Enneagram Type 5 Board Archive

Why you are wrong [ Boards: Main, Type4, Type5, Movie, Care, Chat ][ Top 10 ] [ HOME ]

Why you are wrong

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Cory on December 11, 2001 at 00:33:17:

In Reply to: Re: It would really suck to be an extraverted 5. posted by P on December 05, 2001 at 00:42:27:

: : : ***If you really think every 5 in this world is an introvert on the MB you either too too many drugs or not enough.

No, the essence of the Five IS introversion. And I'm not just talking about socially, I mean Fives are charged by their inner ideas and thoughts, not action or people. Fives, Schizoids, Avoidants...they are all slightly different descriptions of a basic personality pattern in human beings.

The error in thinking is believing that Myers-Briggs and the Enneagram are mutually exclusive and share no common ground whatsoever. While it has been demonstrated that there is a lot of freedom and variation, there are certain things which cannot be changed. The English language has "water", Spanish has "agua". "Water" and "Agua" are the same thing, even if they use different terms.

: ***YOu are confusing extroversion as meaning sociablity. Extroversion simply means being charged by the objective outer world rather than a subjective inner one.
: A five who is an ESTJ could be socially reserved but charged by the outer world of impersonal objects. Their social behavior although reserved would be dictated by social norms and customs (ET).

: It suprises me how set-in-the-mold your and corys thinking is regarding types. The third functions of INTP's is IS. A hinderence to free thinking on one hand, a source of consistancy on the other.

Don't try to appeal to those wacky functions to back up your argument. For one thing, there is no objective theory of functions -- every author has a completely different spin. This is unlike the enneagram, which while many authors disagree on the fine things, the essentials are there. All the books I've read on functions conflict with each other. For example, you describe social norms and customs as being Te when I've read that as being Fe. Lenore Thomson and Linda Berens disagree diametrically when it comes to identifying people's faces -- Thomson attributes that to Ne while Berens says it's Si.

So because of the lack of a universal definition of the functions, I find them unreliable since you can pretty much find any specific version to back up what you say.

-Cory

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : : : ***If you really think every 5 in this world is an introvert on the MB you either too too many drugs or not enough. : No, the essence of the Five IS introversion. And I'm not just talking about socially, I mean Fives are charged by their inner ideas and thoughts, not action or people. Fives, Schizoids, Avoidants...they are all slightly different descriptions of a basic personality pattern in human beings. : The error in thinking is believing that Myers-Briggs and the Enneagram are mutually exclusive and share no common ground whatsoever. While it has been demonstrated that there is a lot of freedom and variation, there are certain things which cannot be changed. The English language has "water", Spanish has "agua". "Water" and "Agua" are the same thing, even if they use different terms. : : : ***YOu are confusing extroversion as meaning sociablity. Extroversion simply means being charged by the objective outer world rather than a subjective inner one. : : A five who is an ESTJ could be socially reserved but charged by the outer world of impersonal objects. Their social behavior although reserved would be dictated by social norms and customs (ET). : : It suprises me how set-in-the-mold your and corys thinking is regarding types. The third functions of INTP's is IS. A hinderence to free thinking on one hand, a source of consistancy on the other. : Don't try to appeal to those wacky functions to back up your argument. For one thing, there is no objective theory of functions -- every author has a completely different spin. This is unlike the enneagram, which while many authors disagree on the fine things, the essentials are there. All the books I've read on functions conflict with each other. For example, you describe social norms and customs as being Te when I've read that as being Fe. Lenore Thomson and Linda Berens disagree diametrically when it comes to identifying people's faces -- Thomson attributes that to Ne while Berens says it's Si. : So because of the lack of a universal definition of the functions, I find them unreliable since you can pretty much find any specific version to back up what you say. : -Cory

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 5 Message Board ] [ FAQ ] type5board/messages/6830.html

Your Ad Here