My type?

[senza tema]

BREAKING: The Fauvres (or just one, whoever runs the Enneagram Explorations Fb page - David is the only one listed) posted this.

Enneagram Myths:
Many people are now learning about the Enneagram in online forums. I thought this list of myths that persist to be repeated in forums would be helpful.

1. Our type is determined by our childhood. False. All evidence suggests type is genetic and we are born our type.

2. Integration/Disintegration. False. This concept was proposed by Enneagram founder Claudio Naranjo and later he retracted it. We equally go to the high and low sides of the types on the lines from our primary type.

3. Some types are more difficult than others. False. All types in their own way when their core fears are triggered can be difficult to interact with for various reasons. No type is better or worse than any other type.

4. Some types are better suited to be with each other in a romantic relationship than other types. False. The biggest determinant of relationship compatibility in romance is one's instinct not one's type. Any two types can potentially have a happy relationship. That said it's unusual to find couples of the same type. It's most common with 9s.

5. The Enneagram types originated from ancient wisdom and came from Gurjieff or the Sufis. False. The concept of the types is modern and originated with Oscar Icahzo in the 1970s and was further developed by present day Enneagram teachers.

6. We can change our type. False. Our type like our sex (I've been corrected that gender is the wrong term here...lol) is fixed throughout our life time. We can dramatically change our emotional health in relationship to our type and how we express our type.
​

This isn't to say I don't have my doubts about some of these points above - but at least now there's clear evidence that at least one Fauvre believes type doesn't change.

(I'm kinda hard pressed to believe #1 in particular. I'd be interested to see this evidence.)

#1 seems super bogus to me but I think reasonable cases can be made for the others.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Yeah, the integration/disintegration points - I've always kinda struggled with that. I'd read Naranjo's claim (the retraction) before, it's good to see Fauvre on board.

 

[Starry]

BREAKING: The Fauvres (or just one, whoever runs the Enneagram Explorations Fb page - David is the only one listed) posted this.

Enneagram Myths:
Many people are now learning about the Enneagram in online forums. I thought this list of myths that persist to be repeated in forums would be helpful.

1. Our type is determined by our childhood. False. All evidence suggests type is genetic and we are born our type.

2. Integration/Disintegration. False. This concept was proposed by Enneagram founder Claudio Naranjo and later he retracted it. We equally go to the high and low sides of the types on the lines from our primary type.

3. Some types are more difficult than others. False. All types in their own way when their core fears are triggered can be difficult to interact with for various reasons. No type is better or worse than any other type.

4. Some types are better suited to be with each other in a romantic relationship than other types. False. The biggest determinant of relationship compatibility in romance is one's instinct not one's type. Any two types can potentially have a happy relationship. That said it's unusual to find couples of the same type. It's most common with 9s.

5. The Enneagram types originated from ancient wisdom and came from Gurjieff or the Sufis. False. The concept of the types is modern and originated with Oscar Icahzo in the 1970s and was further developed by present day Enneagram teachers.

6. We can change our type. False. Our type like our sex (I've been corrected that gender is the wrong term here...lol) is fixed throughout our life time. We can dramatically change our emotional health in relationship to our type and how we express our type.
​

This isn't to say I don't have my doubts about some of these points above - but at least now there's clear evidence that at least one Fauvre believes type doesn't change.

(I'm kinda hard pressed to believe #1 in particular. I'd be interested to see this evidence.)

Fauvre has hit the bong so hard in her lifetime...


okay...I’m kidding. I mean, probably, but I don’t know that for a fact.
That is a super interesting list...to see it all together like that.

1.) I haven’t made my own (personal) determination on that yet. I have actually seen good evidence for both theories tbh.

2.) & 3.) yup

4.) surprises me a little in that there must be some types that will have an easier time of it together. I mean, where’s the starting point here? If it’s like “all things being equal” then yah. But I would imagine something like...an average e1 will be more likely to get on really well with many 5s of various health whereas they may likely struggle with anything other than a super healthy 7 (something like that). Idk I’d have to consider that more. And what instincts? I almost want to say that Fauvres matches the same dom instincts together for compatibility...like sx dom + sx dom.

5.) is either written really poorly or is wrong.

And 6.) yes

 

[Avocado]

Fauvre has hit the bong so hard in her lifetime...


okay...I’m kidding. I mean, probably, but I don’t know that for a fact.
That is a super interesting list...to see it all together like that.

1.) I haven’t made my own (personal) determination on that yet. I have actually seen good evidence for both theories tbh.

2.) & 3.) yup

4.) surprises me a little in that there must be some types that will have an easier time of it together. I mean, where’s the starting point here? If it’s like “all things being equal” then yah. But I would imagine something like...an average e1 will be more likely to get on really well with many 5s of various health whereas they may likely struggle with anything other than a super healthy 7 (something like that). Idk I’d have to consider that more. And what instincts? I almost want to say that Fauvres matches the same dom instincts together for compatibility...like sx dom + sx dom.

5.) is either written really poorly or is wrong.

And 6.) yes

If I truly remind you of yourself when you were younger, wsn't there a point you looked around and saw you could have more? A time you realized fixing the world and putting things as they "should be" is a futile exercise? No good deed goes unpunished, starry. You have to make decisions based on the world as it is and always with an eye towards what benefits you personally. My power and wealth grow exponentially. You tried helping me at one point. I can now help you.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Juice was a NFJ Scholar with 8 in charge (I saw your posts in the MIA...by far one of the greatest losses TypoC has experienced).


Z Buck is vocal and won’t hesitate to confront...but she’s entirely open. She doesn’t hold fast to a set of preconceived notions of right and wrong or certain hoops that need to be jumped or rituals that should be preformed. 8 is very misunderstood in this way. 8s are super open...I think it’s just their force that often gives them the appearance that they are not.

THANK YOU.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

#1 is actually super supported by research if you look into things like case studies of twins raised separately.

I used to think nurture over nature, but science isn't as keen on that concept these days. Obviously, it's somewhere on a spectrum.

 

[Forever]

Just to clarify is #2 meaning that we equally go from let’s say as a type 4 as a 1 AND a 2? Instead one is up and the other is down?

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Just to clarify is #2 meaning that we equally go from let’s say as a type 4 as a 1 AND a 2? Instead one is up and the other is down?

Sort of.
So a 4 could be helpful like a 2, but also clingy.
Or disciplined like a 1, but also critical.

There's a high functioning side and low functioning side, and we use both rather than just integrate and disintegrate, based on how well we're doing in the moment.

 

[Starry]

If I truly remind you of yourself when you were younger, wsn't there a point you looked around and saw you could have more? A time you realized fixing the world and putting things as they "should be" is a futile exercise? No good deed goes unpunished, starry. You have to make decisions based on the world as it is and always with an eye towards what benefits you personally. My power and wealth grow exponentially. You tried helping me at one point. I can now help you.

Dude this is Z Buck’s type me thread

Quite a few years ago now...soon after you first arrived and for a few years after that...you were a curious one because you wore ENFP 7 on your sleeve. And it is that experience that I identified with - all the ENFP 7s did. To this day I don’t think you ever got it...no matter how many times it was explained to you...you yourself never seemed to grasp 7s grip...or how starting out at 7a will always take you to 7b...(and once at 7b again you’ll throw a tantrum.). But many of us could see these shared thoughts/behaviors in you plain as day. Things are very different now though.

I wasn’t trying to help you back then. I had been under the impression that you were truly doing everything you could to obtain decent mental health care. And I thought that if I involved you heavily in a discussion I was going to have anyway... it might work to maintain your awareness until proper treatment had been secured.

^You never did this though. And I will tell you - you seem very unwell to me today. Very unwell. And far outside the bounds of anything ENFP and/or 7 can help you with. I no longer identify with anything you say anymore. I mean, I get “no good deed goes unpunished”. <-hell, that could easily be the sum total of my entire forum experience alone right there. But if you imagine that you can help me or anyone for that matter by encouraging the opposite than you are far worse off than I thought and I think you are quite ill already.

I have never been interested in wealth and power and never will be. I have already told you this many times. Even if I could obtain those things without having to exploit resources, animals, people - I don’t want them do you see? Trying to preach the philosophy of exploitation is a greater waste of time than me “trying to save the world” so stop.

 

[Galena]

Can most definitely attest to #2 on the list. To move forward with integration at present, I actually I think I need some more healthy 2 to balance out all the 1.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Can most definitely attest to #2 on the list. To move forward with integration at present, I actually I think I need some more healthy 2 to balance out all the 1.

I also need to embrace some 2-ishness. Many of my 1 traits are also critical. Sigh.

 

[Dr Mobius]

#1 seems super bogus to me but I think reasonable cases can be made for the others.

Yeah statements like this always remind me of Dobzhansky's quote about how nothing in biochemistry makes sense except in light of free energy. If we view biological processes as the lowest possible energy conformation then having fully formed personalities encoded in our dna seems unlikely. Though given how any significant evidence on a macroscopic level has left us with Mengele's twin experiments, and Peter Neubauer's twin separation....... I imagine we'll have to wait for a greater understanding of our genetics. I would bet on select traits being genetic with the majority being environmental development.

 

[Pionart]

Yes I would definitely guess INFJ.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

And yah...541. I'd like to take that test myself if you have a link...but I think you are just getting 1 because 8 will score low for you in spite of its influence (imo).

The test is free again for today (Friday) and tomorrow, using "BlackFriday" as the code. Here's the test.

 

[SigningBeast]

If it's okay if I barge in, can someone help me figure out what type I am? I know I am a dom Fi, so that would make me IxFP, but idk if I am Se or Ne. The test says I am INFP but I feel like I'm more ISFP

 

[Peter Deadpan]

If it's okay if I barge in, can someone help me figure out what type I am? I know I am a dom Fi, so that would make me IxFP, but idk if I am Se or Ne. The test says I am INFP but I feel like I'm more ISFP

It's best if you start your own "Type me" thread, but know that it can be a long road to get the info integrated accurately.

 

[Starry]

The test is free again for today (Friday) and tomorrow, using "BlackFriday" as the code. Here's the test.

Did you take it? I did. Whoops I have to go get my results ha hold on...


omg I couldn't find it and was like "fuck man" (because I hate taking tests and this was no exception)...but it was in my junk.

Your Report Summary:
Top ranked Enneacard overall: Type 7
Top Ranked Enneacard in your Enneaspread: Type 7
Potential Wing(s): not suggested
Potential Tritype: 748
Potential Instinctual Stacking: Sexual > Self-Preservation > Social


I just noticed that they couldn't decide on a wing for me and this is how cp is and it's bothersome in a way. It's like I'm afraid of everything but no one knows this or something.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Did you take it?

No, but I've taken it twice previously and gotten 541 both times. And I think it's interesting that I've had others guess 541 the most (of a total of, like, 4 or 5 people offering guesses). I haven't written it off, but it doesn't seem to me any better a fit than 549 or 548.

And like I said anyway though, I just don't put much stock in tri-type. (And the other results probably just confirmed 5w4 sx/sp, since I typically would only remember results that stuck out in some way).