and Fe being combined together... I suppose it'd just mean that the individual has slightly contrasting attitudes that would combine together to form something else. This happens all the time if we were to look at the ideas of astrology. In fact, when I think about it now... it'd just mean that the 6w5 IFJ would more likely to be balanced in their expressiveness etc.
Thanks. That's a better description of the difference that don't really involve F nor T looking behaviours. Think you might have just confirmed 6w7 for me, even though I identify more with 5 stand alone than I do with 7.
One question regarding the difference between the two:
Would 6w7 be more interested in creating a security system in the outside world in order to create a secure and peaceful mindset within.
While 6w5 perhaps is more likely not to bother with the external world as much. By focusing inwards security first, they'll create a secure external environment? Just how would this work with functions like Fe for example.
Guess ultimately the goal of most 6 is to create a good environment internally and externally. So I wouldn't be surprised if there were people who believed in both approaches... since they affect each other anyway.

I'm not an expert on 6, but generally it seems to me like 6w7s are more likely to ask for/desire external reassurance while 6w5s look more for tangible reassurance (like money or physical protection)

you could ask [MENTION=7063]SilkRoad[/MENTION]
she is an INFJ 6w5

and [MENTION=5356]Speed Gavroche[/MENTION]
he knows a lot about 6s in general

 

[Snow Turtle]

I'm not an expert on 6s

you could ask [MENTION=7063]SilkRoad[/MENTION]
she is an INFJ 6w5

and [MENTION=5356]Speed Gavroche[/MENTION]
he knows a lot about 6s in general

I do identify quite a fair bit with Silkroad but that might just be the IFJ.
In the past before you had suggested 6w7 in a past thread, I had pretty much self-typed myself as a 6w5. Yet, you described 6w7 to sometimes come across as 4w3 (Individualistic-Entertainer) and 9s.

 

[Elfboy]

I do identify quite a fair bit with Silkroad but that might just be the IFJ.
In the past before you had suggested 6w7 in a past thread, I had pretty much self-typed myself as a 6w5. Yet, you described 6w7 to sometimes come across as 4w3 (Individualistic-Entertainer) and 9s.

6w7s frequently come across as
- 2s
- 4s
- 7s
- 9s

6w5s frequently come across as
- 1s
- 5s
- 8s

 

[SilkRoad]

I genuinely think I have fairly balanced wings. I am almost certain that I'm a 6, but can't really choose between 6w5 and 6w7.

I definitely lean toward the "phobic" side of 6 which has partly made me think I'm 6w5 (while thinking 6w7 is more counterphobic). But I can see the counterphobic in me, too.

I'd say I'm more 6w5 in that I have intellectual interests and tend to fall back on these for comfort and refreshment, as well as my beliefs, my close friends and family, etc. I am very cautious and can get quite alarmed by surprises, unless they are 100% pleasant ones. I need time to make up my mind about things, even minor things.

At the same time - more 6w7 - I have a wide circle of friends and acquaintances and though I prioritize the close relationships built up over years, I like to stay in touch with people. I have quite a fun-loving crazy side and can be surprisingly adventurous and sensation-seeking (though there needs to be an undercurrent of "safety" or I feel out of my depth). I generally come across as quite friendly and warm, unless I feel unsafe or like I'm being intruded upon, in which case I become more guarded again.

In terms of where I look for security, it's kind of all over the place. I am not a paranoid stockpiler by any means. But I do worry about finances, accommodation, etc. I don't like having any element of uncertainty there. I find a lot of security in my beliefs, my friends and my family. Even with the very loyal friends and family, I sometimes worry that they will leave or die (both have happened, so I guess I have reason for it) and that's quite terrifying. I start to feel quite anxious when, for instance, a few good friends start making plans to move away...if I don't have someone I find really reliable and who I can often talk to and see, I can feel quite adrift. I'm not currently in a relationship but I would prioritize an SO being reliable, loyal and protective of me.

 

[Hazashin]

I definitely lean toward the "phobic" side of 6 which has partly made me think I'm 6w5 (while thinking 6w7 is more counterphobic)

Actually, it's usually the opposite. 6w7s usually need more external reassurance and support from others, while 6w5s are more suspicious, paranoid, and pessimistic, so they usually are distrustful of others and are more like "I can do this myself!"

 

[SilkRoad]

Perhaps it's hard for me to decide because I don't identify much with either 5 or 7 on their own.

 

[Hazashin]

Perhaps it's hard for me to decide because I don't identify much with either 5 or 7 on their own.

Which do you identify with more? You don't have to identify much with either of them to know this. For instance, I hardly relate to 8 or 3, yet I would say that I relate to 3 more.

 

[SilkRoad]

Which do you identify with more? You don't have to identify much with either of them to know this. For instance, I hardly relate to 8 or 3, yet I would say that I relate to 3 more.

Oh, I'd definitely have to say 5. Neither 5 nor 7 were ever types I would have mistaken myself for, though. And I come from a family with at least one and probably two 5 members, so that may have had an influence too. But I don't relate to the 7 impulsiveness/unreliability at all.

The trouble is, I don't know if that's really what provides the definitive answer. It seems like wings are a very different thing from the actual type, because they're supposed to be more of a flavour of your actual type, not necessarily a type that you would identify with on its own.

 

[VagrantFarce]

The trouble is, I don't know if that's really what provides the definitive answer. It seems like wings are a very different thing from the actual type, because they're supposed to be more of a flavour of your actual type, not necessarily a type that you would identify with on its own.

I think the wings are pretty much bullshit - everything about them feels arbitrary, from how they're derived (e.g. 5s can only have a 4 or 6 wing, and only one) to how they're described (5w4s are artistic, 5w6s are scientific).

Not only that, they seem to make things more complicated without really clarifying or illustrating anything about real people (unlike the types themselves, on their own) and the things they go through. To me, what the types help do (very succinctly) is to convey perspectives and worldviews that you wouldn't otherwise be able to appreciate. All the wings do is create more categories of behaviour and stereotype, rather than categories of experience and thought.

( I know I'm just poo-pooing everything around here, please be patient with me )

 

[Snow Turtle]

Oh, I'd definitely have to say 5. Neither 5 nor 7 were ever types I would have mistaken myself for, though. And I come from a family with at least one and probably two 5 members, so that may have had an influence too. But I don't relate to the 7 impulsiveness/unreliability at all.

The trouble is, I don't know if that's really what provides the definitive answer. It seems like wings are a very different thing from the actual type, because they're supposed to be more of a flavour of your actual type, not necessarily a type that you would identify with on its own.

This is definitely true.
I'm siding more and more towards 6w7. Yet if we were to examine 5 vs 7 stand alone. I could easily tell you that I see myself more within 5 than 7.

 

[SilkRoad]

This is definitely true.
I'm siding more and more towards 6w7. Yet if we were to examine 5 vs 7 stand alone. I could easily tell you that I see myself more within 5 than 7.

Yes. It depends a lot on descriptions too. I've read 6w7 descriptions that sounded so much like me, perhaps more so than a 6w5 description on the same page or in the same book. And vice versa applies as well.

As useful as I've found a lot of things about the enneagram, it does often seem too arbitrary. It doesn't seem quite right, for instance, that one author's 6 description will fit me to a T and another author's really won't. I don't have that experience with MBTI or not to the same extent.

For instance, I've read sp-6 descriptions which go on and on about how we do all our security-seeking from material goods; stockpiling, fretting about work and accommodation, etc. I do a bit of that - especially if those things are threatened - but I certainly don't take every security precaution, turn my home into a fortress or whatever. Then I read other sp-6 descriptions which said that sp-6s tend to create alliances and go towards others to keep safe and to defuse threats. And THAT totally struck a chord (perhaps especially because I'm INFJ). But those two concepts/descriptions seem quite unrelated, or at least not similar.

 

[brainheart]

Tests are shit, it's not to be taken seriously. As an INFP, you are naturally more or less an emo kid, which is often confused with being Sx, but it's not the same thing.

As reluctant as I am to admit this, you have a point.

I think a good marker for defining your dominant instinct is: Are you a quiet version of your type (sp); Are you an intense version of your type (sx); Are you a friendly version of your type (so). I was thinking I was sx/sp but seriously, I am intense, but not intense for fours. I'd say I'm more quiet with bouts of intensity than the opposite.

 

[Hazashin]

Tests are shit, it's not to be taken seriously. As an INFP, you are naturally more or less an emo kid, which is often confused with being Sx, but it's not the same thing.

As reluctant as I am to admit this, you have a point.

I think a good marker for defining your dominant instinct is: Are you a quiet version of your type (sp); Are you an intense version of your type (sx); Are you a friendly version of your type (so). I was thinking I was sx/sp but seriously, I am intense, but not intense for fours. I'd say I'm more quiet with bouts of intensity than the opposite.

The Sexual instinct isn't all about aggression, risk-taking, assertiveness, bluntness, boldness, and confidence. The Sexual instinct is about wanting to feel stimulation and chemistry from certain individuals, and while this often manifests with being like the previously mentioned attributes, it does not have to be. I would have some of those attributes if I were more confident with myself, but the fact of the matter is, I'm not, so I hold back from expressing myself. And just because I'm not confident, doesn't mean my primary instinct can't be Sexual, because that's the area I'm most focused on. I look for "spark" and flavor when I do things and when I'm talking/hanging out with individuals. I am more comfortable directing my focus towards certain individuals rather than focusing on myself or spreading it out evenly amongst a group of people. I also enjoy intimacy, and crave to know more and more about certain people that intrigue me (whether on a romantic/sexual level or on a friend level). I like have a small group of very close buddies that I can talk to and discuss with. However, since I am most aware of this instinct and I have low self-confidence, I am self-conscious about it and hold myself back. If you really knew me, you'd know I was intense and passionate on the inside. Outward behaviors are not the only thing that determines type!

 

[brainheart]

The Sexual instinct isn't all about aggression, risk-taking, assertiveness, bluntness, boldness, and confidence. The Sexual instinct is about wanting to feel stimulation and chemistry from certain individuals, and while this often manifests with being like the previously mentioned attributes, it does not have to be. I would have some of those attributes if I were more confident with myself, but the fact of the matter is, I'm not, so I hold back from expressing myself. And just because I'm not confident, doesn't mean my primary instinct can't be Sexual, because that's the area I'm most focused on. I look for "spark" and flavor when I do things and when I'm talking/hanging out with individuals. I am more comfortable directing my focus towards certain individuals rather than focusing on myself or spreading it out evenly amongst a group of people. I also enjoy intimacy, and crave to know more and more about certain people that intrigue me (whether on a romantic/sexual level or on a friend level). I like have a small group of very close buddies that I can talk to and discuss with. However, since I am most aware of this instinct and I have low self-confidence, I am self-conscious about it and hold myself back. If you really knew me, you'd know I was intense and passionate on the inside. Outward behaviors are not the only thing that determines type!

I wasn't saying you aren't sx/sp; how would I know? I don't know you. I was just saying that 1, INFPs tend to be emotional feelers, and it tends to be turned inward, so yes, there is hidden intensity. This can be confused for being sx/sp, but there are plenty of INFPs who aren't sx/sp. So how do you disengage the two?

I was pretty certain I was an sx/sp because there's plenty I relate to in the general sx description, I got sx/sp on that test I referred you to. However, in the writing below the test results it recommended that you read the sexual instinct description for your specific type and see if it fits you accurately. There were aspects I related to, yes, but overall it seemed way more intense than me. I don't get super jealous and vindictive like it said I was supposed to at the average levels. I'm only like this when I'm extremely unhealthy. Not only that, but the unhealthy levels of the self-preservation four description could seem kind of sexual variant-ish- engaging in risky affairs, putting yourself in dangerous situations, etc. And this I very much recognize in myself when unhealthy.

I think what can be confusing as an INFP is that the descriptions for self-preservation veer toward very sensing-oriented practicalities- paying the bills, keeping the house clean and orderly, etc. I kind of stink at this stuff. However, I very much value my alone time, I value my self-sufficiency (I rarely ask for help, I feel a need to figure things out myself, do things on my own). I am affected by my environment and I like being in situations where I feel comfortable. I like intensity to an extent, and I am intense to an extent, but when it begins to seriously endanger my well-being, I rein it in. My sexual instinct is strong, but not as strong as my self preservation instinct.

 

[Hazashin]

I wasn't saying you aren't sx/sp; how would I know? I don't know you. I was just saying that 1, INFPs tend to be emotional feelers, and it tends to be turned inward, so yes, there is hidden intensity. This can be confused for being sx/sp, but there are plenty of INFPs who aren't sx/sp. So how do you disengage the two?

I was pretty certain I was an sx/sp because there's plenty I relate to in the general sx description, I got sx/sp on that test I referred you to. However, in the writing below the test results it recommended that you read the sexual instinct description for your specific type and see if it fits you accurately. There were aspects I related to, yes, but overall it seemed way more intense than me. I don't get super jealous and vindictive like it said I was supposed to at the average levels. I'm only like this when I'm extremely unhealthy. Not only that, but the unhealthy levels of the self-preservation four description could seem kind of sexual variant-ish- engaging in risky affairs, putting yourself in dangerous situations, etc. And this I very much recognize in myself when unhealthy.

Hmm... well, I think jealousy and desire for vindication are unhealthy traits, so that could skew things a bit. I also fail to see how one must be very dare-develish, risk-taking, aggressive, etc. to be an Sx-dom. If anything, that indicates Sp last (more likely Sx/So than So/Sx, though).

[...] However, I very much value my alone time, I value my self-sufficiency (I rarely ask for help, I feel a need to figure things out myself, do things on my own). I am affected by my environment and I like being in situations where I feel comfortable. I like intensity to an extent, and I am intense to an extent, but when it begins to seriously endanger my well-being, I rein it in. My sexual instinct is strong, but not as strong as my self preservation instinct.

Now see, I don't relate with the bolded. I do, however, relate with being in situations where I feel comfortable (although one could say that "being comfortable" is vague, because it could mean that you are comfortable with being in situations that are not seen as comfortable as Sp-doms, such as being a large crowd, doing dangerous/thrilling things, etc.). Also, some stuff that seems Sx-ish, such as physical rushes, don't do much for me (or at least most of them), as I am an N. That could also skew things a bit.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

An INFP 6 would probably manifest differently and maybe have more E9 traits because of their general personality. A lot of what I'm reading that you describe as 9 sounds like INFP. If you don't feel that "internal radar" thing, then you most likely are an E9. That is such a 6 thing and should resonate strongly if you are one. Whether Phobic or Counterphobic.

Remember E9 is growth for an E6. If you are a matured, psychologically healthy E6 you will have more of a peaceful vibe to yourself.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

The Sexual instinct isn't all about aggression, risk-taking, assertiveness, bluntness, boldness, and confidence.

Every sources say the contrary.

 

[Nales]

Every sources say the contrary.

Not mine. The keyword to the sexual instinct seems to be intensity, and from there each enneagram type can find it in some way or another. What Hazashin is describing is closer to the Eight type, and this list just isn't compatible with some (if not most) types. Sixes lack self-confidence. Nines aren't assertive. Fours and fives aren't risk-taking - on the contrary, they escape reality through their minds.
How you'd naturally act and think is defined by your instinct; how you actually act and think is defined by your enneagram type. This is how I believe it works. As for Sx, I'd say it's main feature is to be deeply focused on whatever sparks your interest, and completely ignore what does not.

About the original topic, I can see bits of Four, Five, Six and Nine... Do you daydream much? This would lead us to a withdrawn type (4, 5 or 9). If you're constantly feeling too anxious to daydream, then you're a 6. Actually 6 is a "compliant" type, which matches your description of easy-going. Indecision and lack of self-confidence also matches 6 very well. The wing would probably be 5, however. I don't see much of 7 in you.

 

[Mal12345]

Every sources say the contrary.

http://ocean-moonshine.net/e1428573...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=27&MMN_position=55:55

"The sexual instinct focuses on attraction and excitement, or, what, apart from the self, seems to promise to expand and intensify life. The life of the self is found in the life of the other. As its name would indicate, individuals who are dominated by the sexual instinct are concerned with sexual fulfillment in the obvious sense of that term, but sexual subtypes are seldom interested in sex merely as a physical act. In fact, a belief that sex is just another physical drive for physical pleasure is a pretty good sign that an individual is not a sexual subtype. Sexual subtypes generally have romantic longings for the ideal partner and hence have high expectations and ideals. By extension, the sexual instinct can manifest in a desire for intensity of many different sorts, but the primary manifestation will generally be a concern with finding the ideal partner, as the sexual subtypes tend to feel somehow incomplete or unfinished without a relationship to ground them.

"On the high side, sexual subtypes often bring a certain passion and experimentalism to their lives; they are generally willing to take risks in order to attain their ideals. Sexual subtypes are also usually willing to sacrifice for those who matter most to them; they have an expanded sense of what constitutes the self and tend to merge with those they love. On the down side however, sexual subtypes tend to struggle with issues of neediness and dependency, as they tend to feel that they need relationships in order to reclaim lost or inaccessible portions of the self. In addition, the merging tendency, when taken to extremes, can lead to an inability to protect important boundaries. And the desire for intensity of experience can lead sexual subtypes to take unnecessary risks, to be somewhat impatient and to grow bored or frustrated with mundane reality. When the overall personality is unbalanced, thrill seeking or self-medication sometimes enter the picture, and can lead to various forms of addiction.

"When the sexual instinct is least developed, the personality can lack a certain charisma and momentum. Such personalities often do not form truly intimate relationships, as they don’t feel driven to do so; consequently, their personal relationships can suffer from a lack of attention. As there are aspects of ourselves which we can only see when in close relationship to others, those whose sexual instinct remains undeveloped might find it difficult to cultivate some forms of self-awareness."