u/Heavy_Till5231

Why is Trump typed confidently SEE over SLE? I don’t see much reasoning outside of the fact that he’s not a great businessman, showy and charismatic. I fail to see how a SLE can’t be any of these things. Seeing how he treats those closest to him, a lot of his behavior *does* scream FI polr, how would one confidently assert for instance that he is FI creative TI polr and not flipped.

Not to mention - he seems to incite a *lot* of beta like feelings within people, very divisive for instance.

Kinda interesting how people will use types as morality equivalences. A shorthand to signal your values rather than your type.

Say someone doesn’t like..racists. Or perhaps someone who’s violent. They’ll say: “oh, that’s EIE SE mob behavior”. EIE is the most common type to dump this on. And EIEs, who for some reason I always see hating themselves, will for some reason admit to this (why do yall take this, who knows).

Just a very interesting observation I see. And funnily enough - matches some things gulenko says about socionics types from sociological perspective; namely betas. Particularly how they have a tendency to rationalize *morals* through “systems”. Can see it in action here…crazy.

It has its limits. Seems this community thinks you can type based off 5 sentences (that have nothing to do with a person explaining themselves). You, mostly, can’t. This is an anonymous space where people act without much bounds. It’s also a space where people don’t detail their main problems in life. Your “intuition” of people are mostly projections and many times are inaccurate. Someone rambling emotionally online does not make them an ethical. Someone writing a long theoretical post does not make them a logical or intuitive.

Stop assuming you can type someone based on a paragraph with three emojis. Get a grip.

it doesn't make sense. if you've never had sex before, and you type as sx dom in the newer versions of enneagram...how does this even happen? how do you know that you're a sx dom and not just a gooner or something? how can you for sure be certain of your instinct then?

im actually asking for an answer to this btw

Would one say that feelers are more likely to project motivations or be obsessed with the idea of motivation (why someone does something) in the first place? Or project ideas of why someone does something? And thinkers are more likely to just simply do something and not really think about the meaning or implication behind it…it just was “done”?

I think this is a common cause of conflict between feelers and thinkers; but especially rational feelers and irrational thinkers who naturally don’t get along for this reason. Rational feelers need a meaning to everything they do, or their existence. And irrational thinkers usually deny these things as navel grazing and just sort of exist/do outside of this.

How does one derive if they have weak SE or simply lack confidence?

For instance if a person were overweight, but later hit the gym and became attractive and physically competent…wouldn’t their way of coming off change as well? Perhaps going from meek and antisocial to physically assertive, protective towards their partner/others, socially assertive and more “out there” in general?

If someone did have such a change in dynamic, how would it be typed? Same with FE -> if a person who is perhaps more unattractive or weak is quieter, locks in and becomes stronger…wouldn’t they be more assertive emotionally (making the first move, expressing themselves louder, perhaps meeting people quicker stronger handshakes etc).

I see a very strong correlation between physicality and expression, in particular that the more physically competent and attractive you are, the more you are able to be out there, assertive, expressive (and good at making connections etc). To me, they seem more predictive of someone’s capacity to be assertive in the emotional sphere.

If you have a tritype and you feel like it isn’t talked much about, I’d like to hear any takes (maybe even how your type “performs” at a larger scale level, or how it is misinterpreted). We always hear about 4/5/7/8 mixtures and it’d be cool to hear about how others see the world (never hear about 126s or 359s for instance).

I’ll start with my own: I think that 136 being labeled as middle managers is pretty funny (and probably half true) but also IMO a large portion of our modern culture is very 136 from culture and art to government. I think a ton of ideas, such as legislating bodies, creating governments and bureaucracies and overturning bad ideological systems is very in line with type. Also a ton of architecture is also 136, structural mosaics, geometric designs on old buildings. Structure made to be aesthetically beautiful. Even things like cathedrals and pagodas…many were probably designed from this type because of their symmetrical yet “beautiful” design. Not to mention, many philosophers were almost certainly this type from Kant and Descartes to Aristotle. I think the type is also pervasive in scientific institutions (rather then some rendition of a tritype with 5), focused on inquiry, stress testing, proof through the correct means with underlying competition.

So tell me about how your type functions as well.

Yes, I know, many people hate this. But it’s an interesting social phenomena and IMO the enneagram is a useful shorthand to deconstruct why these things take place. It’s no secret a large portion of younger generations swallows this content a lot.

What types would you say have the biggest presence within these circles as “influencers” and who follows these things the most.

My guess: some so/sp attachment types would have by and large the biggest presence. And NOT sx doms…who I could even see finding the whole thing ridiculous. Though I’d like to hear theories on how/why these things happen through an enneagrammic lens.

Do any of you guys get this like internal “feeling” that some information, or some piece is “incorrect” before actually verbalizing it? And you notice that when you do question and verbalize your issues with some information, that usually the flaws all unpack almost exactly as you predicted them to? Each question and answer is like building onto this “guess” which is extremely accurate for some reason…

Almost like you can read through something, and before reasoning, you understand implicitly something is wrong with what is written. But reasoning obviously takes cognitive labor (so you attack/deconstruct the claim/reasoning based on laziness and time), but nearly every single time you have this intuitive feeling that some claim is incorrect and verbalize it…you end up right.

Do any other 6s know you also (intuitively) can break down the reasoning into the core components, trace the logical flaw, the assumed premise and whatnot but are many times too tired (or short on time) to do so. So it becomes this sort of irritation that you know something (many things) are intuitively “wrong”, but going through every claim and breaking it all down into its core components is just too much work and is frustrating to do? Does integration to 9 to some level for you just entail avoidance of this?