Re: Just an observation....

Subject:

Comments:
> > > I will not stand up for any off-the-cuff typing job I do based on a few > > lines written by someone I don't know on the board. I will stand up > > for the usefulness of practicing and trying to type people. To me it is > > like basic research or spinning > > off wild hypotheses about some area of science or brainstorming ideas > > at a high-tech company -- ie, the wilder, the better -- because creativity > > should be encouraged because none of us knows enough about the > > enneagram. T.S. Eliot used to say that his method of writing > > was to just throw a spear into the darkness and then take a flashlight > > and go out and find where it landed. It is an INTUITIVE method that > > isn't for everyone. > This is true - but then again, it helps to be clear about what constitutes a 'wild guess', and what constitutes an opinion that you are prepared to stand for. A lot of confusion can be caused by failing to signify which is which... > I belive that most of Edward DeBono's writings is about this - taking the method described above and formalising it in a variety of different ways. Whether this is genuinely useful, or just an overcomplicated way to sell lots of books is an open question (I'm undecided myself)... > > However, the 5w6's MBTI typology commonly accepted on the board, I would > > not agree with -- I'm an NFP. > MBTI correlations - the source of many a heated discussion if ever I saw one... Still, the general consensus is that although certian combinations are more common that others (eg Fours are often INFs), this is by no means binding, and less common combinations can and do turn up from time to time. So, to pick a not-so-random example, it's perfectly possible for a five to be an NFP (incidentally, in your case is that INFP, ENFP, or somewhere in the middle?)... > > Another point, as I posted Amanda, please let me clarify - what I actually > > meant was that there are many types on the board but if you could count > > them all then the type with the highest head count would be sixes, eg, > > 40% sixes; 25% fives; 10% fours; 3% ones; 2% sevens, etc. DO YOU SEE > > WHAT I MEAN? That is different than what seems to have come across to > > everyone who read what I said. I apologize for the unclear way I put > > it the first time. > I belive that this point is incidental - even if you were clear about that the first time, I would have made pretty much the same comment - I belived (and still do) that you were mistyping large numbers of people on this board... > > However, I do stand behind my comments that most senators, CEO's, > > engineers, generals, lawyers, presidents, etc. are sixes --probably > > in the range of 60% or higher of the world class people in those > > professions tend to be sixes. This opinion was counter-intuitive to me > > and only came about after years of analysis of famous people and > > discovering an amazing pattern. > I can belive that sixes would be over-represented in those occupations (although I'm not so sure where the engineers fit into that scheme of things...), although I'm not too sure about the 60% - the 6s are going to face some stiff competition from all of the 8s, 1s and 3s out there... However, there was definitely something about the tone of that line that quite strongly suggests that this is more that just a 'considered opinion' about these people... > > Have you been by the website, Peter? Check out the traits overview > > page that I finally got up yesterday. From your post you seem to be > > in the 5,6,7 range, (and yes, this is just a wild guess!) > > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/2415 > Hmmm... To borrow one of my friend's (not sure if he's an 8 or a 5) stock phrases, "I'm not convinced..." > Peter, often found with some comment after his name...

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: