Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
571 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I do, I want to be the best I can be and usually very hard on my standard. And work/learn hard to achieve the best.

Near perfection is not enough.

What about you guys?
 

·
Registered
ENTP 3w4 so/sx
Joined
·
2,841 Posts
I can relate well to this! I strive to be the best in whatever I do. Constant momentum and successes are necessary or I don’t feel fulfilled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
571 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I can relate well to this! I strive to be the best in whatever I do. Constant momentum and successes are necessary or I don’t feel fulfilled.
Couldn't describe this any better. And when I get the second rank, or so--it's really itching. And I work harder to beat them all and be the best!

Though sometimes, it's quite stressful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
It depends for me. Some things I can let slip, but others things have to be perfectly done or else I will feel like a failure.

One of the places that I feel like I need success in is the work place. Typically I want for my work to be spectacular or else I will be upset with myself. But if it's in a craft or something I will let my imperfections just serve as a tinge of originality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Yes. It depends on what it is, but mostly I hold myself to very high standards, especially when I'm performing (I sing and also have done some acting off and on and slipping up on stage is awful). There are a lot of things I've sort of trained myself to let go of over time, and some things I don't sweat, but some things I only manage to look like I don't sweat, and some things I will criticise myself for for approximately forever and try very hard to make sure whatever it was never happens again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
My experience is:

3w4 has more resemblance to the 1 or the 4 (obviously) and is more perfectionist, higher quality.
3w2 is not usually perfectionist, if they're forced to chose between speedily and efficiently churning out mediocrities and making a slow, painstaking masterpiece, they choose the former usually. The fastest employ at my job is a 3 but I'm on the quality inspection team (good place for a 4) for what he produces...let's just say, alot of it needs improvement. The sound of him fuming as I crush his self-worth is such beautiful music. :happy: I suspect the unhealthy 3w2 mindset is what ended up creating "fast food" in America, Ray Kroc was probably a 3w2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,199 Posts
3w4 is one of the most perfectionistic types of the Enneagram.

Hyper-competence-driven 'A-type' personality with the need for refined aristocracy, creating this desire to distinguish oneself and one's work (for the average to unhealthy levels type 3, there is no real difference between the two) and to elevate oneself and one's work from what is perceived as average - which is seen as not good enough and in need of 'better.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
3w4 is one of the most perfectionistic types of the Enneagram.

Hyper-competence-driven 'A-type' personality with the need for refined aristocracy, creating this desire to distinguish oneself and one's work (for the average to unhealthy levels type 3, there is no real difference between the two) and to elevate oneself and one's work from what is perceived as average - which is seen as not good enough and in need of 'better.'
Just curious, where are the 3w4s throughout human history who changed the world for the better with the sheer awesomeness of their work? Lists of great saints, composers, novelists and playwrights, scientists, mathematicians, painters and sculptors, humanitarians, etc. tend to not emphasize 3s any more than any other type, and they might actually be one of the less common types from the "lists of famous types" I've seen. 4s and 5s seem to be the most commonly mentioned greats in the areas I mentioned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,199 Posts
Just curious, where are the 3w4s throughout human history who changed the world for the better with the sheer awesomeness of their work? Lists of great saints, composers, novelists and playwrights, scientists, mathematicians, painters and sculptors, humanitarians, etc. tend to not emphasize 3s any more than any other type, and they might actually be one of the less common types from the "lists of famous types" I've seen. 4s and 5s seem to be the most commonly mentioned greats in the areas I mentioned.
I don't follow. How is your post related to mine?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
I don't follow. How is your post related to mine?
Your post tends to be in line with the standard treatment of 3s in Enneagram literature, i.e. better than all the other types, with greatness no one else can produce. I was just pointing out that if they really were that way, 3s would own the vast majority of the greats of human accomplishment, yet lists of famous people by type do not support this treatment. In literature for example, Shakespeare was not a 3, nor was Dostoevsky, Dante, Tolkein, Homer or Hugo. Fancy that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,199 Posts
Your post tends to be in line with the standard treatment of 3s in Enneagram literature, i.e. better than all the other types, with greatness no one else can produce. I was just pointing out that if they really were that way, 3s would own the vast majority of the greats of human accomplishment, yet lists of famous people by type do not support this treatment. In literature for example, Shakespeare was not a 3, nor was Dostoevsky, Dante, Tolkein, Homer or Hugo. Fancy that.
No, that is not what my post said. Your issue lies with your interpretation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
Just curious, where are the 3w4s throughout human history who changed the world for the better with the sheer awesomeness of their work? Lists of great saints, composers, novelists and playwrights, scientists, mathematicians, painters and sculptors, humanitarians, etc. tend to not emphasize 3s any more than any other type, and they might actually be one of the less common types from the "lists of famous types" I've seen. 4s and 5s seem to be the most commonly mentioned greats in the areas I mentioned.
Augustus Caesar, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Niccolo Machiavelli, Madonna, Elvis Presley, F.Scott Fitzgerald, Jack London, Thomas Edison. I won’t even bother looking for the all the notorious politicians in history who were probably 3s, as there’s a shitload. I think an argument could be made for Shakespeare being a 3 btw, we don’t know much about the guy but we do know he was an ass kisser and someone well versed in the masks people wear. Could be a 7 too. Not that it matters.

Naming literature authors and philosophers is all fine and dandy, but it’s only a fraction of mankind’s achievements. It’s also biased towards 4s and 5s obviously, the same way it would be unfair for me to use sports as a benchmark of a person’s greatness when it’s really not a 4 or 5’s zone of comfort. No one here said success was exclusive to Threes, but simply that it was a type driven by success more than any other, which is factually true. Discounting the great names, I’d bet my favorite coat that most of the Three population where you live achieves more in terms of success than most of the Four and Five population. And that’s what should be discussed here, not Dostoevsky or Michael Jordan, not a dick contest between people that 99.9999999999% of PerC won’t even come close to in their lifetime, but the average experience of type X vs the average experience of type Y. Think a 3w2 car salesman vs a 4w3 teacher who paints in her spare time, that kind of stuff.

And before you pull that card and put words in my mouth, yes I do think that 3s who fail exist. Just like 5w4 shut-ins and 4w5s pretentious bad artists are most definitely a thing.

The sound of him fuming as I crush his self-worth is such beautiful music.
Truly the chaotic good dark knight of PerC, edgelord tritype to boot. Grow up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
the standard treatment of 3s in Enneagram literature, i.e. better than all the other types, with greatness no one else can produce.
This is not true. You've misunderstood what they mean by 'achiever' with the 3. They mean more reliably meeting societies definition of everyday 'normal' success (not necessarily the extreme outliers). It's well documented in enneagram literature that 3s are these two things:
1. Strivers (who put forth great effort to achieve, when heathy anyway. Results vary due to talent/luck etc)
2. Image types (will strive in areas of visible social value -- whether at a society level or family level).

Arnold Schwarzenegger is a great example of a 3. The constant striving was always there, taking him from becoming Mr Universe to movie star to politician (note the social value/visibility in these choices). He does speeches encouraging others to strive like he did. Many admire his achievements, some are even inspired.

I agree with Electric that your average 3 will be out there striving away and attaining achievement (commensurate with their abilities/opportunities). I know a 3 who is following in his respected father's footsteps to become a surgeon. While this doesn't blow my socks off personally I can see why society values such behavior in the first place (would you rather a great surgeon or a great author if in need of both? -- even the prosaic has value).

Meanwhile the average 5, who is driven to understand rather than achieve, is sitting at home (withdrawn) contentedly consuming other people's understandings (reading books/online). It's an exceedingly rare 5 that breaks new ground in understanding (in any significant massive-value-to-society way). 5s have an advantage over 3s in that we can get off the 'society smiles on' reservation (for better 'observation') but that can also come at a cost (non participation). I see 5s as nature's dice roll. 3s are a sure bet.

It's a mistake to try to compare these types in a 'who's better' way since they are so fundamentally different: is a hammer 'better' than a knife? -- not always (and vice versa). We simply serve different functions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
@Dare

I believe that’s the first time we agree on something lol. Schwarzy is indeed an excellent example precisely because of how much he reinvents himself in new fields that are likely to make his legacy and resume more admirable to the public eye. Threes are instinctively geared towards spotting areas that will allow them to shine and striving towards that goal, reinventing themselves if need be. It doesn’t have to be a celebrity status, I have no doubt many monks and priests were Threes back when it was a very valued profession in medieval Europe. That’s why in Enneagram literature they’re represented as the most successful type by conventional standards, which Mona should understand.

Not all Threes are desperate conformists that will mold into whatever role promises them success, but even the trail blazers and more original ones will market their individualism/own personal quest into tangible success as seen by the people in order to have their validation needs met.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,156 Posts
And before you pull that card and put words in my mouth, yes I do think that 3s who fail exist. Just like 5w4 shut-ins and 4w5s pretentious bad artists are most definitely a thing.
Lol, so I misread this as "3s who fail to exist" at first, but I guess to a 3 those are pretty much one and the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Augustus Caesar, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Niccolo Machiavelli, Madonna, Elvis Presley, F.Scott Fitzgerald, Jack London, Thomas Edison.
3s do tend to do better in sports yes, but...
Greatness in music history: Allegri, Handel, Chopin, Tchaikovsky...Madonna. One of these does not fit in, unless you have a really sick sense of humor. Her music is as manufactured, uninspired and banal as it comes and no one would even remember her if it weren't for her edgy sexualized persona.
Machiavelli? "notorious politicians"? I said people who achieved greatness, "The Prince" is essentially guide on how to be a sociopathic ruler, making it the opposite of greatness.

Naming literature authors and philosophers is all fine and dandy, but it’s only a fraction of mankind’s achievements.
Well, that's why I also listed saints and humanitarians.

No one here said success was exclusive to Threes, but simply that it was a type driven by success more than any other, which is factually true.
Desire for success and fear of failure is universal to the human species. The difference is that the 3s definition of "success" is the one most likely to involve being admired by the crowd, being given attention in the public eye, etc. which is why more accurate Enneagram literature (which there isn't much of) names the 3 the "Performer".

I’d bet my favorite coat that most of the Three population where you live achieves more in terms of success than most of the Four and Five population.
No shit? I'm in America, where being a 3 (and to a slightly lesser extent a 7) is what's considered a good person, while being a 4 or 5 is usually the opposite of what our institutions are looking for, and those cultural biases are why, in America, 4s and 5s usually do poorer in life than 3s and 7s.

Dare said:
Meanwhile the average 5, who is driven to understand rather than achieve, is sitting at home (withdrawn) contentedly consuming other people's understandings (reading books/online). It's an exceedingly rare 5 that breaks new ground in understanding (in any significant massive-value-to-society way). 5s have an advantage over 3s in that we can get off the 'society smiles on' reservation (for better 'observation') but that can also come at a cost (non participation). I see 5s as nature's dice roll. 3s are a sure bet.

It's a mistake to try to compare these types in a 'who's better' way since they are so fundamentally different: is a hammer 'better' than a knife? -- not always (and vice versa). We simply serve different functions.
I think you undervalue your type and that's a pity. Also, if it's mistake to try to compare types in a "who's better" way, why would 3s be "a sure bet" with 5s being a "dice roll"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,258 Posts
...cultural biases are why, in America, 4s and 5s usually do poorer in life than 3s and 7s.
I think you undervalue your type and that's a pity.
Save your pity for a different kind of animal. I'm with the "I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself" crowd.

I favor fives, being one wasn't enough apparently (my 'other half' is one too) -- I quite literally love the type.

I'm fond of healthy 4s too. I had a 4 mentor who I always held in high esteem. That didn't stop me from pointing out he's a loser for making paintings while never attempting to sell them though. A debate on economics ensued, which didn't go well for him given my hobby is economics. I questioned how to spot the difference between someone with 'artistic integrity' and someone with a pigeon's heart and informed him I'd call him "dabbler" from that moment forward since an artist sells their artwork. It was towards the end of the one year we had together and I wanted to shake him up in the hope he'd do better/be happier. We never spoke of it again but I was delighted he found sponsorship (to paint full time), quit his teaching job, moved to a different country (to a city known for it's art) and had his work shown in an art gallery for the first time in his life, all within 18 months from our tête-à-tête.

I've never been the type to play games with favoritism to the point of being blind. Especially with my own type since I live our strengths & weaknesses, I experience all the classic 5 temptations. To me weaknesses aren't personal, they're just facts. But useful facts -- a roadmap of sorts with areas to avoid (or at least laugh at yourself if you know you should but can't). I'd much rather say that being a withdrawn type comes with a certain set of challenges and work on that than deny it or get defensive (claim it's "cultural bias" etc) ---> that damn reality, out there, always ruining lives... best stay 'in' eh?

I see a lot of game playing with 4s & 5s around here. "We're the best!" And then the response to 'no, you're not' is invariably some 'yeah well, it's not my fault society doesn't recognize we're the best (but we're still the best!)' Then the other side with some 5s is "we're the worst!" (born to be dysfunctional in human relationships -- aka, excuse found). Both extremes are simply rationalizing why they aren't responsible. It's a delusion and one that should be obvious to anyone versed with the real world (where you meet 'average' 4s & 5s) and enneagram (which specifically tells us not to have a mental world untested by reality, like those at low health levels do).

I should mention that not only are Darwin & Camus truly awesome, clean water coming out of pipes in your house on demand and at the temperature you prefer is too (and whoever makes such magic happen). I'm pretty impressed by people who do two jobs and don't kick the cat when they get home too. I must have missed the memo which says you can only value 'unique individuals' (but then I wonder if it's only 4s who get that memo...) You seem to have missed the 'everyone has different values and that's okay' memo + the 'it doesn't have to be ingenious/tasteful/'special' to have value to people' memo. How very 4 of you to play your 'you should value my celebrity better than the celebrities others value since mine is more special' game in earnest!

Also, if it's mistake to try to compare types in a "who's better" way, why would 3s be "a sure bet" with 5s being a "dice roll"?
It's interesting that you interpreted that as a value judgement (even after I made it clear it wasn't). Value judgements everywhere but not a drop to drink eh? The world looks very different to a head type.

Besides, who doesn't enjoy being the long shot/underdog? All and nothing are my favorite outcomes, especially simultaneously :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,843 Posts
Dare said:
I had a 4 mentor who I always held in high esteem. That didn't stop me from pointing out he's a loser for making paintings while never attempting to sell them though.
That's only the Te user's definition of success. Were his paintings amazing in their quality? Did they inspire people who viewed them? If so, he's a success, and he's not any less of a success because he hadn't attempted to sell them, and I say this as someone who agrees with you that it's a good thing his work is displayed in galleries now.

I'd much rather say that being a withdrawn type comes with a certain set of challenges and work on that than deny it or get defensive (claim it's "cultural bias" etc)
If you've read Susan Cain's book "Quiet" (published in 2012) then you know that there is actually substantial evidence, both scientific and personal, that American culture is heavily biased against Introverts. 3s and 7s are probably the two most Extroverted types, 4s and 5s the two most Introverted. So it's not just me being "defensive", I can actually prove what I'm saying is true.

I must have missed the memo which says you can only value 'unique individuals' (but then I wonder if it's only 4s who get that memo...) You seem to have missed the 'everyone has different values and that's okay' memo + the 'it doesn't have to be ingenious/tasteful/'special' to have value to people' memo. How very 4 of you to play your 'you should value my celebrity better than the celebrities others value since mine is more special' game in earnest!
So I'm not misunderstood: I'd prefer a culture where all 9 Enneatypes or all 16 MBTI types are valued about the same, my problem is that modern America falls far short of this ideal, and maybe you're fine with being considered a long shot or an underdog, but alot of people out there are really hurting because they sense that there's no place for them and that their way of doing things is considered "bad", many people refuse to accept a position of inferiority. To the extent that I seem intent on tearing 3s down, it's less about that and more a sense of frustration that their way of doing things is rarely called into question in America.

It's interesting that you interpreted that as a value judgement (even after I made it clear it wasn't).
How is there any other way to interpret it?
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top