[Type 5] e5 and Emotions

[Totenkindly]

I am not sure because I am SP/SO. Maybe it's the need for self-preservation with the desire to reach out (socially or sexually). Aren't 5's usually about self-preservation with all the self-control, trust issues (speaking generally, not enneagram definitions)? At the same time humans generally want to reach out and bond with others. It might be a conflict of interest.

Yes, that seems to catch the gist of it. With the SX thing, I'm looking more for intimate connection rather than social connection, but the SP thing seems to saying, "Oh, you really don't want to go out there and get enmeshed by someone you can't trust." They typically seem at odds. And the detachment strategy is the easiest, but human beings are human beings and typically need SOME sort of contact with others... even if it's limited in some way, or even to give them an anchor in the quest for self.

I just go have some alone time and then rise back up out of my hermit cave when I am ready to face them again. If it's bad, I lessen my contact with them but it is a balance cutting it off and not being being dismissive.

Yes, that makes sense, although I think sometimes with clingier people it can be hard getting some sort of boundary up that is not rigid. And then having to remember all the different walls for different people.

I'll throw in that a healthy 5 is going to look significantly different from an unhealthy 5.

Yes, the nine stages of unhealth to health for each type are pretty clearly delineated within Riso's enneagram materials.

I was trying to say that Both Ni and TI are naturally introverted and anti social.

Gotcha.

Thus the Fe is the counter to completely closing off and also the vessel for communicating what Ni and Ti ascertain.

Gotcha.

As with 5 being analytical and withdrawing in nature.
Both e5 and Ni/Ti are anti social by nature.
However human beings are not anti social by nature.

Note: You are using "anti-social" to mean two different things there.

E5 and Ni/Ti, by your earlier definitions, ARE anti-social by nature.
They withdraw.
Giving the choice between engaging and not engaging, they detach, to get a better, safer perspective.

Your definition of "anti-social" for the second half of your comment ("human beings are not anti-social by nature") refers to the general concept of "no man is an island" and that we all need some level of human contact.

So even the most extreme and rare types such as INFJs and e5s still have a social drive built in.

Yes. INFJs and E5s are DIFFERENT animals... but each is human, and thus each is not an island, and each needs some level of connection with other human beings in order to become fulfilled or at least reach their optimal stage of health, since we teach each other things we don't naturally know.

But this is different from the "withdrawal" nature described in Enneagram theory.

I am describing this social drive as Fe or w4 w6.

You cannot define, logically, the need to connect with other humans to be "Fe" -- which is a very specific way to see/engage the world. Logically, you're comparing two things that might both look small, red, and round from a distance, but in reality one is an apple and the other is a small rubber ball... hence, not the same.

You can't really define Fe to be whatever form of human connection you want it to be.

To recap:

• MBTI Fe = specific way to perceive/engage the world, prioritizing interpersonal values
• social needs = the basic, generalized need for every human being regardless of MBTI type to engage and interact with others on SOME level

Ignoring them is perilous and unhealthy.

Well, I do agree with you there!

 

[Glycerine]

@ MT: In general,it really plays out in my stressed mode, I am a chaotic ENFJ on steroids and seek people out a lot more when I am stressed. I am like the robot you just described. Also, I seek out a lot of social interaction but then if I don't know what's going on, I just do my own thing and zone out.

To the actual question, I still seek people out but with a lower frequency. If I am desperate, I will go on Vent and check every once in awhile to see what people are discussing but then I get distracted by something else that attracts my attention.

 

[Arclight]

I am using this definition of Fe.

I will highlight the parts of Fe I regularly see in myself.


The process of extraverted Feeling often involves a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidenced by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure. The “social graces,” such as being polite, being nice, being friendly, being considerate, and being appropriate, often revolve around the process of extraverted Feeling. Keeping in touch, laughing at jokes when others laugh, and trying to get people to act kindly to each other also involve extraverted Feeling. Using this process, we respond according to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others. We may ask people what they want or need or self-disclose to prompt them to talk more about themselves. This often sparks conversation and lets us know more about them so we can better adjust our behavior to them. Often with this process, we feel pulled to be responsible and take care of others’ feelings, sometimes to the point of not separating our feelings from theirs. We may recognize and adhere to shared values, feelings, and social norms to get along.

Sounds pretty "social" and very "other people" related to me.

 

[Totenkindly]

I am using this definition of Fe.

I will highlight the parts of Fe I regularly see in myself.


The process of extraverted Feeling often involves a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidenced by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure. The “social graces,” such as being polite, being nice, being friendly, being considerate, and being appropriate, often revolve around the process of extraverted Feeling. Keeping in touch, laughing at jokes when others laugh, and trying to get people to act kindly to each other also involve extraverted Feeling. Using this process, we respond according to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others. We may ask people what they want or need or self-disclose to prompt them to talk more about themselves. This often sparks conversation and lets us know more about them so we can better adjust our behavior to them. Often with this process, we feel pulled to be responsible and take care of others’ feelings, sometimes to the point of not separating our feelings from theirs. We may recognize and adhere to shared values, feelings, and social norms to get along.

Sounds pretty "social" and very "other people" related to me.

What we are discussing is the basic fundamentals of type theory, Arclight.

"The need for human contact" is not "Fe."
And people can interact with each / be sociable in ways that do not necessarily conform to Fe.
(Ti people can discuss Ti ideas without doing any of the Fe stuff, and it can meet interaction needs, etc.)

If you disagree on such a fundamental premise of type understanding, there's not much more to discuss, although I'm going to try to clarify for the benefit of others at least.

I don't also want to make this a discussion of Arclight's use of Fe, which wasn't really the point ... unless you're gonna tie it to E5 in some way that makes sense.

 

[Glycerine]

Just out of curiosity why do Ni and Ti have to be opposed to Fe (anti-social)? I think they can all work good together. My Fe gives an initial read on a situation and Ni and Ti gives me the the meaning and reasoning behind the situation. For example, is it important in the long run for me to correct that person's rude behavior or it is petty and I am imposing myself on the person?

 

[Totenkindly]

Lol same.

I'm a 4w5 but I most often score as a 5 on tests. 4 holds more weight for my personality because it's heart (image) focused, along with 3 and 2. On the other hand, 5 is more centered around problem solving, following suite with 6 and 7. For me, my "fiviness" proceeds from my "fouriness" because being a problem solver is the image I most create for myself. In fact, it's not uncommon for me to overturn concepts the way the "iconoclast" does just because I can.

True, the head stuff does tend to be more "problem solving."

You do sound like a mix / I perceive you that way ... in-between.

I identify as a Five but one who has had to embrace passion and vision, so I can go into the murky areas of heart... and I also want to be known/connect. But I still ultimately have this detach, at the core of it, where I want to step back and figure things out.

I think that on occasion, 5s become attached to the idea of being detached, and in the process start fizzling out like a malfunctioning robot. I've known a few that just internally combust and skitter off like a flaming UFO because I didn't subscribe to their little "mental map" of reality. I guess when you throw chewed gum in their cartography, they start to get attached to in on all fronts. Lol.

I agree with that wholeheartedly.

I've even actually thought about that a lot in the last week or two, personally, in that sometimes we get attached to viewing ourselves a certain way, and it becomes difficult to allow change to occur because we like this particular image we're projecting. And yet there is no possibility for growth without embracing reality and allowed a calcified self to shift.

When I first ran into MBTI in my mid-20's, I actually really liked aspects of my type description. I also liked seeming very intellectual, smart, knowing everything, being enigmatic, being the advisor, being impenetrable, etc. But I found myself starting to change, based on life knowledge, and I think I actually fought it for awhile. I was scared to embrace a new understanding of myself. Emotional capacity might be a big one for solid 5's to embrace, feeling things strongly and allowing oneself to feel strongly -- it can be very threatening because it almost invalidates the image of the self as this stoic ivory tower of knowledge and wisdom that is always stable, always balanced, and that people have to approach to gain understanding.

Letting go of that meant embracing someone who didn't have the answers, someone who was allowed to experience emotions and maybe not be stable all the time. Someone who could be in error, now, rather than "logically sound" at all costs. Someone who now might believe things that could not be proven, and other people might think she was a little batty. I was also scared of the responsibility of power: No longer could I sit back and just give answers and otherwise saying, "I don't know," I now had to actively engage and make decisions and admit that I had power to change things in the world. Power is kind of scary when you're someone who often sees life in shades of gray and doesn't want to screw up. It's easy to see oneself as detached from it all / apart from it all, and even victimized by it, because victims are innocent and have no responsibility.

It was a very humbling experience to embrace that change in self-concept, in order to become accessible and more well-rounded. I don't regret it now, and even have some confidence now in who I am as this person, but back then... yes, it was really hard to let go of that very defined type of person I wanted to be.

 

[Red Herring]

Damn it. I thought I had an answer ready for this. Then I erased it, tried again, erased it, etc ... and noticed I might not be as good at emotional instrospection as I thought.

Anyway, a lot depends on the kind of emotion we are talking about here and its intensity.

Minor disgruntlement/tension,etc: If/when I notice it, I might try to distract myself by watching a movie I like or pamper myself with some good food (chances are I will - again!!!- have forgotten to eat anyway and on top of that an empty stomach turns me into a moody three year old). As soon as I manage to concentrate on something else (reading, watching videos, etc...) that's it. Case closed.

Mid sized discomfort: This might be disappointment in a friend, a breakup from a short term fling or work related problems, etc or attacks of general angst (my life sucks, I'm a failure, I will end up poor and lonlely under a bridge,...). The first approach will be more of the same, i.e. distraction. One thing my mum taught me when I was little is how to manipulate your emotional state through music. So I'll put on extra happy dance music until the impulse to dance overrides the icey grasp of negative emotions - Alexis Zorbas style! That would be method a. Method b is grabbing the phone and calling one of the three people in this world I trust enough to bother them with emotional vomiting (well, let's say 90% of the time, depending on the case at hand). Method c is blowing the dust of the cover of my old diary and writing it all down (thus both expressing and analyzing it on the go). Method d is leaving the house for a walk and mulling things over (and either getting even more worked up in the process but at the same time getting a clearer picture or having calmed down by the end of the walk). If everything fails, I'll cuddle my cats, observe myself at it, judging the sight to be pathetic and burst in healthy tears that flush the stress hormones out of the system.

Major drama: Of cause there has been heart break along the road, but there was only one person that ever got to me so thoroughly that it basically messed up two years of my life (almost a decade ago). During the worst moments I'd put on pathetically cheesy music that reminded me of that person, get hysterical and end up in crying in a fetal position on the kitchen floor...not a pretty sight and a period in my life I'd rather forget.

There are moments when I feel the urge to talk and unburden myself. Sometimes a near stranger ends up being my victim in a situation like that. But normally even those closest to me won't know what's going on inside until something triggers an explosion. The reasons for that silence can be a) I don't want to bother them or think they won't understand or be able to help anyway or b) I didn't even know I had those feelings until I suddenly explode.

I am capable of very intense feelings, but you never know when they will surface, it seems arbitrary even to me. When my first grandmother died, I had no reaction. A few years later I got a phone call that my other grandmother had died (the last one of my grandparents, thus making my parents the next in line, which is a scary thought)...again, no reaction. But only a few days later I got yet another phone call that our family dog had died after a long nasty illness I fortunately didn't have to witness because I live at the other end of the country and only come home once or twice a year.......and I burst out in tears. Not to mention the drama when my first cat disappeared who was basically my little baby (pathetic, I know).

Another example. My ex has recently become serious with someone and since we are still close friends (that is, until a week ago or so) he told me all about his doubts and his heart break and all the complications between them...and I tried to listen and be there for him and judge the situation impartially and even give him advice, totally blinding out my own feelings on the issue. I had become a psychoalanysis/relationship advice robot. He repeatedly asked me if I was okay with him talking about these things. I said yeah, sure. He asked me how I felt about it. I said "don't know, I'll tell you when I find out". Well, it took me a few weeks (during which I felt absolutely nothing either way, total inner void) before I suddenly realized that I wanted to kick in his face with my high heels.

Finding out how I really feel about something can be like going to the dentist sometimes. Distraction and over rationalization go a long way.
But once those emotions surface, they can be very powerful and hard to control.

Don't fear for the ex though, all I did was tell him that I needed some time out. So far no faces have been smashed.

As for other people's emotions: I'm a passable amateur psychoanalyst with a patient and sympathetic ear. But tell me a friend of yours died and I'll start running. I never learned how to express my condolences. Especially when I don't feel anything about that person's death myself (yet?)

 

[Glycerine]

Death is really hard to cry about. I only really cried when I saw my flattened hamster and my other pet die in my hands.

With random people dying, "I'm sorry to hear that" and letting the person vent works for me.

 

[Totenkindly]

Death is really hard to cry about. I only really cried when I saw my flattened hamster and my other pet die in my hands.

It is kind of funny how that works. When my grandfather died, I didn't cry at all. The same year, my dog died, and I wept. But the reality is that I knew my dog much better than I knew my grandfather.

The same went for my cats, too; they were outdoor cats, but typically they would eventually get hit by people speeding on the country roads. I'd be sad (although I don't remember if I cried all the time), and I'd actually go out with a shovel and take them off the road and bury them somewhere in the yard. I remember at the time feeling that someone had to honor them, so that it was clear that they were loved; to leave something that was loved as trash alongside the road seemed horrible to me. It was funny because it sounds like a very SiFe thing, but none of the SiFe people in my life (including my mom) would have done that, and my grandmother (SiFe) would send me money because I was "so brave." I didn't really know what the money was for, it had nothing to do with what I was doing, but... people are strange.

With random people dying, "I'm sorry to hear that" and letting the person vent works for me.

Yeah, that is how I typically handle it too. I'm very careful about being too presumptuous about how they feel about it, and just instead try to give them space to talk... or not... while trying to emote sympathy.

 

[Ginkgo]

True, the head stuff does tend to be more "problem solving."

You do sound like a mix / I perceive you that way ... in-between.

I identify as a Five but one who has had to embrace passion and vision, so I can go into the murky areas of heart... and I also want to be known/connect. But I still ultimately have this detach, at the core of it, where I want to step back and figure things out.



I agree with that wholeheartedly.

I've even actually thought about that a lot in the last week or two, personally, in that sometimes we get attached to viewing ourselves a certain way, and it becomes difficult to allow change to occur because we like this particular image we're projecting. And yet there is no possibility for growth without embracing reality and allowed a calcified self to shift.

When I first ran into MBTI in my mid-20's, I actually really liked aspects of my type description. I also liked seeming very intellectual, smart, knowing everything, being enigmatic, being the advisor, being impenetrable, etc. But I found myself starting to change, based on life knowledge, and I think I actually fought it for awhile. I was scared to embrace a new understanding of myself. Emotional capacity might be a big one for solid 5's to embrace, feeling things strongly and allowing oneself to feel strongly -- it can be very threatening because it almost invalidates the image of the self as this stoic ivory tower of knowledge and wisdom that is always stable, always balanced, and that people have to approach to gain understanding.

Letting go of that meant embracing someone who didn't have the answers, someone who was allowed to experience emotions and maybe not be stable all the time. Someone who could be in error, now, rather than "logically sound" at all costs. Someone who now might believe things that could not be proven, and other people might think she was a little batty. I was also scared of the responsibility of power: No longer could I sit back and just give answers and otherwise saying, "I don't know," I now had to actively engage and make decisions and admit that I had power to change things in the world. Power is kind of scary when you're someone who often sees life in shades of gray and doesn't want to screw up. It's easy to see oneself as detached from it all / apart from it all, and even victimized by it, because victims are innocent and have no responsibility.

It was a very humbling experience to embrace that change in self-concept, in order to become accessible and more well-rounded. I don't regret it now, and even have some confidence now in who I am as this person, but back then... yes, it was really hard to let go of that very defined type of person I wanted to be.

Thank you for sharing that.

Yes I think that's part of the difficulty with self-knowledge - if you're tethered to a particular image of yourself, then you may limit your understanding if you're personality revolves a bit. You may also limit your own abilities if you become too invested in what you have been and not what you are or what you could be. There have been a few instances in my life when I saw myself as an ivory tower like that, unshakable and independent, but I was so dependent on myself that I limited my potential. There have also been times more recent when I became so dependent on another that my self-image hinged on the relationship and not who I really was. Self-confidence is tricky because it depends on your own perception of yourself and the perception of others. It reminds me of a quote from Dune:

The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in. He must reflect what is projected upon him. And he must have a strong sense of the sardonic. This is what uncouples him from belief in his own pretensions. The sardonic is all that permits him to move within himself. Without this quality, even occasional greatness will destroy a man.

 

[Ginkgo]

I cried when my pet praying mantis died, but not when my grandad died. Good ol' Joe-Bob, those crickets gave you a run for your money. We will remember thee.

 

[Arclight]

What we are discussing is the basic fundamentals of type theory, Arclight.

"The need for human contact" is not "Fe."
And people can interact with each / be sociable in ways that do not necessarily conform to Fe.
(Ti people can discuss Ti ideas without doing any of the Fe stuff, and it can meet interaction needs, etc.)

If you disagree on such a fundamental premise of type understanding, there's not much more to discuss, although I'm going to try to clarify for the benefit of others at least.

I don't also want to make this a discussion of Arclight's use of Fe, which wasn't really the point ... unless you're gonna tie it to E5 in some way that makes sense.

Actually I am discussing emotions in type 5. Unless you didn't read the thread title.
This is a typology website and many people make correlations between systems.
Which is all I am doing.

I said the need for human contact in type 5 and INFJs is related to their Fe or their wing type otherwise they might withdraw completely, and also how good the universe was to put these wing points or Fe there as a buffer to being too closed off and to insure that a drive for "connection" is there.
What don't you get about this??

You are simply being critical and offering nothing else.
You are not at all helpful.
If I am so uneducated, educate me.

But you don't speak for any type any more than I do.

I am sorry you don't understand me.. enough people do that I don't need your validation.
And you are an amateur like me.
Show me a PHD or please don't ever accuse me of misrepresentation ever again.

Thanks

 

[Ginkgo]

Actually I am discussing emotions in type 5. Unless you didn't read the thread title.
This is a typology website and many people make correlations between systems.
Which is all I am doing.

I said the need for human contact in type 5 and INFJs is related to their Fe or their wing type otherwise they might withdraw completely, and also how good the universe was to put these wing points or Fe there as a buffer to being too closed off and to insure that a drive for "connection" is there.
What don't you get about this??

You are simply being critical and offering nothing else.
You are not at all helpful.
If I am so uneducated, educate me.

But you don't speak for any type any more than I do.

I am sorry you don't understand me.. enough people do that I don't need your validation.
And you are an amateur like me.
Show me a PHD or please don't ever accuse me of misrepresentation ever again.

Thanks

If you were a vacuum cleaner, you would be a Kerbey with purple flamingos sticking from the sides like a 1950's convertible. Your nozzle would be in the shape of a heart and would solely be used to clear up childrens' cleaning supplies, gluey and chopped up, after the occasional diarrhea "accident". We both know those little gremlins are calculating; don't be naive now.

 

[JocktheMotie]

My emotional difficulties are far more interpersonal than intrapersonal. Properly navigating the space between myself and others is something I'll never fully grasp.

Within my own mind however, I think I have a good system for managing and cataloging my emotions in a way that makes it easy for me to evaluate what they're telling me, after the event has happened. On the fly processing remains a difficulty, but experience has shown me that it's never a good idea to engage in emotional decision making in those moments as I'm nearly always led astray. It helps that I tend to not be very affective, with the exception of anger.

So, intellectualization and hyper rationalization, is the key. Emotions tend to not be a huge difficulty to me personally, it's only the interpersonal management and connection that presents conflict.

 

[Totenkindly]

Actually I am discussing emotions in type 5. Unless you didn't read the thread title.
This is a typology website and many people make correlations between systems.
Which is all I am doing.

I said the need for human contact in type 5 and INFJs is related to their Fe or their wing type otherwise they might withdraw completely, and also how good the universe was to put these wing points or Fe there as a buffer to being too closed off and to insure that a drive for "connection" is there.
What don't you get about this??

You are simply being critical and offering nothing else.
You are not at all helpful.
If I am so uneducated, educate me.

But you don't speak for any type any more than I do.

I am sorry you don't understand me.. enough people do that I don't need your validation.
And you are an amateur like me.
Show me a PHD or please don't ever accuse me of misrepresentation ever again.

Thanks

Please drop the personal drama/histrionics, Arclight.
It doesn't belong here, and if it continues, another mod will remove it.
Just deal with the ideas raised.
Thanks.

It reminds me of a quote from Dune: The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in. He must reflect what is projected upon him. And he must have a strong sense of the sardonic. This is what uncouples him from belief in his own pretensions. The sardonic is all that permits him to move within himself. Without this quality, even occasional greatness will destroy a man.

Thanks for sharing that, I know of Dune but never bothered to read it.

Great word, sardonic... and I think you're right. Seeing the irony and/or maintaining some level of self-deprecation is what allows an observer to move just from observing the external to being able to observe oneself within, as oneself is part of the world and thus needing to be observed rather than excluded from such in-depth observation. Of the world, not outside of it.

 

[Arclight]

Please drop the personal drama/histrionics, Arclight.
It doesn't belong here, and if it continues, another mod will remove it.
Just deal with the ideas raised.
Thanks.



Thanks for sharing that, I know of Dune but never bothered to read it.

Great word, sardonic... and I think you're right. Seeing the irony and/or maintaining some level of self-deprecation is what allows an observer to move just from observing the external to being able to observe oneself within, as oneself is part of the world and thus needing to be observed rather than excluded from such in-depth observation. Of the world, not outside of it.

The issue "raised" by you; was the validly of my statements due to your lack of understanding.
You went so far as to suggest I don't know what I am talking about.
You stay on topic and don't make it personal and I wont either.

Thanks

 

[Glycerine]

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

 

[Red Herring]

Indeed.

Anyway, not only is man a zoon politicon, but so were our ancestors. Looking at social interaction between primates makes me doubt our need for company is caused by certain cognitive functions. They probably shape it though.

 

[Arclight]

Indeed.

Anyway, not only is man a zoon politicon, but so were our ancestors. Looking at social interaction between primates makes me doubt our need for company is caused by certain cognitive functions. They probably shape it though.

Right,and because this is a Typology forum and we tend to discuss things from a typological stand point,then making correlations between behaviors and functions is kind of the whole point.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I think that on occasion, 5s become attached to the idea of being detached, and in the process start fizzling out like a malfunctioning robot. I've known a few that just internally combust and skitter off like a flaming UFO because I didn't subscribe to their little "mental map" of reality. I guess when you throw chewed gum in their cartography, they start to get attached to in on all fronts. Lol.

Is the detachment always about staying in one’s ivory tower, though? Because it seems to me (I love M. Tater’s description^) that- at least for me- getting grabby with my 'mental map' isn’t as much about clinging to self-identity as it is about making sure that someone else isn’t trying to get their mitts on my map to alter it with their own ends in mind (not taking mine into account). It isn’t that I don’t trust others’ intentions- because it’s not like I think people set out to be hurtful to each other- but I don’t place a lot of stock in others’ mindfulness of the give-and-take that takes place regularly. And in the moment where I'm actually dealing with people- I feel disadvantaged in that I tend to do 'what is best for everyone' and there are others with far more of a 'what is best for me' mentality. I have a really hard time making that distinction myself, so I get grabby with my 'mental map' and go reflect on how much give and take is going on in different areas. I'm not saying one is better than the other (truth be told, I'd really love to learn how to be more 'what is best for me'). My point here is: I’m not nearly as threatened by the prospect of having to change my identity as I am of the prospect of being taken advantage of.

[edit:] There are people who will tell me they think I'm feeling 'x' because 'defgh'- and they don't realize they do it because 'defgh' is the 'truth' which is most convenient for them. There are precious few people whom I trust to be able to discern the real reasons- apart from what they want the reason to be (whether it's as simple as wanting me to like what they cooked for dinner, or complicated as wanting me to move to another job position)- for my feelings. There are precious few people who I think know how to have my best interest at heart while giving me feedback. That's why I think I get grabby with my mental map.