[timeless]

I recently finished a series of Enneagram articles. I was dissatisfied with most Enneagram descriptions, because they often consist of nothing more than a laundry list of traits with little reasoning behind them. For a long time, I was turned off to Enneagram because it didn't make sense. So I recently decided to write my own Enneagram articles that would start off with the most basic elements of the personality and then move up to the outward traits that we all know and love.

These descriptions cover the following things:

- A brief introduction to Enneagram.
- A summary of basic concepts about the type.
- A description of the type.
- Analysis of the type's wings.
- Analysis of the growth and stress arrows of that type.
- Descriptions of the type's variants (sexual, self-pres, social)
- MBTI and Enneagram Interaction
- Paths to security for each type
- Freudian associations

Enjoy. ;D

Links to the Articles:

http://personalitycafe.com/type-1-forum-reformer/65601-type-one-reformer-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-2-forum-helper/65602-type-two-helper-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-3-forum-achiever/65603-type-three-achiever-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-4-f...-four-individualist-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-5-f...e-five-investigator-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-6-f...e-six-loyal-skeptic-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-7-f...pe-seven-enthusiast-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-8-f...pe-eight-challenger-timeless-description.html
http://personalitycafe.com/type-9-f...ype-nine-peacemaker-timeless-description.html

 

[MrShatter]

Much appreciated timeless!

 

[AquaColum]

Whooo! @timeless is brilliant! So interesting, and there's so much in there, and it's all compiled so neatly, awesome resource

 

[General Lee]

Thank you Timeless. Are you trying to win MOTM a second time?

 

[Tsuki]

You, sir, are a genius.

 

[BroNerd]

This is awesome, thank you!

 

[mark anthony]

Great work, you would be and possibly are a good educator.

I enjoyed reading your article, you have good understanding. The “Holy Idea” of Type Nine is love; I think people could Handel a bit more meat on the bone.

I think it relates to the receptive state, reconciliation and an affirmation of one's own goodness within a contextual awareness of the Devine or sacredness of Creation, being experienced.

A union of the anima and animus with in the self’s perceptual awareness. Awareness free of a subtotal ignorance and sullied bias, with in cognition.


Great work, you would be and possibly are a good educator.

 

[Rediactor]

Finest enneagram article yet! But i wish there was a lil more info on the wing stuff and maybe tritypes..?.... But this was awesome... Thank You!!!

 

[TomBlo]

Thank you

I love it ! love it ! thank you for taking the time to write all of these. I love it ! been reading it every day !

I recently finished a series of Enneagram articles. I was dissatisfied with most Enneagram descriptions, because they often consist of nothing more than a laundry list of traits with little reasoning behind them. For a long time, I was turned off to Enneagram because it didn't make sense. So I recently decided to write my own Enneagram articles that would start off with the most basic elements of the personality and then move up to the outward traits that we all know and love.

 

[Inspire]

Just curious, timeless; you describe all possible mbti-enneagram combinations like ISXJ 7s - did you really meet people with that combo or ?

 

[timeless]

Just curious, timeless; you describe all possible mbti-enneagram combinations like ISXJ 7s - did you really meet people with that combo or ?

Some of it is based on people I know, and some of it is based on logical extrapolation from known data.

 

[Liontiger]

These are seriously amazing. Thank you, timeless.

 

[Inspire]

So do you know ISTJ 7s?

 

[timeless]

So do you know ISTJ 7s?

Maybe. There are some people who I think are ISTJ 7s but I'm reluctant to type people on Enneagram based on superficial characteristics since the system is so complex. It's possible to get someone's MBTI type quite easily but Enneagram is a whole different story. So basically, I know ISTJs who I think could be 7s.

 

[MuChApArAdOx]

It's possible to get someone's MBTI type quite easily but Enneagram is a whole different story.

What are your thoughts about ENFP being a 5'.?

I hear that it could be rare, even not possible. As an ENFP everything and anything is possible. I really think i'm a five, not quite sure about the wing yet. I've tested five on every possible test there is out there.

Your thoughts ? thanks

 

[timeless]

What are your thoughts about ENFP being a 5'.?

I hear that it could be rare, even not possible. As an ENFP everything and anything is possible. I really think i'm a five, not quite sure about the wing yet. I've tested five on every possible test there is out there.

Your thoughts ? thanks

You'll hear a lot of differing opinions on this. I believe that any MBTI type can be any Enneagram type, while some people think that it's pretty much locked into place and each MBTI type can only be one of three or four Enneatypes. But yes, I think that ENFPs can definitely be 5s.

I've found that some letters/enneatype pairings are more palatable than others for most people. For example, being a J or P or N or S doesn't ring any alarm bells when those dichotomies are paired with 5. But there's an implicit assumption that Fives must be introverted and/or thinkers. So I'll go over the E and F dichotomies and explain why I think it can be paired with Five.

Type Five is considered a withdrawn type, so many people think it can't fit with extroversion... but I think the confusion arises because few people understand what Type Five withdrawal is, and what extroversion is.

Type Five is often called "The Investigator", and oftentimes "The Observer." I love using these terms in conjunction with Type Five because "Investigator" conjures up this image of active and diligent inquiry, while "Observer" is the detached counterpart to that. While Type Fives are always withdrawn to some extent, they must interact with the outside world to fulfill their goals.

Let's be more precise about what extroversion actually is. MBTI Types are extroverted because they have an extroverted function as their first. In the case of ENFP, that first function is Extroverted Intuition, which is a perceiving function. It makes perfect sense that a Type Five would have a perceiving function as their primary function - after all, they are Observers.

Feelers can definitely be Type Five as nothing in Feeling has any bearing on the operation of a Five. I like that Socionics calls it "Ethics" because Feeling makes it sound like pure emotion when that's not the case. (Jung considered it a rational function)

So I think that an ENFP can definitely be Five.

 

[Heather White Karnas]

You'll hear a lot of differing opinions on this. I believe that any MBTI type can be any Enneagram type, while some people think that it's pretty much locked into place and each MBTI type can only be one of three or four Enneatypes. But yes, I think that ENFPs can definitely be 5s.

I've found that some letters/enneatype pairings are more palatable than others for most people. For example, being a J or P or N or S doesn't ring any alarm bells when those dichotomies are paired with 5. But there's an implicit assumption that Fives must be introverted and/or thinkers. So I'll go over the E and F dichotomies and explain why I think it can be paired with Five.

Type Five is considered a withdrawn type, so many people think it can't fit with extroversion... but I think the confusion arises because few people understand what Type Five withdrawal is, and what extroversion is.

Type Five is often called "The Investigator", and oftentimes "The Observer." I love using these terms in conjunction with Type Five because "Investigator" conjures up this image of active and diligent inquiry, while "Observer" is the detached counterpart to that. While Type Fives are always withdrawn to some extent, they must interact with the outside world to fulfill their goals.

Let's be more precise about what extroversion actually is. MBTI Types are extroverted because they have an extroverted function as their first. In the case of ENFP, that first function is Extroverted Intuition, which is a perceiving function. It makes perfect sense that a Type Five would have a perceiving function as their primary function - after all, they are Observers.

Feelers can definitely be Type Five as nothing in Feeling has any bearing on the operation of a Five. I like that Socionics calls it "Ethics" because Feeling makes it sound like pure emotion when that's not the case. (Jung considered it a rational function)

So I think that an ENFP can definitely be Five.

I like your explanation of the feeling function being a rational function. I understand this... I have often wondered why so many people think that feelers are purely emotional and that they in turn are irrational/illogical. I see feeling function simplified in saying that a feeler is more apt to make a decision or apply a reaction based on the way they feel about it rather than basing it on the way they think about it. Either way it is a way of rationalizing. Is this basically right to your knowledge? Isn't the F or T function simply the area in which we apply information?

 

[aestrivex]

\
Type Five is considered a withdrawn type, so many people think it can't fit with extroversion... but I think the confusion arises because few people understand what Type Five withdrawal is, and what extroversion is.

Type Five is often called "The Investigator", and oftentimes "The Observer." I love using these terms in conjunction with Type Five because "Investigator" conjures up this image of active and diligent inquiry, while "Observer" is the detached counterpart to that. While Type Fives are always withdrawn to some extent, they must interact with the outside world to fulfill their goals.

Let's be more precise about what extroversion actually is. MBTI Types are extroverted because they have an extroverted function as their first. In the case of ENFP, that first function is Extroverted Intuition, which is a perceiving function. It makes perfect sense that a Type Five would have a perceiving function as their primary function - after all, they are Observers.

in my opinion, you are missing the point a bit. true, absolutely, that the nature of extroversion in jungian and neo-jungian (e.g. socionics) terms is conceptually distinct from the trait-based ideas that go along with extroversion in an eysenckian way, as is more conventionally thought of in contemporary academic psychology. that said, extroversion (moreso than neuroticism) is the one facet in psychology that nobody can or would ever challenge as being a meaningful factor in and of itself -- in essence, jung, with his descriptions based on the direction of psychological energy, hit on this trait concept which has demonstrated itself in externally valid terms to be something quite fundamental in personality. the point of this is that, the variance between jungian (or MBTI, or socionics, or whatever) extroversion, is fairly low. even the degree of overlap between MBTI and socionics extroversion (a topic of my interest) is fairly robust in my opinion -- and nothing about my views of that topic in general suggest robustness of correlation.

this discussion between jungian functions and the enneagram is similar. my interest is primarily in correlations between socionics and the enneagram -- and in this context, whether you think of ENFP as being most like an IEE or most like an EIE or something else (i think it is a "closest" fit with EIE in general), i have no objection to thinking that someone might be an EIE 5 in principle, and i think it is extremely important to evaluate the assumptions of different models independently from one another -- but that said, i have never personally seen anyone who i think would fit that combination, or an ILI 2, or an SLI 3, or an SEE slow 9, or etc etc.

draw your own conclusions about the feasibility of the combinations, absolutely, but that being said, the descriptions here that seem to proffer the idea that ENFP 5s not only can in principle exist, but that they affirmedly do exist and such and such is what they look like, is pretty "ehhhhhhhh" to me.

if this topic is of particular interest to anyone, i am happy to bring my own interpretive evaluation to the table and take a stab at anyone who identifies themselves or anyone else as an ENFP 5 (or other "implausible" combinations). i will evaluate it in terms of the enneagram and socionics, and my suspicion is that i will probably have a very different interpretation. my interpretation of such people, further, will probably be completely different from timeless' interpretation (not that this is invalidates his point of view at all).



i would also point out that i have identified some combinations that i think of as probably implausible -- my typings of people in the socionics community have led me to such conclusions. there is a guy who is widely typed in the socionics community and self-typed as LII, who i am completely convinced is LSI or SLE instead, and we both agree on 9 (he considers himself 9w8, and i consider him fast 9 with a 5 wing). there is another person who i think is SEE 4w2, an ILE fast 9 and slow 9s of many types (i don't think these latter ones are "implausible" combinations but some people would.)

 

[timeless]

I like your explanation of the feeling function being a rational function. I understand this... I have often wondered why so many people think that feelers are purely emotional and that they in turn are irrational/illogical. I see feeling function simplified in saying that a feeler is more apt to make a decision or apply a reaction based on the way they feel about it rather than basing it on the way they think about it. Either way it is a way of rationalizing. Is this basically right to your knowledge? Isn't the F or T function simply the area in which we apply information?

Things get a bit more specific when you get into the actual cognitive functions themselves, but within MBTI, F is more about the general value of a situation while T is focused more on the details. Decisions made with F can -seem- like they're based solely on feeling because they involve a holistic approach that does have its own internal logic.

 

[timeless]

in my opinion, you are missing the point a bit. true, absolutely, that the nature of extroversion in jungian and neo-jungian (e.g. socionics) terms is conceptually distinct from the trait-based ideas that go along with extroversion in an eysenckian way, as is more conventionally thought of in contemporary academic psychology. that said, extroversion (moreso than neuroticism) is the one facet in psychology that nobody can or would ever challenge as being a meaningful factor in and of itself -- in essence, jung, with his descriptions based on the direction of psychological energy, hit on this trait concept which has demonstrated itself in externally valid terms to be something quite fundamental in personality. the point of this is that, the variance between jungian (or MBTI, or socionics, or whatever) extroversion, is fairly low. even the degree of overlap between MBTI and socionics extroversion (a topic of my interest) is fairly robust in my opinion -- and nothing about my views of that topic in general suggest robustness of correlation.

This wasn't my point, my purpose in discussing the meaning of extroversion is to highlight a certain form of cross-contamination that happens between the terminology of the Jungian/MBTI world and the Enneagram world. Enneagram is chiefly existential in nature while Jung/MBTI/Socionics is not.

Here's an example. I sometimes see people typed as Sixes because they've had some condition of doubt or fear in their lives. It is true, doubt is often associated with type six, but the key is existential doubt and not merely an instance of doubt. This is analogous here. Someone can be extroverted in the MBTI system while maintaining the sense of existential separation that a Five would have.

this discussion between jungian functions and the enneagram is similar. my interest is primarily in correlations between socionics and the enneagram -- and in this context, whether you think of ENFP as being most like an IEE or most like an EIE or something else (i think it is a "closest" fit with EIE in general), i have no objection to thinking that someone might be an EIE 5 in principle, and i think it is extremely important to evaluate the assumptions of different models independently from one another -- but that said, i have never personally seen anyone who i think would fit that combination, or an ILI 2, or an SLI 3, or an SEE slow 9, or etc etc.

draw your own conclusions about the feasibility of the combinations, absolutely, but that being said, the descriptions here that seem to proffer the idea that ENFP 5s not only can in principle exist, but that they affirmedly do exist and such and such is what they look like, is pretty "ehhhhhhhh" to me.

if this topic is of particular interest to anyone, i am happy to bring my own interpretive evaluation to the table and take a stab at anyone who identifies themselves or anyone else as an ENFP 5 (or other "implausible" combinations). i will evaluate it in terms of the enneagram and socionics, and my suspicion is that i will probably have a very different interpretation. my interpretation of such people, further, will probably be completely different from timeless' interpretation (not that this is invalidates his point of view at all).

i would also point out that i have identified some combinations that i think of as probably implausible -- my typings of people in the socionics community have led me to such conclusions. there is a guy who is widely typed in the socionics community and self-typed as LII, who i am completely convinced is LSI or SLE instead, and we both agree on 9 (he considers himself 9w8, and i consider him fast 9 with a 5 wing). there is another person who i think is SEE 4w2, an ILE fast 9 and slow 9s of many types (i don't think these latter ones are "implausible" combinations but some people would.)

There's nothing in Enneagram or MBTI that would directly conflict with each other, for the reason I gave above. (The existential nature of the Enneagram etc.) Determining that particular combinations are implausible is counter-productive because it colors the interpretation of people who appear to be an implausible combination. For example, I know a few ENFP 5s in person. I might have changed my perception of their type if I was predisposed to think it was implausible, but MBTI and Enneagram can coexist without conflict as long as the terms used in each are identified and given their appropriate limits.

I do not know if the above holds true about Socionics, though.