# Do you prefer MBTI or the Enneagram?



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

100% Enneagram.


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

I prefer Enneagram. I have only come across mbti through the Enneagram. The best however, is to combine the two.
It is true they measure different things. A simplified explanation of the difference: mbti tells us how we do things, Enneagram tells us why we do things.
Mbti is built in a more consistent and orderly way, but Enneagram can appeal more in an intuitive way. My conclusion on my mbti-types was a decision based on logic, my decision on my Enneatype was through some 'Wow, this is me' moment.
I feel closer to people with the same Enneatype than those with the same mbti-type. 
For people working together, their mbti-type might be more important. For friendships and love relationships, the Enneagram is more useful.


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

Gossip Goat said:


> Enneagram because motivations for behaviors are slightly clearer / better to understand.


This is true - Mbti isn't meant to tell us about motivation. While finding a person's motivation is the core of the Enneagram:

Type 1 - perfection
Type 2 - caring
Type 3 - success
Type 4 - identity
Type 5 - independence
Type 6 - security
Type 7 - energy
Type 8 - strength
Type 9 - peace


----------



## Rose for a Heart (Nov 14, 2011)

Enneagram because it gets closer to the "soul" of the person, for me. MBTI is very intelligent in determining the inner workings of a person but it's "outside looking in" as Jung also said these (his impressions of people, specially of his patients) were "empirical data" for him. MBTI is more detached. Enneagram is more inside out as it goes back to early temperament, and the effect of parenting in shaping your _worst fears_ and consequently personality.


----------



## _XXX_ (Oct 25, 2014)

MBTI

Enneagram gives me different results every time. Hm.


----------



## Rascal01 (May 22, 2016)

MBTI. I've had a lot of exposure to MBTI, been tested at least six times, and received some training in the process. It has worked well for me and been very beneficial in my life.

I'd not heard of the Enneagram before joining PerC and have zero knowledge regarding it.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

Let's see...

The MBTI is based on the thesis that if A is internal, B must be external and deductions drawn from that. It makes logical sense, it has no inconsistencies or discrepancies, it follows the scientific method, it's apparent in human thinking, behavior, etc., and the idea were developed by psychologists, notably the infamous Carl Jung, student of Sigmund Freud himself, the man who is credited to have defined modern psychology.

The Enneagram is based on a crack theory that there are only 9 values for no apparent reason and that there are only heart, head and gut, also for no apparent reason. It doesn't follow the scientific method, it's full of inconsistencies and discrepancies, it makes no sense, it's not applicable to human thinking and behavior, and the idea was developed by hippies from south america.

Tell me, which one do you prefer?!


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Personallly... well, it's a hard decision. 

I _prefer_ the MBTI more. It paints a picture of myself that I emotionally connect with better. It gives me a good holistic conception of the person I am and how I respond to and initiate with life. I like identifying as an INFP. It gives me a sense of contentment and value. It also really helped me understand some of my family dynamics at a particularly challenging time in my life. 

On the other hand, the Enneagram has arguably been more useful in terms of personal growth. Typing as a 6 helps me to identify and head off my reactivity more than I ever have been able to in the past. It gives me a good conceptual grounding for behavior that I have found confounding personally and it gives me insight into how to work with and around it. It's also very useful in assessing others' motivations.



Emologic said:


> Let's see...
> 
> The MBTI is based on the thesis that if A is internal, B must be external and deductions drawn from that. It makes logical sense, it has no inconsistencies or discrepancies, it follows the scientific method, it's apparent in human thinking, behavior, etc., and the idea were developed by psychologists, notably the infamous Carl Jung, student of Sigmund Freud himself, the man who is credited to have defined modern psychology.


Putting aside the vaguely ethnocentric comment about hippies from South America, the above still isn't really true. The MBTI has plenty of inconsistencies and discrepancies. Its categories (I/E, N/S, T/F, P/J) are no more scientific than the 9 Enneagram categories. They, too, were simply born of theorizing, not of empirical methods. It is no more possible to "measure" someone's MBTI type than to measure someone's Enneagram type. Its validity is not really any more testable, neither internal nor external (though I do appreciate how it is more internally "balanced"). The most recent official test I read was pretty bad. Don't get me wrong - I _like_ the MBTI. I value it. And the Enneagram certainly has its flaws. But it's not right to pretend like the MBTI is empirical or scientific. It isn't.


----------



## Endologic (Feb 14, 2015)

angelfish said:


> Personallly... well, it's a hard decision.
> 
> I _prefer_ the MBTI more. It paints a picture of myself that I emotionally connect with better. It gives me a good holistic conception of the person I am and how I respond to and initiate with life. I like identifying as an INFP. It gives me a sense of contentment and value. It also really helped me understand some of my family dynamics at a particularly challenging time in my life.
> 
> ...


I'm talking about cognitive functions. The MBTI is 100% based on deductions. The whole letter thing was made to dumb it up for the masses, which worked very well capitalistically, but it destroyed the theory in the community of science.

Get this:


> *By Emologic*
> The MBTI is based on deductions.
> The basic theory is, if A is internal, B is external, and vice versa.
> There are 2 cognitive modes. Perception, and Judgement.
> ...


What makes it relative is that there are technically only 4 types if we balance the functions:

SFJ/NTP
SFP/NTJ
STJ/NFP
STP/NFJ


----------



## TheProphetLaLa (Aug 18, 2014)

I'm more drawn to enneagram. Its more interesting to me.


----------



## HermioneG (Jul 1, 2015)

Can't choose. I agree that they measure different things. I use typing to figure myself out and relate to others. MBTI tells me how people think and how I can better understand and communicate with them. Enneagram is about fears and virtues. This helps me understand what motivates people.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Emologic said:


> I'm talking about cognitive functions. The MBTI is 100% based on deductions. The whole letter thing was made to dumb it up for the masses, which worked very well capitalistically, but it destroyed the theory in the community of science.


Yeahhhh. Nardi's been trying and I applaud it. Maybe someday.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

I prefer MBTI (letters/preferences/dichotomies) for the reasons @Simpson17866 already gave, though I prefer the Enneagram to the cognitive functions. I keep getting drawn into the Enneagram, reading/thinking/posting about it, but sometimes I wonder why I bother with it since I accept so few of its claims. Even treating it as a list of 9 types, without using The arrows, instincts, the spiritual stuff, or any of the other concepts that come with it doesn't entirely work because unlike the MBTI, it doesn't allow for a spectrum where someone can be between two types. The structure of the MBTI works better, not only because of the spectrum thing, but also because each dichotomy can be further divided into facets, so that someone could be a J in some ways and a P in other ways while still having an overall best-fit type. The dichotomy-letter-based MBTI has plenty of flaws, but I think they're easier to overcome because they involve refining our understanding of the preferences rather than completely restructuring the theory.

I like that good Enneagram type descriptions provide rich portraits of some people's personalities, and it describes tendencies that exist with in all of us. I think the Enneagram does have insights to offer, some of which the MBTI has missed. The problem with it is the huge number of unjustified assertions it makes. The best theory would be one that combined the insights of both. (I don't buy the "MBTI and Enneagram deal with completely different aspects of personality" line).


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

Octavarium said:


> I prefer MBTI (letters/preferences/dichotomies) for the reasons @Simpson17866 already gave, though I prefer the Enneagram to the cognitive functions. I keep getting drawn into the Enneagram, reading/thinking/posting about it, but sometimes I wonder why I bother with it since I accept so few of its claims. Even treating it as a list of 9 types, without using The arrows, instincts, the spiritual stuff, or any of the other concepts that come with it doesn't entirely work because unlike the MBTI, it doesn't allow for a spectrum where someone can be between two types. The structure of the MBTI works better, not only because of the spectrum thing, but also because each dichotomy can be further divided into facets, so that someone could be a J in some ways and a P in other ways while still having an overall best-fit type. The dichotomy-letter-based MBTI has plenty of flaws, but I think they're easier to overcome because they involve refining our understanding of the preferences rather than completely restructuring the theory.
> 
> I like that good Enneagram type descriptions provide rich portraits of some people's personalities, and it describes tendencies that exist with in all of us. I think the Enneagram does have insights to offer, some of which the MBTI has missed. The problem with it is the huge number of unjustified assertions it makes. The best theory would be one that combined the insights of both. (I don't buy the "MBTI and Enneagram deal with completely different aspects of personality" line).


Some thoughts I had reading your post:
- First of all, I do think you can be different Enneagram-types. If you see them all as thought patterns (or tendencies), you can see which of these thought patterns do I recognise most in myself. For example, I often think like a Four, but regularly like a Five, and sometimes a bit like a Six or a Nine. Then these types are all parts of your personality. It is not that you are between two types, but you have a bit of all in you, in different measurements. It is kind of a spectrum with nine sides instead of each time two. I usually drop the wings, arrows, instincts and that stuff too.
-Strangely enough, I do think you have one mbti-type (I never identifiedwith any other type - everything I wanted account for, I could with my own type)
-I think the two do measure different things, but the borderline between the two isn't very solid. Enneagram tells us about our motivations, mbti tells us about we think, learn and decide. Surely there's a relation between the two. If you're an Eight, and your key motivation is Strength, that will influence the way you decide, often preferring logical conclusion that you think will work over empathic decisions. Hence they are usually TJ types (or Te-types). I would describe them as two different parts of the same mechanism.
- I think good Enneagram sites don't make unjustified assertions. All the qualities they describe, are logically connected. Every type centers around one idea or key motivation. For example, take type 5:

Their key motivation: BEING INDEPENDENT
SO they spend a lot of time gathering information, so they will be able to make independent decisions.
SO they are looking for imaginative new ideas, because it shows their independent thinking.
SO they will spend a lot of time on the topics they know best (and where they can solely rely on their own independent thinking), and neglecting areas they don't know well.
SO they will often have the tendency to refuse too intimate social contact, because if someone becomes a too big part of your life, you will become dependent.
...

Every aspect of a personality comes together neatly. The same is true about the other types.
Another thing I like about Enneagram, is that each type has something in common with each type. In mbti, there are opposites like INTJ-ESFP (at least if you use the dichotomies - with functions it will become a bit trickier). Enneagram helps you see what you have in common with someone.


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

Peter said:


> Yes, there is a tendency for N's to prefer talking with N's over S's. And in threads where this is discussed you see people focus on this quite fanatically. The MBTI definitely isn't made for everybody to love everybody else. This mere fact may be a sign it's got something to it. Few people question their type. You don't see many S's trying to be N's. When people realize they´re an S, they prefer to stay with that. The same goes for N's. I think it's because it makes sense to them.


First of all, supporters of both can look down on each other. And seeing that the other looks down on you results in you looking even more down on them. I love both, but since most people seem to prefer mbti (there was a poll about it), I usually have to defend Enneagram.
And the bias are real. I do see S's who are convinced they are N's (usually if they are pigeonholed as S-traditional N-creative). Also a bias of F over T. I'm basing this thing on people in real life, who may not have looked at it in full depth. But on the 16personalities -forum I hardly see any S's (much less than here), leading me to suspect some S's might have typed themselves as N's.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

ColdWindsRising said:


> First of all, supporters of both can look down on each other. And seeing that the other looks down on you results in you looking even more down on them. I love both, but since most people seem to prefer mbti (there was a poll about it), I usually have to defend Enneagram.
> And the bias are real. I do see S's who are convinced they are N's (usually if they are pigeonholed as S-traditional N-creative). Also a bias of F over T. I'm basing this thing on people in real life, who may not have looked at it in full depth. But on the 16personalities -forum I hardly see any S's (much less than here), leading me to suspect some S's might have typed themselves as N's.


I think the reason why you find few S's in forums like this, has to do with that participating in forums like this where it's mostly just text, ideas and concepts, is more of an N thing.

Just like you won't find many N's in extreme sports.


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

Peter said:


> I think the reason why you find few S's in forums like this, has to do with that participating in forums like this where it's mostly just text, ideas and concepts, is more of an N thing.
> 
> Just like you won't find many N's in extreme sports.


But what I meant was: there are much more S's on this form than on the 16 personalities form. (There are more N than S on both)
That's why I think there might be some bias of N over S based on the description there. I do think there are a lot of S-types who think there are N-types, and who want to be N because it has a 'smart' reputation.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

ColdWindsRising said:


> Some thoughts I had reading your post:
> - First of all, I do think you can be different Enneagram-types. If you see them all as thought patterns (or tendencies), you can see which of these thought patterns do I recognise most in myself. For example, I often think like a Four, but regularly like a Five, and sometimes a bit like a Six or a Nine. Then these types are all parts of your personality. It is not that you are between two types, but you have a bit of all in you, in different measurements. It is kind of a spectrum with nine sides instead of each time two. I usually drop the wings, arrows, instincts and that stuff too.
> -Strangely enough, I do think you have one mbti-type (I never identifiedwith any other type - everything I wanted account for, I could with my own type)
> -I think the two do measure different things, but the borderline between the two isn't very solid. Enneagram tells us about our motivations, mbti tells us about we think, learn and decide. Surely there's a relation between the two. If you're an Eight, and your key motivation is Strength, that will influence the way you decide, often preferring logical conclusion that you think will work over empathic decisions. Hence they are usually TJ types (or Te-types). I would describe them as two different parts of the same mechanism.
> ...


Yeah I've thought about how to change the Enneagram so it would allow for people who don't fit exactly into one type, and the nine-sided spectrum idea is one I've thought of. I guess it would be a bit like the Big Five, except With the Enneagram's nine types as the factors/traits, and your type would consist of your position on each spectrum (how much type 5 is in your personality, for example). But, although that theory would use material from the Enneagram, it has a completely different structure.

Just about every Enneagram source makes unjustified assertions, for example that types which are connected by the arrow lines have whatever kind of relationship the author of the material thinks the arrows indicate (dis/integration, stress/security, soul child, or whatever). If we ignore all that and only use the nine core types, there are still questions about whether/to what extent the traits within each type correlate (and that's an empirical matter), whether there are enough categories to account for all people and whether those categories are mutually exclusive. Enneagram authors seldom argue for their views on these matters, instead simply asserting them as though they were self-evident or because Naranjo said it and that must make it true. The Enneagram tells a good story, and a lot of its claims sound like they make sense, but often what seems true according to common sense turns out to be inaccurate when tested empirically.


----------



## ColdWindsRising (Feb 11, 2016)

Octavarium said:


> Yeah I've thought about how to change the Enneagram so it would allow for people who don't fit exactly into one type, and the nine-sided spectrum idea is one I've thought of. I guess it would be a bit like the Big Five, except With the Enneagram's nine types as the factors/traits, and your type would consist of your position on each spectrum (how much type 5 is in your personality, for example). But, although that theory would use material from the Enneagram, it has a completely different structure.
> 
> Just about every Enneagram source makes unjustified assertions, for example that types which are connected by the arrow lines have whatever kind of relationship the author of the material thinks the arrows indicate (dis/integration, stress/security, soul child, or whatever). If we ignore all that and only use the nine core types, there are still questions about whether/to what extent the traits within each type correlate (and that's an empirical matter), whether there are enough categories to account for all people and whether those categories are mutually exclusive. Enneagram authors seldom argue for their views on these matters, instead simply asserting them as though they were self-evident or because Naranjo said it and that must make it true. The Enneagram tells a good story, and a lot of its claims sound like they make sense, but often what seems true according to common sense turns out to be inaccurate when tested empirically.


Exactly!!! Well put! I love the description of the Nine types. But I would like to get rid of wings, arrows, tritypes and all those other things. Instead, people just say which types they identify with, and in what measurement. It would be a clearer, purer and easier way to use it.
I don't think there are many inaccurate claims within the type description - only in the claimed relations between the types (wings, arrows, tritypes). I haven't found any proof for them, neither rational nor empirical.
I actually made a thread asking this a while back, but got very negative reactions. The idea of rebellion against the traditional system had just begun to ripe in my head, so I was still a bit insecure about it. Here it is, if you are interested: http://personalitycafe.com/enneagram-personality-theory-forum/852498-fed-up-wings-tritypes.html. Maybe the people who believe this should start an own thread together, or continue there?


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

ColdWindsRising said:


> But what I meant was: there are much more S's on this form than on the 16 personalities form. (There are more N than S on both)
> That's why I think there might be some bias of N over S based on the description there. I do think there are a lot of S-types who think there are N-types, and who want to be N because it has a 'smart' reputation.


Oh sure, there are people who are mistyped, and probably there is a bias of N over S, but I don't think it's all that much because People tend to find out what their type is before they are aware of this bias.

Another weird thing I noticed is that there are a lot of "genderless" people in these forums. I wonder why a larger percentage of them ends up in here.


----------



## hahahalessandra (Jul 13, 2016)

Enneagram helps me understand my flaws and negative feelings, while MBTI shows me not only my flaws but also the ideal person I should be and that I can be. Therefore, I prefer MBTI as it provides a wider description of myself. Nonetheless, the combination of my enneagram and MBTI is exceptionally accurate.


----------



## Aridela (Mar 14, 2015)

I think MBTI and the Enneagram are both tools you can use to understand yourself/others but they have a different focus. 

The MBTI focuses more on how we experience our environment, how our mind works, where feelings sit in there in the system and how we (can/should) approach other people. 

The Enneagram seems to me to be more about what your inner drivers are (your soul even?). It's looking into a deeper level of your subconsciousness and your demons. 

Again, that's my personal take but to me MBTI seems more scientific and the Enneagram more New Age-y.


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

MBTI because I am more familiar with it, so it's naturally how I analyze my behavior (if I have to use either of these incomplete systems) I don't think in enneagram, if that makes any sense.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

MBTI, correctly understood and applied, makes the enneagram system superfluous. That said, no one system is self-contained. They all fall far short when attempting to define people and their personal motivations.


----------



## Parrot (Feb 22, 2015)

I value both equally, because they identify two distinct aspects of personality. I incorporate both when typing myself and others.

I voted Enneagram, though, because it has less votes.


----------



## meaningless (Jul 9, 2016)

Enneagram is fun to use, but it's very psuedosciencey and has no scientific backing

MBTI has much more scientific evidence and has a deeper insight of personality and cognitive functions, although it is still a bit psuedosciencey in some aspects.

I think both concepts are bit.... questionable, but I prefer MBTI over enneagram any day.


----------

