[Type 8] Are 8 and Fi similar?

[Eric B]

In that light I'ld say an enfp 8 is more likely than an entp 8

From what I've seen, ENTP's usually come out as 7w8. (Or ar you talking about pure 8 only).

I think Elfboy is just noticing the fact that Ji (generally Fi and Ti) are, in ancient Greek terms, considered to be Cholerics. But in modern times this labeling has changed. So it's not like he hasn't observed something important, it's only that he's implicitly siding with Galen the Physician.

Again, classic Choleric would be more Je than Ji. (Particularly Te. I also believe NT fits it as well, but on a different level than social behavior. For ENT's, it is more obvious because it is amplified by the extraversion.

The number of FP males enneagram 8 is not at all negligible. The gut instinct is not just a physical thing. It relates to anger specifically. If you are and FP male, life gives you plenty of reasons to be angry from a very early age.This too is an oversimplification....what I'm getting at is that cognition and motivation are related but not in a clear cut way. There are cultural phenomenons that deeply affect all of this too. Your sex plays a part too.

But if this is what you are associating 8 with, that sort of makes it sound like it is just from a person's situation, and not really a fundamental type.

 

[Mal12345]

Again, classic Choleric would be more Je than Ji. (Particularly Te. I also believe NT fits it as well, but on a different level than social behavior. For ENT's, it is more obvious because it is amplified by the extraversion.

Of course you're getting Te from this idea (from Wikipedia), 'A Choleric, however, is an extroverted "leader"-type who, in the area of control, has a high need to control others, but a low tolerance of others controlling him.' As I said, that's the modern version. And the modern version would have the Ti and Fi as Melancholic types.

However, if you look here

http://www.ptypes.com/temperaments.html

you will see that Galen included the Choleric temperament with the schizothymics (as opposed to the cyclothymics):

Schizothymia is a temperament related to schizophrenia in a way analogous to cyclothymia's relationship with bipolar disorder. A schizothymic individual displays a flat affect and a high degree of introversion, withdrawing from social relations generally; nevertheless, some individuals with this characteristic may be able to achieve relatively affable social relations and a measure of affectivity in some situations. As a kind of temperament, schizothymic personality traits are thought to be more or less innate rather than the result of socialization (or a lack thereof).

 

[Moiety]

I appreciate your creativity there, but no matter how hard you try to spin it, 8 and Fi are not similar. That's a fact!

I was not trying to say they are close to the same thing. I was saying their relation is the same as the relation between 8 and Te, for the most part. As a fellow ENP I'd urge you to check your sources for "facts" on a daily basis There are no facts concerning this that I know of.

But if this is what you are associating 8 with, that sort of makes it sound like it is just from a person's situation, and not really a fundamental type.

My style of communication often times comes bitting me on my arse....I stayed away from direct definitions because I'm not claiming I know how Fi and 8 (or any two other enneagram/MBTI concepts for that matter) relate to each other specifically only that they clearly do. This only makes sense if one understands we are no just our enneagram number and wing, but are affected by the whole circle; also, the enneagram tells us we can move in that circle.

The more I investigate psychology the more I'm inclined to stay away from nature/nurture debates. It's mostly a moot point since I'm not claiming anything regarding what came first anyway.

I don't think enneagram is merely nature OR nurture. Even if I have a predisposition from birth to be a certain way, my life experiences may satisfy my special needs favorably and thus my enneagram test results might still be slightly skewed. Not to mention one is even recommended to grow. As a 9 I hope in a few years time my 3 scores are much higher since that would mean I'm moving in my direction of integration. Integration being a keyword here people since that is the enneagram's "aim".

I'm not trying to make a direct correlation between Fi and 8 per se.....my view is that the gut instinct, Fi and Te, the need to withdraw or assert one's presence in the environment AS WELL as the fundamental needs for peace/love (9) and truth/strength (8) of the individual might all be interdependent. These matters are all related to the same "energies"/impulses if you will so that if you affect one of them you also affect the other. Let's not forget these systems are here for us to MAP reality, but are not reality in themselves. As ever, the map is not territory.


Also I'd like to add, to whom it may concern, that in the light of new data or experience words like spiritualism and mysticism (and the inventors of these models are no strangers to those) lose their "la-la" weight. The new religion of the ages is science, and anything even sounding in any way less scientific is deemed heresy and taboo. But there are reasons people like Jung investigated certain topics. This is not the same thing as saying that mysticism is suddenly a source of truth.

The point is that someone studying psychology with any degree of sincerity has to open himself up to all sorts philosophical questions. The study of the human psyche is the study of our reality as well. And to do that one must be open-minded. Something is only hocus-pocus insofar as we predefine it as such. What do the words religion, spiritual and msytical mean to any one of us? For a long time they held negative, wishy-washy meanings for me. Nowadays they have no more such weight for the most part. And I'm not more religious, spiritual or mystical for it. Also anyone who worships science (since science is but one of men's many gods throughout history) should do well to ponder on history's greatest geniuses and their philosophies and worldviews and inquire into them.

 

[Eric B]

Of course you're getting Te from this idea (from Wikipedia), 'A Choleric, however, is an extroverted "leader"-type who, in the area of control, has a high need to control others, but a low tolerance of others controlling him.' As I said, that's the modern version. And the modern version would have the Ti and Fi as Melancholic types.

However, if you look here

http://www.ptypes.com/temperaments.html

you will see that Galen included the Choleric temperament with the schizothymics (as opposed to the cyclothymics):

That doesn't say Galen included Choleric with the schizothymes. Galen spoke of the Choleric, not the schizothymes. That was from Kretschmer, and Keirsey drew that from Kretschmer and matched it with the MBTI iNtuitives, whom he linked to both the Choleric and the Phlegmatic. And of course, all iNtuitives are not introverts. Keirsey did call them "introspective", however, and probably linked that to the "introversion" of that definition. Besides, Kretschmer probably drew from a disorder, and named the groups of characters after them, so it probably does not necessarily literally include all of those descriptions. (Any more than a Choleric person actually has too much yellow bile in his body).

Galen's original definition was that it was "hot" and "dry" (like fire). Hot= expressive; dry corresponds to task rather than people focus. Later, it was defined as having a shot response delay (again, expressive, quick to act) and a long response sustain (holds onto emotions longer, more serious and critical).
This is where those "modern" definitions comes from.

There is no modern version that maps the eight function-attitudes to the four temperaments. Te is associated with Choleric through Interaction Style (dom. Te's are always "In Charge"; which is extraverted and directive, fitting the original factor definition). Fi would be more the opposite, Phlegmatic. (Behind the Scenes). Si is associated with Melancholic through SJ, and Se is associated with Sanguine through SP. Ti does not fit any of those, but it sort of mixed, from being T (leans towards task), yet P in attitude (Ji), which softens its task focus, unlike Te, which is totally task-focused). ISTP is Melancholic by virtue of being Chart the Course, but INTP is Behind the Scenes (and the T figures in the conative temperament--NT, rather than the Interaction Style).

 

[Mal12345]

That doesn't say Galen included Choleric with the schizothymes. Galen spoke of the Choleric, not the schizothymes. That was from Kretschmer, and Keirsey drew that from Kretschmer and matched it with the MBTI iNtuitives, whom he linked to both the Choleric and the Phlegmatic. And of course, all iNtuitives are not introverts. Keirsey did call them "introspective", however, and probably linked that to the "introversion" of that definition. Besides, Kretschmer probably drew from a disorder, and named the groups of characters after them, so it probably does not necessarily literally include all of those descriptions. (Any more than a Choleric person actually has too much yellow bile in his body).

Galen's original definition was that it was "hot" and "dry" (like fire). Hot= expressive; dry corresponds to task rather than people focus. Later, it was defined as having a shot response delay (again, expressive, quick to act) and a long response sustain (holds onto emotions longer, more serious and critical).
This is where those "modern" definitions comes from.

There is no modern version that maps the eight function-attitudes to the four temperaments. Te is associated with Choleric through Interaction Style (dom. Te's are always "In Charge"; which is extraverted and directive, fitting the original factor definition). Fi would be more the opposite, Phlegmatic. (Behind the Scenes). Si is associated with Melancholic through SJ, and Se is associated with Sanguine through SP. Ti does not fit any of those, but it sort of mixed, from being T (leans towards task), yet P in attitude (Ji), which softens its task focus, unlike Te, which is totally task-focused). ISTP is Melancholic by virtue of being Chart the Course, but INTP is Behind the Scenes (and the T figures in the conative temperament--NT, rather than the Interaction Style).

This is getting off track. Galen described the Choleric type in terms of what we today would call schizothymic. Obviously, Galen had no concept of schizothymia, or cyclothymia. For Galen, being slow to respond did not matter in his equation. It's the response that mattered.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I am interested in your statements on Gurdjieff and his philosophy about self awareness. He recommends becoming more aware utilizing certain methods, like music, movements, and group work, to bring about enlightenment (because people walk around in a "waking sleep" state). And, according to wikipedia, he believes we should do these things to tap into our conscience which lies within our unconscious mind, so that we live a better and holier life. (if i have it right)


So, if humans' brains are mostly (99%?) untapped unconsciousness, and our conscience lies within it, as Gurdjieff asserts, are there more specific ways, than his one-size-fits-all methodology, based on type or function preference, that we can tap into our conscience, do you think?

For example, I get "insight" (Gurdjieff's goal) after I've contemplated something a while, studied and pondered about it, looped it around a bit, then slept on it. Other Ni's I've heard do this as well. I also get insight while I'm exercising aerobically. I also do get insight, or, perhaps more accurately, clarity or surity, about something after I've listened to music a while and gotten lost in it, or danced. So perhaps there is something to it. However, in considering this, those are all Se type activities, and Se is my most undifferentiated function....which lies mostly in my unconsciousness.

I'm just wondering if an Se/Ti user would more likely tap into their conscience doing something that takes them into their undifferentiated functions as well, like some Ni/Fe delving....And so on with other types. Is an INTP more likely to get 'insight' if he utilizes some Si/Fe activity, as these might lie more securely in the unconsciousness. Not sure what those activities are off the top of my head....

This is a random thought but your comments on Gurdjieff and the prodding of the unconscious raised these questions for me....Sorry if this is a major derail.




Or does just everyone get in touch with their unconscious most easily through his teachings of movement, music, and group work?

 

[Mal12345]

[MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] Undifferentiated functions lie outside the context of Gurdjieff's system, so you're straying into speculative territory. I don't see him talking about the unconscious much. That concept is part of modern psychology, and as Western science I'm sure that Gurdjieff would reject it. Conscience, yes, that is something all or most of us possess innately (even if it starts to develop soon after birth, that is close enough to being innate.) It constitutes a source of right and wrong notions that do not require being fed by any external instruction ('thou shalt not,' etc.), only being made conscious of this innate content as an internal source of wisdom we all share and can all freely tap into.

I don't believe Gurdjieff was some kind of god, as some do, so I feel free to question his idea that group work is required to make spiritual progress. Having to travel to join a school somewhere seems very limiting. And being a Gurdjieff student costs a lot of money. His theory is that if you don't have a lot of money to spend, then you're not worth bothering with as a person: if you don't have the discipline to earn and save the large sums required, then you won't have the discipline to survive his rigorous training method. This seems very harsh and unfair to me, but it's perhaps true for some or most. It's a good way to keep out the riff-raff, I'll admit.

 

[Rim]

when you look at them a little deeper, that have a lot in common with each other

8s and FPs both
- a strong, visceral response to injustice <--typical type 6 reactiveness not just 8 does this
- insist on being independent
- become extremely pissed if you try to control them <-again type 6 reactive side, we hate to be controlled
- are wild and free spirited and disdain rules and being expected to be "appropriate" <--not really, more cp 6 again
- strong disliking for social expectation <-- this depends on the individual, cp 6 is usually like this.
- solid and resilient (FPs to social conditioning and moral adversity; 8s to everything)
- both tend to have protective personalities (though the 8 is likely to be a little more so right off the bat while most FPs tend to wait a little longer to step in) <--this is again an example of being reactive while an 8 is constantly actively engaged in being independent.
- value truth over tact (FPs often value tact and saying things in a nice way when possible, but not at the expense of truth)
- both have beliefs and/or preferences that they will not compromise on under any circumstances <-- other types do this as well it is not 8 exclusive.
- both insist on doing things "their way"

I don't see how being an FP 8 seems to contradictory to some people. their motivations are extremely similar

Most all of this describes type 6 and not 8. Type 8 is more along the lines of Fe - Te, most if not all 8s are Judgers.

A lot of counter phobic 6-es, 7w8s, 9w8s and some 2s mistype as 8. What counts in the enneagram are motivations for behavior and not the behavior itself.

Most people confuse counter phobic 6 defensive-reactive response to threats as type 8 behavior. The most important thing to keep in mind when trying to make the distinction is that type 8 is not reactive in such a manner. An 8 will be actively aggressive "no bullshit" and not defensively reactive.

Type 6 reactive is defensive in nature and you can see the distress, the anger is mental.

Type 8 reactive is aggressive, more controlled and composed, solid.

 

[Elfboy]

Most all of this describes type 6 and not 8. Type 8 is more along the lines of Fe - Te, most if not all 8s are Judgers.

A lot of counter phobic 6-es, 7w8s, 9w8s and some 2s mistype as 8. What counts in the enneagram are motivations for behavior and not the behavior itself.

I'm talking about similarities, not mistypings
Edit: actually, 8s are reactive. 4, 6 and 8 make up the reactive triad.

 

[Rim]

I'm talking about similarities, not mistypings
Edit: actually, 8s are reactive. 4, 6 and 8 make up the reactive triad.

Oh you were on, sry I haven't finished editing it fully.

Well FPs defend their values and that is the source of the reactive behavior.

8s defend common sense, Fe and Te values. It doesn't have to be personal. If you get in the way of progress, that will piss an 8 off.

^^ I post half way through :\ to avoid loss of written material and then edit it for another 10 minutes or so double checking sources and making it crisp clear. You are right 4, 6, 8 is the reactive triad, but there is a difference in the "why" (aka motivation).

either that or I have an 8 in the tritype :\ but that can't be because I relate a lot to type 9. I have never seen an FP which was an 8 and not some other type thinking they are an 8.

 

[Elfboy]

Well FPs defend their values and that is the source of the reactive behavior.

yes, though how reactive it is varies. personally I don't consider myself very reactive, though I'm certainly responsive in that I let people know what I think of them, their opinions and their actions.

8s defend common sense, Fe and Te values. It doesn't have to be personal. If you get in the way of progress, that will piss an 8 off.

8s defend their personal space and anything they feel they should have control over. depending on the beliefs of the 8, this can vary tremendously.

 

[Rim]

yes, though how reactive it is varies. personally I don't consider myself very reactive, though I'm certainly responsive in that I let people know what I think of them, their opinions and their actions.


8s defend their personal space and anything they feel they should have control over. depending on the beliefs of the 8, this can vary tremendously.

here I found something that makes the proper difference:

Sixes and Eights are aggressive, although only the Eight is an entirely aggressive personality. Sixes react both to their fears and to other people and constantly oscillate from one state to another, from Level to Level. They are ambivalent and passive-aggressive, evasive, and contradictory. In contrast, Eights have solid egos and formidable wills; they keep pushing others until they get them what they want. There is little softness in Eights and even less tendency to comply with the wishes of anyone else. They have no desire to be liked or to ingratiate themselves with others. Rather than look to others for protection, Eights offer protection (patronage) in return for hard work and loyalty.

^^ imo FPs are not blunt and independent enough to be 8s, having one in the tritype or as a wing is quite possible thou. Pure 8 is more TJ.

EDIT2: x.x or just don't mind me...I'm in "devil's advocate" mode right now.

 

[Elfboy]

here I found something that makes the proper difference:

that pretty much sums it up. 6's reactive tendencies come more from volatility, fear and being thrown off guard; 8s reactive tendencies come from anger and a desire to destroy danger and obstacles. 8s as a whole are less reactive because their behavior is more predictable to themselves. 6s are so unpredictable that they themselves often don't know how they will react; 8s on the other hand know that if someone hits them, they will hit back, and as a result they're pretty much prepared for it 24/7.

the 8 is the predator; the cp 6 is more like an herbivore who will fight and flail like hell if attacked, but lacks the inherent aggression of a carnivore. once the threat is removed, a 6 will generally return to their normal self. 8s on the other hand scarcely change. extreme confrontation and even physical violence are often not a very big deal to them.

 

[Rim]

that pretty much sums it up. 6's reactive tendencies come more from volatility, fear and being thrown off guard; 8s reactive tendencies come from anger and a desire to destroy danger and obstacles. 8s as a whole are less reactive because their behavior is more predictable to themselves. 6s are so unpredictable that they themselves often don't know how they will react; 8s on the other hand know that if someone hits them, they will hit back, and as a result they're pretty much prepared for it 24/7.

the 8 is the predator; the cp 6 is more like an herbivore who will fight and flail like hell if attacked, but lacks the inherent aggression of a carnivore. once the threat is removed, a 6 will generally return to their normal self. 8s on the other hand scarcely change. extreme confrontation and even physical violence are often not a very big deal to them.

As a 6 I'm wary and afraid I'll end up doing this when I get reactive-defensive, so yes that is correct. I think that is what i wanted to get across in my initial first post, just couldn't express it properly.

 

[Elfboy]

As a 6 I'm wary and afraid I'll end up doing this when I get reactive-defensive, so yes that is correct. I think that is what i wanted to get across in my initial first post, just couldn't express it properly.

you expressed it fine, I just added 2-3 things and rephrased the quote you gave me a bit to make sure I got what you were saying. a lot of the things I mentioned in the OP could apply either to 6s or 8s

 

[Eric B]

This is getting off track. Galen described the Choleric type in terms of what we today would call schizothymic. Obviously, Galen had no concept of schizothymia, or cyclothymia.

But schizothymia is a "temperament" only in the modernly accepted sense of the word (Thomas and Chess theory, the nine characteristics), not in the sense of "the four temperaments". Both it and cyclothymia are related to disorders (schizophrenia, bipolar, respectively) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizothymia so that has nothing to do with the Choleric temperament.

For Galen, being slow to respond did not matter in his equation. It's the response that mattered.

I don't quite understand what you're saying. Everyone "responds"; fast or slow delay, and long or short sustain, were what distinguished the four temperaments. Again, it has nothing to do with the modern disorder concepts.

that pretty much sums it up. 6's reactive tendencies come more from volatility, fear and being thrown off guard; 8s reactive tendencies come from anger and a desire to destroy danger and obstacles. 8s as a whole are less reactive because their behavior is more predictable to themselves. 6s are so unpredictable that they themselves often don't know how they will react; 8s on the other hand know that if someone hits them, they will hit back, and as a result they're pretty much prepared for it 24/7.

the 8 is the predator; the cp 6 is more like an herbivore who will fight and flail like hell if attacked, but lacks the inherent aggression of a carnivore. once the threat is removed, a 6 will generally return to their normal self. 8s on the other hand scarcely change. extreme confrontation and even physical violence are often not a very big deal to them.

8 is Choleric, 6 is Supine (often highlighting the more reactive side of it).

 

[Elfboy]

But schizothymia is a "temperament" only in the modernly accepted sense of the word (Thomas and Chess theory, the nine characteristics), not in the sense of "the four temperaments". Both it and cyclothymia are related to disorders (schizophrenia, bipolar, respectively) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizothymia so that has nothing to do with the Choleric temperament.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. Everyone "responds"; fast or slow delay, and long or short sustain, were what distinguished the four temperaments. Again, it has nothing to do with the modern disorder concepts.
8 is Choleric, 6 is Supine (often highlighting the more reactive side of it).

cp 6s (especially 6w7 Sx) can be choleric too, but 8 pretty much defines choleric

 

[Moiety]

So, if humans' brains are mostly (99%?) untapped unconsciousness, and our conscience lies within it, as Gurdjieff asserts, are there more specific ways, than his one-size-fits-all methodology, based on type or function preference, that we can tap into our conscience, do you think?

I'm gonna throw in my two cents even though this wasn't directed at me. IMO Gurdjieff was a bit of a nut, an eccentric. Dancing and music? Only in the off-chance they might induce a state of flow in the practitioner could I see them having any merit. Meditation from my experience is the fastest and simplest way of bringing consciousness into our unconscious psyche. Enneagram is a good aid for personal growth but one has to take its history with a grain of salt.

 

[Mal12345]

But schizothymia is a "temperament" only in the modernly accepted sense of the word (Thomas and Chess theory, the nine characteristics), not in the sense of "the four temperaments".

Then tell the author of this page http://www.ptypes.com/temperaments.html - remember that one? You think we can't mix ancient and modern? Think again. At the very least, we can find the similarities, as Elfboy did in the OP with type 8 and Fi.

Both it and cyclothymia are related to disorders (schizophrenia, bipolar, respectively) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizothymia so that has nothing to do with the Choleric temperament.

Yet somehow the chart at that other page locates "scientist" and "dialectical" in the same column as "choleric" under the general heading "Schizothymic." There is a reason for this which you are neglecting. It has to do with Galen's theory of temperaments which does not match the modern version of "choleric." And it has to do with Elfboy's OP which points to certain similarities between type 8s, who are choleric in the modern sense, and Fi's, who are choleric in the ancient, Galenic sense.

I don't quite understand what you're saying. Everyone "responds"; fast or slow delay, and long or short sustain, were what distinguished the four temperaments. Again, it has nothing to do with the modern disorder concepts.

Galen's four temperaments? Response time had nothing to do with it, that is the modern version.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I'm gonna throw in my two cents even though this wasn't directed at me. IMO Gurdjieff was a bit of a nut, an eccentric. Dancing and music? Only in the off-chance they might induce a state of flow in the practitioner could I see them having any merit. Meditation from my experience is the fastest and simplest way of bringing consciousness into our unconscious psyche. Enneagram is a good aid for personal growth but one has to take its history with a grain of salt.

But meditation for me doesn't do anything really, except perhaps make me feel very relaxed---or irritated. Unless it's meditation involving an Se/Ti activity, as I get with knitting, then it can be very meditative and conscience provoking...

If you feel traditional meditation taps into your conscience, I wonder what type you are. I get an INTP vibe off your avvy and response, etc. And/or if you know your most undifferentiated functions.