[susurration]

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious as to your reasoning behind... several things. Do you have any sources? If not, I'd still be happy to hear your own words.

Wings: 2w4? 6w1? Eh? How come only a fourth of your wings are with the traditional view? How do sub-subwings work?
Variants: Why the six, and why repeating sp and sx a few times?
Misc.: midline/k/weakside/counterweakside. Explain, please? 'Cause it just seems like a jumble of words...

I think that's the point...

[Rhee]

3w2, 8w9, 6w5 (brought to you by @timeless' test, thanks dude.)

The Enneagram is interesting enough, although some type descriptions out there can be too 'fluffy' or abstract for my liking. It also demands more self-reflection than the MBTI does, which isn't always pleasant to be honest.

[susurration]

yes, what is the circumference of the dipole moment of the transient evoked potential in the area of S1 corresponding to the left hand when your left ring finger is hit with a sledgehammer?

-0.567777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 777777777777777777777777777777777777777778

[Paradigm]

I think that's the point...

Aw, geez. Troll'd?

*blush*

Is what I get for deciding to post in the morning before I had coffee.

[susurration]

Aw, geez. Troll'd?

*blush*

Is what I get for deciding to post in the morning before I had coffee.

No worries paradigm, it happens to the best of us. I do it all the time; sometimes I have to read something several times, sit for a few hours deliberating.... then decide to walk away from the computer, because I can't tell if something is serious or not!

[aestrivex]

Aw, geez. Troll'd?

*blush*

Is what I get for deciding to post in the morning before I had coffee.

only mostly.

socionics.ws - View topic - an alternative wing system

[MBTI Enthusiast]

9w1-6w5-3w2 sp/sx

Pretty sure about this. I used to not believe in Enneagram because I always tested as a 5, and it didn't really fit. Then I learned about Type 9.

[NYEnglishRose]

What does that have to do with anything? Or are you an NT (Rational) who likes to ask these kinds of questions? I am an NF (Idealist) who finds such things queries interesting.

[Aleksei]

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious as to your reasoning behind... several things. Do you have any sources? If not, I'd still be happy to hear your own words.

Wings: 2w4? 6w1? Eh? How come only a fourth of your wings are with the traditional view? How do sub-subwings work?
Variants: Why the six, and why repeating sp and sx a few times?
Misc.: midline/k/weakside/counterweakside. Explain, please? 'Cause it just seems like a jumble of words...

That kind of was the point.

[Malak]

THE ENNEAGRAM HAS A TRI-TYPE NOW?!?!

Now I can identify with THREE of the 9 groups?!?! Hot damn that's convenient.

No, I don't agree with the enneagram theory.

For more reasons than in this link, but this link is aight:

Enneagram Tests are Weaker than any Other Psychological Instrument.

EDIT: It's funny, because originally with Enneagram you were allowed ONE. And you couldn't change it. Ever. So...think about that all you type-switchers and wing-and-triad bearers. You aren't even doing it right :O

Actually, if you look into the Enneagram, not as it is contemporarily conceived, but as it was historically conceived by e.g. the Sufis, and so forth, that was not in fact how they viewed it. They considered it a self-development tool, and the idea was to move from the outside of the circle into the center - in other words, to overcome all of these things. Now, granted, again, the contemporary conception is not quite in sync with its classical predecessors, but that said, they didn't come up with this theory all by their little lonesome selves.

That said, I've actually looked into DiSC, and I found the same thing. Some people act like your type is your type, and only a few will acknowledge that your type in DiSC might have something to do with your setting. I might test as a DI in one organization and an SC in another, all based on how I perceive my environment. I have also seen some literature that links up the Enneagram with Myers Briggs, that was interesting.

I will say too it depends on the Enneagram theorist you're reading. I've got less appreciation for Palmer's books than I do for Riso& Hudson, in part b/c it seems too much like a collection of stereotypes and less an in depth look that factors in the complexity of the human spirit.

Most of all though, I guess what would have more credibility with me is an actual exposition on specific weaknesses in the theory. I understand that there is some criticism as to the roots, but there is still an actual theory guiding this. So, what's the issue with the theory and its actual working components? I didn't see enough of that in this article. That's what I'm really curious about. Let's look at the theoretical foundations, rather than the history. :)