And with that, I will join the rest of the conversation:
1s: 153 [efficient, calculating, knowledge-driven, allergic to emotions]
2s: 297 [happy, giving, give to everyone, people pleasers]
3s: 378 [outgoing, conquerers, always on top, egomaniacs]
4s: 469 [shy, socially anxious, worried about not fitting in, quiet, lost in their thoughts & daydreams, insecure]
5s: 594 [conflict-averse, social-phobic, stuck in their heads]
phobic 6s: 694 [trying to please & mix in with others while secretly mistrusting them, easy going, unconfident]
cp 6s: 683 [fearless, wild, fear-mongering, up-in-arms, very 'out there']
7s: 729 [cheerful, agreeable, charming, bouncy, floaty, un-grounded]
8s: 835 [cold, reserved, competent, always on top, detached]
9s: 972 [easy-going, agreeable, giving]
That's an interesting way to look at it. I find that most descriptions are very,
very 9-fix-biased. I've seen 3s, 4s, 6s, and 7s with an 8-fix all mistype (the 1-fix I've been following less, but this may be true as well). The 3s don't see themselves in that "vacuous, ingratiating suck up" taint that sometimes emerges. 8-fixed fours don't see themselves as "weak, impractical, and openly vulnerable" which much of the literature implies is true. The 6s don't see themselves as "passive-aggressive" and willing to yield to the pressure of others for security; the 7s see themselves as "too angry" to be such a happy, upbeat optimist.
I could go on, but I feel that many descriptions do have that bias as well. Thank you for pointing this out.
i don't know where else to say this but reading through the tritypes and maybe i'm not 729. i don't feel like i care about conflict that much really. it really doesn't bother me like it sounds like they're saying it does. i do try to help others resolve their conflict but not because conflict bothers me.
Sounds like it's your last fix. That one can be hard to ascertain--if there's a tritype that sounds more like you, that may be it. Give it some thought.
I'm uncertain of my own tritype.
4w5 for sure.
Can't decide between 6w7, 7w6, and 7w8.
And completely lost on my gut type: 8w9, 9w8, 9w1, 1w9, 1w2...?
So it's between:
4-6-8/4-8-6
4-6-9/4-9-6
4-6-1/4-1-6
4-7-8/4-8-7
4-7-9/4-9-7
4-7-1/4-1-7
I've been told I'm very mellow. I've also been told I'm uptight. I'm sweet, but can certainly be aggressive when I need to be. I'm not sure if there's a part of me that's an 8 or a part of me that's an annoyed 1. I also have bouts of extreme laziness and teeter between that with extreme motivation. I tend to fight for what I think is fair, and I've been told I have issues with authority. Which I don't necessarily think is the case, so much as I don't like to be wrong, and take a lot of pride in the things I do. So when an authority figure gets on to me for something, I tend to become a bit fiesty.
I'll give some unsolicited advice:
What you say here sounds like 6 and 1 to me, though that's not intended as an assessment by any means. In my experience, the 8 is not so much about "aggression" (which is partly how I didn't see it in my own case), but more a sense of War. Towards life.
1s, 6s, and 8s can all be fairness-oriented and will stick up for perceived injustices. Reactive types in general have issues with "other people telling me what to do". Just some thoughts.
Have you read through the tritype descriptions? It might give you a starting ground.
However, I think 4w5-5w6-9w1 is probably my best fit as far as tritype goes. With that comes a tendency to interiorize my intensity. I think it can make me look more sp/sx than sx/sp which confused me for a long while, because I'm pretty contained. I related so much to the obsessive/addictive/angry envy/need for a charge aspect of being a sexual four but people would say I didn't 'seem' sx/sp. So I tried on the sp/sx but it just seemed wrong, I'm really not that neurotic about self pres stuff, while I'm very neurotic about sexual issues. And I'm like an exploding atomic bomb internally. Internally I am extremely emotionally volatile. I am also bipolar, but I'm one of those bipolar people that no one would ever suspect of being bipolar, because everything is focused inward (unless I'm at my absolute worst, then watch out). I think to most people I seem easy-going, cerebral, and quietly dramatic. If they were to read my poetry they might change their mind.
[MENTION=17911]Animal[/MENTION], my one criticism of Naranjo's pov regarding fours being drastically different, instinct wise, is that most of us aren't purely one instinct. You can look at the instincts in a vacuum, but that doesn't mean people are going to look obviously that way. Some people the presentation of the dominant instinct is blatantly obvious. Others, less so. I'd say I'm definitely a sexual/self pres mix.
I feel you on this one. I had a devil of a time trying to figure out instincts. I'm not a typical "needy, impractical sx4", which made me think I was sp-first for a long time--I rely on myself and seldom go crying to others, etc. The problem is, I just don't see self-pres setting off any 4ishness in me whatsoever, at any level, and I fail to see the need for ambiance, luxury, and comfortable surrounds that are said to accompany this stacking (I guess you could attribute this to the 5-wing). I strongly identify with social 4 issues, but then can't see it reaching the level of dominant-instinct neurosis.
When I read about the instincts themselves, I've clearly got neuroses around each, and blindspots around each. It's like...ARGGHH!!! In the end, I just went by motivations (what sets off the 4-issues?), and how little am I motivated to maintain an interest sp stuff versus soc stuff.
The stacking isn't always obvious. Mine is generally challenged, no matter what I type as. XD
Interestingly, I think naranjo's descriptions would correspond in this way for tritype- sort of, I didn't give it tons of thought. (I'd love to get others' opinions):
459: sp/so or so/sp
451: sp/sx
458: sx/sp
469: so/sp (maybe so/sx)
461: sp/sx
468: sx
479: so
471: sx/sp or sx/so?
478: sx
This doesn't mean that I think that people of this tritype are this instinct and vice versa, just that this is the sort of 'flavor' the tritype descriptions seem to give that correspond with the sort of 'flavor' Naranjo's descriptions seem to give. It would explain why when I listen to Naranjo I begin to wonder if I have a social instinct in there somewhere (despite the fact that I have little to no interest in belonging, etc.) because of my tendency toward passivity.
I think the Fauvres state that generally the 468 is sexual first, and 459 has a sp/sx norm (this is true of my mother, a 945). The others I haven't heard anything about, though I'd imagine all are subject to each instinct.
It's something I've been wondering about recently though--how does each tritype correlate to instincts? How does each tritype correlate to cognitive functions? Is an ESFJ or INFP 683 possible? It seems like a contradiction in terms! Are 548s more likely to be Ni-dom (a 548 friend indicated that it's a "very Ni" combination)?
For example, when I was younger, I might look at a group of people in some social situation and stay apart instead of taking a chair beside them, because I'd feel they would rather someone else sit there. To them, I was a snob; to me, I had rejected myself for them, saving them the trouble and me the humiliation. I suppose the difference here between an sp/sx and sp/so is that this attitude is more often directed at relationships where I'd desire something more intense but think this is unwanted by the other & might cause them to reject me as an obsessive creeper. It does pop up in social spheres too, as in my illustration, but I have enough disdain & disinterest at times to the point that I may actually be a snob, haha.
WOW I totally relate! If this is evidence of social-last, maybe I am that!! I've always assumed people don't want me around (or at least I have since I was rejected as a kid). It took me a long time to consciously realize that this was the underlying dynamic, but basically, I maintain the perception that my presence is an imposition rather than a benefit.
Is it not possible to be balanced in all three realms? sx, sp, so? [MENTION=7140]brainheart[/MENTION]
According to the theory, some people are relatively good at each, but there's supposed to be one that's more neurotic than the others. I find instincts to be the hardest part of the theory to grasp, though. I'm still not even 100% on my own stacking, but so far it provides the best explanation for the sorts of issues I've torqued out about/not torqued out about in my life.