typology correlations

[Danellian]

What are your enneagram and mbti types? What do you think makes your types on both systems compatible? What types do you think might be incompatible accross both systems?

[Danellian]

I am 1w9 INTJ. I think this is a very common correlation. Both types tend to be perfectionistic, independent thinkers, oriented toward ideals, objective, and impersonal.

[Xenolar]

I am an enneagram 5, which is, I believe, the most common enneagram type for INTx types (and I am still somewhat undecided as to whether I am truly INTJ or INTP). My wings are balanced, but I am usually more 5w4. As far as the subtypes go, I am sp/sx, which, for those of you not entirely familiar with the enneagram, means that of all 5s I am the most comfortable being self-preservationist (i.e. most independent), followed by a preference for intimate relationships. My least preferred subtype, by implication, is the so (social) subtype, in the sense that I do not tend to gravitate towards larger groups or gatherings, and tend not to rely so much on other people.

[Danellian]

I am also sp/sx. I have next to no 2 wing influence. My wing is definately 9, but it's not so much that I have a stong 9 wing, just that I have next to no 2 wing. Overall, my 9 wing is probably moderate. I wonder if the sp first stacking is most likely to yield INTJ. They are the most independent, after all.

Why do you think INTx is most common to E5? You might be right, I just want to know your reasoning. I do think, however, that INTJ is very common to 1w9, if not one of the more common MBTI types for that E-Type. As mentioned in my last post, the two types have a lot in common. I also base this on experience, most of the 1w9s I've known have been INTJ.

[ShiningLight]

Hello Danellian,

It's interesting that you find a correlation between INTJ and E5 personality types. From my personal experience, most type 1s that I know are INFJs. I'd associate these two types, perhaps because INFJs are more likely to see self improvement/doing their best as a moral responsibility? Do take my opinions with a grain of salt though; I have to say I don't know much about the Enneagram as it hasn't sparked my interest like the MBTI did.

Myself, I'm an INTJ and a 5w4. I remember there was a poll some time ago on one of the LiveJournal type communities, and most INTJs scored as 5. From reading the descriptions on Enneagram Institute, something about detaching ourselves from the practical world strikes me as very INTJ. I find that many INTJs have a distain of social rituals such as small talk, dating, etc. While these activities are deemed useful, it seems that oftentimes the INTJ rationalizes that they're not worth the effort.

I also relate to the part about becoming preoccupied with imaginary worlds, or living inside my own thoughts, so to speak. But that was more a result of type imbalance, when my Ni overshadowed the other functions. I've since then worked on this issue and found that in making more connections with the practical world, I'm beginning to specialize in various areas of knowledge (see level 4 from EI). I'd think that the INTJ is one of the more intellectual types and interested in attaining knowledge, but apparently there are numerous anomalies in each type. i.e. Some INTJs find challenge in developing their EQ.

Just a few observations. (:

[Danellian]

Hello Danellian,

It's interesting that you find a correlation between INTJ and E5 personality types. From my personal experience, most type 1s that I know are INFJs. I'd associate these two types, perhaps because INFJs are more likely to see self improvement/doing their best as a moral responsibility? Do take my opinions with a grain of salt though; I have to say I don't know much about the Enneagram as it hasn't sparked my interest like the MBTI did.

Myself, I'm an INTJ and a 5w4. I remember there was a poll some time ago on one of the LiveJournal type communities, and most INTJs scored as 5. From reading the descriptions on Enneagram Institute, something about detaching ourselves from the practical world strikes me as very INTJ. I find that many INTJs have a distain of social rituals such as small talk, dating, etc. While these activities are deemed useful, it seems that oftentimes the INTJ rationalizes that they're not worth the effort.

I also relate to the part about becoming preoccupied with imaginary worlds, or living inside my own thoughts, so to speak. But that was more a result of type imbalance, when my Ni overshadowed the other functions. I've since then worked on this issue and found that in making more connections with the practical world, I'm beginning to specialize in various areas of knowledge (see level 4 from EI). I'd think that the INTJ is one of the more intellectual types and interested in attaining knowledge, but apparently there are numerous anomalies in each type. i.e. Some INTJs find challenge in developing their EQ.

Just a few observations. (:

This gets into too much material for me to really get into right now, since I have only a few minutes on hand to type. The main thing I want to do is ask you this: What is your notion of detachment, how do you define it, how do you experience it?

While it is true the E1s are focused on perpetually improving themselves, the type in general is not agreeable enough to correlate them with a strong feeling preference. While some E1s may be INFJs, I bet many of them might actually be mistyped 9w1s, thought I'm not saying such a match is impossible. I have a friend who I thought was 1w9 for years, he is an INFJ, and I now believe that he is 9w1. There are two main reasons for this. The first reason is that he is too agreeable, he will feel bad about pushing his ideals on people, he will restrain from doing so, and has a dislike of conflict to where if you try to push your ideals on him or argue with him much he will try to avoid it, not wanting the conflict, but preferring to keep the peace, even though he still strongly beleives in his ideals. This brings me to my second point, which is that he does not like his beliefs questioned. When my beliefs are questioned, I will argue my point and tell the other person what they think. But, since E9 is in the triad that is out of touch with their primary emotion, which is, in this case, anger, being in this out of touch group, they do not like to even put their beliefs out there to the prospect of change. They are not in touch enough with themselves to be able to do that. The same goes for E6s in E3s, it just comes across in different manners and is done for different reasons.

[niffer]

An 8w9 ENFP?


8s come across as the toughest of the Enneagram personalities. At work, average eights can be assertive to a fault - they like to speak their minds bluntly, make quick but forceful decisions, and respect others who do the same. They demand and need a high degree of autonomy, and when they feel controlled by authority, they often show an unmistakable defiant streak. They are often shrewd in using circumstances to their material advantage. They do not like threats to their dominance, or people who hide information from them, and may force confrontations with others to get the truth, however uncomfortable it may be. 8s like to have the final say on things, but they may also give tremendous autonomy, within certain absolute limits, to subordinates they trust, which others find very empowering. Eights may show a softer side at home, where their strength is used not to dominate, but to protect. 8s are the prototypical "father figures", (even if they are women). When eights are secure in their dominance, they may expand their caring side by becoming magnanimous and generous. However, insecure 8s are the most tyrannical, destructive, and self-serving types. Many historically great world leaders are 8s, but so are many ordinary people who project a strong sense of being their own person, refusing to be used or led by others.

8s with 9 wings are an interesting subtype. The 9 wing considerably softens the traits of the 8, making the 8w9 much harder to recognize and understand than a pure 8. Don Riso notes that the 8w9 often holds their power "in reserve". 8w9s are often underestimated, because they can look like mild-mannered 9s one day, only to unleash their aggressive 8 side the next.


I've never met another person with the same traits as me. 8w9 are also given the nickname, "the iron fist in the velvet glove".

[ShiningLight]

This gets into too much material for me to really get into right now, since I have only a few minutes on hand to type. The main thing I want to do is ask you this: What is your notion of detachment, how do you define it, how do you experience it?

Definition 1: independence from practical considerations. I was mainly going off tangents based on this definition. Likely due to the dominant iNtuition, INTJs exercise an unusual freedom from practical conventions. So does the E5 type, and from the Enneagram Institute, it seems that this is a result of the 5 living inside their own heads, somewhat similar to the MBTI Ni function.

Definition 2: social isolation. This is a more widely understood notion of "detachment," but both definitions are mentioned on the EI page. I wasn't really talking about this aspect. However, as I look back, it seems the two are not mutually exclusive. For example, detachment from the practical could be: spending so much time and energy chasing abstract thoughts that I neglect to eat/sleep. Or it could have a social flavor: i.e. finding small talk pointless and thus refusing to engage in it.

Sorry if that was confusing. I admit this is going over my head. Here's the link I was trying to post, hopefully it will clarify some things.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

While it is true the E1s are focused on perpetually improving themselves, the type in general is not agreeable enough to correlate them with a strong feeling preference. While some E1s may be INFJs, I bet many of them might actually be mistyped 9w1s, thought I'm not saying such a match is impossible. I have a friend who I thought was 1w9 for years, he is an INFJ, and I now believe that he is 9w1. There are two main reasons for this. The first reason is that he is too agreeable, he will feel bad about pushing his ideals on people, he will restrain from doing so, and has a dislike of conflict to where if you try to push your ideals on him or argue with him much he will try to avoid it, not wanting the conflict, but preferring to keep the peace, even though he still strongly beleives in his ideals. This brings me to my second point, which is that he does not like his beliefs questioned. When my beliefs are questioned, I will argue my point and tell the other person what they think. But, since E9 is in the triad that is out of touch with their primary emotion, which is, in this case, anger, being in this out of touch group, they do not like to even put their beliefs out there to the prospect of change. They are not in touch enough with themselves to be able to do that. The same goes for E6s in E3s, it just comes across in different manners and is done for different reasons.

Interesting. Haven't considered that before. According to an article I came across, we develop our dominant MBTI function from mid to late teens, the auxiliary function anywhere from early 20s to 30s, then the less used tertiary and finally inferior functions when we're middle aged and after. The particular INFJ I have in mind is middle aged, so possibly she has developed her Thinking function well enough that she is able to openly speak and apply her views?

I also find that INFJs rarely if ever push their beliefs on people. They judge the world just like we do but mostly only apply the frames of belief to themselves (hence the drive for personal improvement) since they believe in every individual having a value. Regarding the second point about your friend, it appears to me that it is a common trait among younger INFJs. My INFJ friends tend to get very upset when I question their views. However, I have met an older and mature INFJ who appreciates my questions and new perspectives.

[Danellian]

ShiningLight, I have also read about the development of the functions over the lifespan. This, of course, presupposes that the functions were already present to be developed. I agree that the functions develop like this, and that the later half of life is largely about the development of the shadow. I think this can be done earlier in life (to some degree) though I see the first half of life as being primarily about building a strong ego identity (developing the first two functions), finding out who we are, etc.

About detachment, sometimes I get to where I don't want anything to do with the practical world, but this is not due to detachment. Actually, it either has to do with having had a long day or week and wanting to relax, which I do not have an easy time doing, or because I am more interested in the ideal and want to impose it on the real. Also, I like my ideas to have practical applications, but I am very interested in ideas. I don't think much of this applies to 1w2. I see 1w9 as much more mental than 1w2, and if you read Riso and Hudsons orange book, it states that the 1w9 is often mistaken for E5. In fact, I used to think I was a 5, because I am so mental and intellectual. However, I am not detached. I hate setbacks, and become easily frustrated if things do not go the way I want them to go, and get impatient if I do not get the result I want to have in the timeframe I want to have it. These things can become a large source of self-criticism. In relationships, I do not need a great deal of space, in fact, it is usually the other person who needs the space from me, as at times I can be overwhelming and push myself on people. Finally, as much of a thinker as I am, I am not a truly mental type. I have passion behind my views, and I often think I am right and have the need to be right to the exclusion of seeing the other persons's point of view or having understanding for their situation. I am not an instinctual person, in the sense of spontaneity, but I am in the sense of my ideals. And this is precisely what E1 does, is restricts and channels their instincts through their ideals, through the defense mechanism of reaction formation. Again, I find this mental, uninstinctual manner much more apparent in 1w9 than 1w2. Further, a difference between 5s and 1s with regard to cognition is that 1s start with the general and apply it to specific circumstances, which takes the forms of ideals, principles, and standards, where 5s start with the specific and induct to the general, constantly modifying their framework from which they view reality.

[Xenolar]

I am also sp/sx. I have next to no 2 wing influence. My wing is definately 9, but it's not so much that I have a stong 9 wing, just that I have next to no 2 wing. Overall, my 9 wing is probably moderate. I wonder if the sp first stacking is most likely to yield INTJ. They are the most independent, after all.

Why do you think INTx is most common to E5? You might be right, I just want to know your reasoning. I do think, however, that INTJ is very common to 1w9, if not one of the more common MBTI types for that E-Type. As mentioned in my last post, the two types have a lot in common. I also base this on experience, most of the 1w9s I've known have been INTJ.

You are definitely right in saying that it is rather common for an INTJ to test as an 1w9, however, E1 is all about perfectionism, correct? A 1w9 could be any IxxJ type, and probably some ExxJ types with subdued extroversion (generally 1w2 is more common for ExxJs). Enneagram 5s are most known for their abstract nature and detachment from emotions and the physical world, which is a classic description of your typical INTx. In a negative form, 1s are prone to obsessive-compulsive neurosis. Unhealthy 5s, on the other hand, are more prone to schizoid or schizotypal neuroses, which, once again, is a more typical example of INTx characteristics.

[ShiningLight]

About detachment, sometimes I get to where I don't want anything to do with the practical world, but this is not due to detachment. Actually, it either has to do with having had a long day or week and wanting to relax, which I do not have an easy time doing, or because I am more interested in the ideal and want to impose it on the real. Also, I like my ideas to have practical applications, but I am very interested in ideas. I don't think much of this applies to 1w2. I see 1w9 as much more mental than 1w2, and if you read Riso and Hudsons orange book, it states that the 1w9 is often mistaken for E5. In fact, I used to think I was a 5, because I am so mental and intellectual. However, I am not detached. I hate setbacks, and become easily frustrated if things do not go the way I want them to go, and get impatient if I do not get the result I want to have in the timeframe I want to have it. These things can become a large source of self-criticism. In relationships, I do not need a great deal of space, in fact, it is usually the other person who needs the space from me, as at times I can be overwhelming and push myself on people. Finally, as much of a thinker as I am, I am not a truly mental type. I have passion behind my views, and I often think I am right and have the need to be right to the exclusion of seeing the other persons's point of view or having understanding for their situation. I am not an instinctual person, in the sense of spontaneity, but I am in the sense of my ideals. And this is precisely what E1 does, is restricts and channels their instincts through their ideals, through the defense mechanism of reaction formation. Again, I find this mental, uninstinctual manner much more apparent in 1w9 than 1w2. Further, a difference between 5s and 1s with regard to cognition is that 1s start with the general and apply it to specific circumstances, which takes the forms of ideals, principles, and standards, where 5s start with the specific and induct to the general, constantly modifying their framework from which they view reality.

The parts about handling setbacks and your need to be right describe me so well, it's as if I could have written them. I think I might be more perfectionistic than a majority of 5s. If I remember right, I typically get 1 or 4 as my second highest preference on Enneagram tests. However, as the wing is the type adjacent to the most preferred mode of operation, I came out as 5w4.

I think while we have similar reactions, they are due to different reasons. For me, being right is crucial to expanding my understanding. I'm constantly gathering data for my bank of knowledge, and I've found that all knowledge (that I've encountered, anyhow) are interconnected in one way or another. So if I make a miscalculation in one of the steps, it could possibly cause a chain reaction that renders other "facts" and conclusions invalid/useless, in other words, disrupt the entire framework. I think it's also a problem with my ego. Being a perfectionist, I already criticize myself for my shortcomings enough; I don't need it from other people too. What I really need is for them to confirm what I know and feed my ego. So, to solve this issue, I've adopted the following as my starting point:

I know nothing.

I find that this view not only cuts down on my arrogance but also frees me up to question and explore new ideas. After all, if I know nothing, then I can't be wrong. ;-) And if I already live my worst fear, it can't get any worse.

[Danellian]

ShiningLight, some questions:

1: What is your attitde toward setbacks: Do you get frustrated with your environment, and think something like "Everything is all messed up, why can't this be better, it's up to me to instill order here!" or something more like: "I don't have the resources to handle this, so it doesn't matter".

2: What is the nature of your perfectionism. Is it born of idealism that always looks for improvement and sees how things can be better, or is it born of the fear of not having enough knowledge to handle the life?

3: What is the nature of your search for knowledge? Is it a quest to gain understanding of things that are important to you and serve specific purposes in your life, such as how you can improve yourself, or is it a question to know as much as possible, regarless of how it might apply to situations in your life?

4: Are you constantly seeking to improve yourself? Or is your notion of self-improvement limited to the acquisition of knowledge?

5: Do you feel the need to be right such that you use your thinking to justify beliefs and your actions, and to think of beliefs that justify yourself, or do you feel the need to be right such that you constantly gather more information without being sure what you think about it?

6: Do you believe in an objective morality, that there are things people "should" do, or do you think it really all boils down to societal expectation and that morality is ultimately subjective? (Note, I think a lot of things, that don't matter, are socially subjective, in fact, some social norms I find to me immoral, but I still think there is a social morality. That is, I think for myself, and believe there is an objective morality. A crucial distinction in what I'm asking, here.)

That's all for now. Look forward to your reply.

[DeepPurple]

I am a type 5 enneagram with a 6 wing.

[stasis]

MBTI: INTP.
Enneagram: 5w4.

I think non-rigorous theories of 'personality' like the Enneagram will tend to correlate to themselves or to more rigorous theories by simple consequence of their dealing with the same subject in a very loose, generalized sort of way. I'm skeptical of there being any use or value in this kind of correlation.

[ShiningLight]

1: What is your attitde toward setbacks: Do you get frustrated with your environment, and think something like "Everything is all messed up, why can't this be better, it's up to me to instill order here!" or something more like: "I don't have the resources to handle this, so it doesn't matter".

I see another crucial factor in my reaction to setbacks: what/who is involved? If it’s dealing with things, then yes, most of the time I take matters into my own hands and (re)introduce order. Everything changes when people are in the equation. Take partner/group work, for instance, in which the property (ideas, material inventions, etc.) is shared. I typically ask myself: how much is fixing said property worth to me, and based on what I observe from each person, how much energy would it take to convince them to implement my plan? I view energy as a valuable resource, and even if I do have the physical/material abilities to carry out the plan, if it costs me too much to get people to listen, then I will choose to forego the solution, which I note occurs a majority of time when I deal with people.

2: What is the nature of your perfectionism. Is it born of idealism that always looks for improvement and sees how things can be better, or is it born of the fear of not having enough knowledge to handle the life?

The main motivation behind my perfectionism is fear, like you mentioned. However, it is not a fear solely dependent on a lack of knowledge. I fear my own failure and incompetence above all else, and this is what fuels my pursuits of perfection. But you were partly right to question whether it had something to do with not having enough knowledge, because not being knowledgeable in something I care about counts as failure to me. And I improve myself because I see not doing my best as another type of failure. Even if I ever do reach the potential I see in myself, it requires rigid perfectionism just to keep performing at that level. Hence, the quest is never-ending for me.

Another observation: I have little use for perfectionism in itself. For me, perfection is all or nothing, and because of this, I tend to have difficulty separating priorities from less significant details. I often wish that I’m more flexible, so I could scrape by with remarkably less effort and save more time and energy to pursue other interests. As a side note, I’m curious as to what drives your perfectionism. If you don’t mind me asking, do you pursue it for its own sake or are there other underlying reasons?

3: What is the nature of your search for knowledge? Is it a quest to gain understanding of things that are important to you and serve specific purposes in your life, such as how you can improve yourself, or is it a question to know as much as possible, regarless of how it might apply to situations in your life?

I pick and choose, and reserve my limited mental energy for specialized topics. Though, regarding many of these subjects, I don’t see how they are particularly important to my life (other than my interest in them) or how they apply to my life (personality theory being an exception). I learn for understanding, rarely application. Unless understanding counts as an application. I notice that Perceivers are more comfortable with “the journey” when it comes to learning and other things, whereas I want an understanding so I can move on to something new. Possibly this act of concluding serves as an application of the information?

4: Are you constantly seeking to improve yourself? Or is your notion of self-improvement limited to the acquisition of knowledge?

How would you define knowledge? To me, knowledge has broad implications. For instance, I used to be in the performing arts. And when I tried to make progress, was I improving the performance itself or was I using trial and error to gather information about how to do it better?

5: Do you feel the need to be right such that you use your thinking to justify beliefs and your actions, and to think of beliefs that justify yourself, or do you feel the need to be right such that you constantly gather more information without being sure what you think about it?

I do the first, all the time. But I’m not sure whether it stems from a need to be right or my unacceptance of making mistakes or failing.

6: Do you believe in an objective morality, that there are things people "should" do, or do you think it really all boils down to societal expectation and that morality is ultimately subjective? (Note, I think a lot of things, that don't matter, are socially subjective, in fact, some social norms I find to me immoral, but I still think there is a social morality. That is, I think for myself, and believe there is an objective morality. A crucial distinction in what I'm asking, here.)

I’m not very confident in my opinion and reasoning, as I think I might be misunderstanding your question. I assume your inquiries are to gain a better understanding of how different Enneagram types experience idealism? Yet all that comes to my mind is scientific evidence on the evolution of morality (and how it impacts objectivity/subjectivity). Before I answer, can you clarify: what are some qualifications that must be met before an insignificant social norm becomes important/general enough for objective morality to apply? In other words, how do you view/define the things that ‘don’t matter’ and those that do? I should also add, this may be one of the topics that is simply beyond my comprehension. However, if you’re interested in hearing my thoughts, I can include my two cents in another reply.

[Danellian]

Well, regarding my question about objective morality, I was trying to get your perspective without giving too much of my own, to avoid the possibility of it biasing your response. But just to give you a general framework of what I'm talking about: When I say objective morality, I'm saying that there is a right and wrong that truly exists, we can make a statement with objective meaning that action x is right or wrong, which has nothing to do with social mores or individual preferences. When I talk about seeing morality as subjective, I mean the view that a statement that x action is right or wrong really caries no objective meaning, just an imperative of what must be done or not done for society to work and/or for people to get along. This second view could, but doesn't necesserily, lead to forms of reductionism, where morality is not seen as something that really exists, that it is just a psychological phenomenon, or nothing more than a set of obligatory rules to prevent social chaos.

Regarding my perfectionism, it is fear of not improving, fear of making a mistake, fear of somehow being subject to criticism, the feeling that if I am not perfect I have no value. Underriding these fears is an anger with myself for not being perfect, for not being able to meet these expectations. And it is not uncommon for me to take this anger out of my environment by trying to perfect it or instill order in it.

From your asnwers thus far, you don't seem to exhibit the quality of detachment. Your focus on not failing seems like you care too much about the outcome rather than having the detached attitude that it's something that really doesn't matter or affect you personally.

[ShiningLight]

I agree that morality is not merely composed of rules to instill social order, but I think I define subjectivity differently from you. For me, morality is subjective because each individual is influenced by his distinct genetic makeup, experiences of social conditioning and other events in his lifetime. My definition of this morality is not based so much on individual preference as perception. In a hypothetical case, a schizophrenic may view his doctor as a threatening figure, and attempt to protect himself and the other patients from the doctor's treatments. It is the moral thing to do in his eyes, but as we know, his perceptions are distorted, and we do not believe he is doing the "right" thing by inhibiting medical treatment.

I have a difficult time understanding how morality, or anything else for that matter, can be truly objective. I can understand it if something is prevalent enough amongst humankind that it can be perceived as objective, but I would see it as more of majority rule than objective.

Did you know that altruism (helping others, saving them from danger) is encoded in our genes? We are predisposed/preprogrammed to do the "moral" thing of helping others because in evolution, these acts of kindness have enabled our genes to survive. When we save a family member, we preserve a part of our genetic makeup. When we help a friend or even stranger, reciprocal acts from the other party ensure our own survival. Assuming this specific sequence of genes is present in all of humankind, then I can see how helping others would be generally viewed as "moral." However, I'm still skepical of an objective morality.

It appears to me that fear of some type of incompetence motivates your perfectionism as well. What I wanted to ask you was this, do you think it is more anger with imperfection or a question of control that drives your quest for order? I find that I feared my own failure so much that perfectionism was a way for me to control failure. Too much so, in fact, that I have tried to consciously ruin an outcome for myself before it could have the chance to go awry. Then I'd tell myself that the end result is already imperfect so as to stop pursuing perfection to a pointless degree.

I agree with your point on detachment. I'm not detached at the present - it's more of how I was two years ago: stuck inside my own head and neglecting everything else. I've since then worked hard to come out of it.

[Danellian]

Yes, I am very concerned with competency. The competency triad is composed of tpes 1, 3, and 5. All three type have a high concern for competency. But for different reasons. While I used to live inside my head more than I do now, my problem was never that I didn't care about performing well. See, I never was detached in the 5ish sense, not when it came to relationships, not when it came to setbacks, and all my life, I have been attracted to ideals, and wanted to strive for something higher, pushing my instinctual nature into the background. You could say I resemble a 5 in having issues with feeling incompetet, that I resemble a 3 in my issues with good performance, and that I resemble a 1 with my issues with self-improvement, ideal-striving, and perfectionism. The thing is this: when I look at myself and see what drives me the most, it is a passion for my ideals. That is the primary thing. I want to be competent to embody those ideals, whether it be through spiritual advancement or performing well at work. I'm not sure which type you are, but I'm vascilating between 5 and 1. But, of course, you know better than anyone else.

Another thing to consider is Oscar Ichazo's idea of the Trifix. I don't know if you've heard of this theory, but he taught that everyone has one fixation in each of the triads; that is, one fixation in the thinking triad, one in the feeling triad, and one in the instinctual triad. If this theory is correct, then my trifix would be 1, 4, 5, meaning that my fixations would be primarily 1 in the instinctive triad, then 5 would come up second in the thinking triad, then 4 would come up last in the feeling triad. The trifix is notated, however, in the order in which each enneagram point appears on the enneagram symbol, hence why 4 appears before 5 in my trifix notation. The problem with this, however, is that is it generally used in opposition to those who use the concept of wings. My type would definately be 1w9 over 1w2, the type description describes me in a way that I find difficult to discard as an invalid categorization. I've even considered that both theories could be correct at the same time, which is something you will see people doing on enneagram message boards, and if this is the case, then my wing-trifix would be 1w9, 4w5, 5w4. The explanatory power of the trifix lies in the fact that people don't fit neatly into categories and shows a pattern that appears to be exhibited in how people can have qualities accross different categories that aren't related in the convention way of the system (wings, direction of integration and disintegration).

Regarding morality, I see that there is an objective morality because there are two layers to things. The first layer is the physical layer in which the rules of society are followed or they are not folowed, in which society flourishes or falls apart. The second layer is the spiritual layer in which it *matters* if society flourishes or falls apart, where it *matters* - and this is the bottom line - if people are happy or unhappy. If it doesn't matter if we are happy or unhappy, then we might as well be mass murderers, because as much suffereing as we might cause ourselves and others, it doesn't *matter* that we caused it. In this sense, morality would have an objectivity, independent of society and any other causation observed wtihin the physical world, because it has *meaning*.

[ShiningLight]

Ah okay, I see what you mean. In that case, I think I'm more of a 5 than a 1. I always had goals and sometimes the passion to achieve them, but they're very different from ideals. Thanks for the info on the Trifix. Very interesting. Can you point me to any sites or books? And how do you determine your fixations? Are they your highest scored preference in each triad?

I'd like to know more about how you view objective morality. I wanted to mention beforehand that it is not my intention to argue with you or question your beliefs. We have different beliefs, and I respect that. I'd like to get a better understanding of where you're coming from, so can you answer for me:

By "it matters," are you referring to any person/group of people/thing in particular? In other words, to whom does this morality matter/hold meaning? And if it matters to, for example, humanity, how would it remain objective?

[Danellian]

Information on the trifix really isn't that easy to come by, but you could go to an enneagram message board such as the one at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and ask about it, or look up old threads about it, it's been delved into a few times there. Or you could do a google search on Oscar Ichazo, you might be able to find something that way. I'm not sure there are any books published about it, or if there are, they must not be very popular.

I really wouldn't suggest going by tests. The most reliable way to discover your type is to read all the type descriptions in depth, then give it some time to see how they play out in your life. The descriptions on To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. are some of the best I have found online.

Concerning my views on morality, when I speak of an objective morality, I believe there must be something to make that morality objective, and I think that is what God does. I view God as the ultimate objectivity, that is, if God says something is right or wrong, then it is right or wrong, objectively. How individual opinions of mankind factor into this is that we can either agree with the truth, or not. So, there is a human quest of always striving toward Truth. Even though we will never completely get there, we will never be perfect, we can progress, one step and a time, and take satisfaction in that improvement. I have a metaphysical theory about how God is the source of morality in relation to objectivity and subjectivity, I will get into that if you want to hear it, but I haven't included it here because it would be an conversation unto itself.

That's fine, I respect that you hold a different view from mine. Please understand that I like to debate about things, it doesn't necesserily mean that I have to change your mind.

[DeepPurple]

I initially thought that I had a six wing because it was so hard for me to choose between Ennegrams type 5 and 6. However I reread types 4, 5 and 6 and I believe that I do have a 4 wing.

[Danellian]

I initially thought that I had a six wing because it was so hard for me to choose between Ennegrams type 5 and 6. However I reread types 4, 5 and 6 and I believe that I do have a 4 wing.

What confused you about the differences between 4 and 6?

[vulcan]

5w4 intj

[vision]

I did this test the other day having not researched into it that much so far; but anyway, here is what i got:

Enneagram Test Results
You are most likely a type 1.

Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w6.

It is not clear from these test results which Enneagram type and wing you are.