# Which types common descriptions suck the most?



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Strelok said:


> I'm not sure that the inverse would work out any better.


I can see what you're saying. If they were self aware, it would. However someone just writing from the outside doesn't always hit the mark. I think that's why some types get idealized because people only see the external, but not the internal. Similarly why some types are looked down on. Ideally, it should probably be a collaborative effort. But someone who is of the type being described is the one who's gonna understand the fixations. Others may only be able to give insight into how they externally manifest which isn't very reliable since different types can manifest in similar ways, but combining both would probably produce the most nuance description


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Vaka said:


> I can see what you're saying. If they were self aware, it would. However someone just writing from the outside doesn't always hit the mark. *I think that's why some types get idealized because people only see the external, but not the internal. Similarly why some types are looked down on.* Ideally, it should probably be a collaborative effort. But someone who is of the type being described is the one who's gonna understand the fixations. Others may only be able to give insight into how they externally manifest which isn't very reliable since different types can manifest in similar ways, but combining both would probably produce the most nuance description


I don't know how often that's true... IIRC, RH self-type(d) at 4 and 5 (not sure who was which) and they heavily idealized 5 to a disgusting amount in, at least, Wisdom of the Enneagram. The 5 chapter nearly made me gag, it was so overtly glowing; have a migraine atm so I can't recall 4 immediately, but I think it was similarly idealized. Even if an individual (I don't want to assume what you think) don't see them as such, they're are/were really quick to praise those two types. Likewise, there's two (I think) authors who self-type at 6 and there's not a small number who think their 6 descriptions are somehow subpar. I hate Chestnut's, for example; I think it's stereotypical and very much exaggerated to the point of being, well, stupid. 

Also, people tend to gloss over how glowing their chosen type's chapter can be, and/or how bad another type's can be if they decide they don't relate or don't "like" that type. It's an odd thing.

(And again, I'm _not_ insinuating you, personally, think any particular way about any of this.)

[HR][/HR]
@Asd456
Hey, sorry for not responding yet. Will do when I feel better!


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Paradigm said:


> I don't know how often that's true... IIRC, RH self-type(d) at 4 and 5 (not sure who was which) and they heavily idealized 5 to a disgusting amount in, at least, Wisdom of the Enneagram. The 5 chapter nearly made me gag, it was so overtly glowing; have a migraine atm so I can't recall 4 immediately, but I think it was similarly idealized. Even if an individual (I don't want to assume what you think) don't see them as such, they're are/were really quick to praise those two types. Likewise, there's two (I think) authors who self-type at 6 and there's not a small number who think their 6 descriptions are somehow subpar. I hate Chestnut's, for example; I think it's stereotypical and very much exaggerated to the point of being, well, stupid.
> 
> Also, people tend to gloss over how glowing their chosen type's chapter can be, and/or how bad another type's can be if they decide they don't relate or don't "like" that type. It's an odd thing.
> 
> ...


Yeah that makes sense. When I said the external, I meant more...like for type 4, types 4s will say things like that they want to be authentic or some variation of that, so then some descriptions turn it into, '4s are the most authentic types of the enneagram' or something like that even tho it's just an aspect of the 4's fixation on authenticity to some degree depending on wing and stacking. Like people who don't really understand 4's may actually think 4's are what they want to be as part of their neurosis that comes with the type if they don't dig a little deeper

I believe you were on typewatch at one point...on that site, 4, 5, and 8 were like the holy trio. So idealized to the point people could only don those types if they went through a whole battery of tests that deemed them worthy of such high labels lol. On that site, I remember 5s were the most idealized and I think secondly was 4s, or maybe it was equal


----------



## Myrkur (May 6, 2018)

"Power hungry secretly introverted asshole who hedonizes his way through life while trampling over others' emotions and looking handsome."

That's my probable tritype description when you read between the lines. I imagine, most descriptions do suck to a point when over-generalization or over-simplification takes the helm, because lack of substance usually creates room for unnecessary dramatics.


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

@Paradigm Not a problem. I'm traveling right now so my internet access isn't great as well. Take your time.


----------



## Strelok (Aug 16, 2013)

Paradigm said:


> RH self-type(d) at 4 and 5 (not sure who was which) and they heavily idealized 5 to a disgusting amount in


Their description of the "healthy levels" for 5 are the worst part.


----------



## Brains (Jul 22, 2015)

Level 3 Five in PT sounds like a description of an actual human being. Level 1 and 2 are more expositions of some Platonian idea. Level 1 and 2 Eight descriptions suffer some from the same. Last I read, Six seems very interestingly human. The exaggerated parts are my least favourite of the book. I'm not one to insist all kinds of people be described as equal, but I'd prefer the descriptions be of actual people. Many of Chestnut's descriptions have felt similar - like she's expositing on a concept, not describing living people.

As far as correlating disorders to Enneagram styles, I'm of two minds. On one hand, I don't think the disorders / "stuckness" / general mental health association holds up at all, I doubt that eg. stressing people would drive them to develop OCPD. But many disorders like the aforementioned OCPD can be characterized as healthy aspects of personality taken to an extreme and we'd eg. call an OCPD sufferer a One, since his personality is like that overall.


----------



## bundleofraindrops (Feb 25, 2018)

6 and 1w2 because a lot of obvious 1w2 women seem to want to claim 2w1.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Asd456 said:


> I actually like Ichazo's "ego-go" type 3 description.


True, it's not bad, but... I find it easily conflated with 2w3, and vice versa. I figure that's just because when I read it, I don't find the "efficient" (Competent triad) trait to be emphasized enough or as nuanced as it could be, and I think 2 and 3 can (not necessarily _will_, for 3) both have a need for overt acknowledgement / "flattery."



> This type 6 description is a lot better compared to the rest. Although I don't find certain aspects relatable as well (I'll elaborate if you want me to, when I have time).
> Although not completely accurate, brief, and I only find certain aspects relatable, Naranjo's Sexual 6 covers some of my main drives.
> Trust, or the inability to trust, is a big fixation for me. Since you're a 6, I'm curious if it's the same for you (if it influences or motivates you in a similar way).


An inability to trust other people isn't my main fixation, no. I don't usually look for "ulterior motives," and I don't think everyone is going to "betray" me eventually. Quite the opposite: I tend to ignore that stuff, most of the time, unless I pick up on something that is going to hurt me or that I find untruthful/malicious. Trusting myself, however, can be annoying: trusting my own senses, my own deductions, the logic of others, everything. I try to describe some of it here. I do trust myself over others, but I don't distrust others automatically, either. Mostly I just don't think about them; it's far too exhausting to follow, let alone engage in, that kind of politicking, personally. I can't even manage to manipulate others in any way, like the "let them think it was their idea" people seem to think is okay. As I said in the post I linked, I'm more concerned about reliability (and being reliable means being transparent, to me), though I suppose that can seem like being concerned about trusting in a similar way I'm interpreting your question.

That being said, I do agree the "primary fixation of Trust" is accurate, or more favorable wording, for type 6. It just has a lot of manifestations.


----------



## Houseplant (May 2, 2018)

Honestly, there are stereotypes for every type. Descriptions are never perfect. It's almost more about the "aura" of a type's description than the description itself.

1s - Descriptions of 1s focus on the perfectionism and the morality, while many 1s are funny, personable, and excellent leaders.

2s - Descriptions of 2s make all 2s seem like they are void of intellectualism and strength. Many 2s find themselves in leadership positions. They are not just the "servants."

3s - Some of the worst descriptions for obvious reasons.

4s - Descriptions of 4s are incredibly negative, although 4s have many superpowers that all other types do not. These descriptions also denote type 4 as the "creative" type - something I hate. All types can be creative!

5s - Pretty spot on as far as I can tell. Although, I do know some social 5s who are still introverted wall flowers, but enjoy being in social settings frequently to observe.

6s - A lot of inherent issues with 6 descriptions for obvious reasons. 6s are more than their anxieties.

7s - 7 descriptions are pretty spot on in my experience, except that some 7s are excellent leaders and are not controlled by their scattered minds all of the time.

8s - Some descriptions of 8s neglect to show that some 8s are full of compassion and longing to help others, not just dominate. This has a lot with the health point at 2, but descriptions often focus on the stereotype of the "bully." I could go into issues with 8 descriptions a lot more because I am an 8.

9s - 9s are the hardest to pinpoint in my experience. I have found a lot of 9s do not resonate with so-called descriptions of themselves for various reasons. Some are very emotional (like 4s). Others are very outspoken and stubborn. These are only a couple examples of traits that are left out of 9 descriptions.


----------



## Strelok (Aug 16, 2013)

Houseplant said:


> although 4s have many superpowers that all other types do not.


Such as?



Houseplant said:


> 5s - Pretty spot on as far as I can tell.


Yes. In my experience, 5 cores don't struggle to find their type as often as other types.


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

I actually forgot to respond to this.. I was traveling abroad at the time. I thought about this post when I was replying to another thread recently.



Paradigm said:


> An inability to trust other people isn't my main fixation, no. I don't usually look for "ulterior motives," and I don't think everyone is going to "betray" me eventually. Quite the opposite: I tend to ignore that stuff, most of the time, unless I pick up on something that is going to hurt me or that I find untruthful/malicious. Trusting myself, however, can be annoying: trusting my own senses, my own deductions, the logic of others, everything. I try to describe some of it here. I do trust myself over others, but I don't distrust others automatically, either. Mostly I just don't think about them; it's far too exhausting to follow, let alone engage in, that kind of politicking, personally. I can't even manage to manipulate others in any way, like the "let them think it was their idea" people seem to think is okay.


This is very interesting. I was under the impression that Sixes in general have issues with trusting others. I can say unequivocally that it's definitely a strong fixation. In a sense it's almost like my disproportionate focus on strength is tied to my lack of faith in others. My self-faith is my faith in my own strength or will or knowledge, competence or experience and it seems like the more I trust myself, the more I value strength but the result of that is I'm unable to trust others. I guess you have to submit some degree of control or power to be vulnerable and trust others and perhaps I unconsciously and automatically process this as a resounding no because the idea conflicts with my defense mechanism of strength. Maybe this is also tied to instincts. I'm SX-first, SX/SP and I can see the focus of attention on trusting others as a result of the SX focus on individuals. 



> As I said in the post I linked, I'm more concerned about reliability (and being reliable means being transparent, to me), though I suppose that can seem like being concerned about trusting in a similar way I'm interpreting your question.


Interesting post. I don't think I'm focused on the concept of reliability. I guess I'm ok with the idea that "nothing is reliable" because I would rather rely on myself anyway given that I trust myself more (but the tradeoff is that I can't trust others). 

Thanks for your post! Sorry I'm late.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Asd456 said:


> This is very interesting. I was under the impression that Sixes in general have issues with trusting others. I can say unequivocally that it's definitely a strong fixation. In a sense it's almost like my disproportionate focus on strength is tied to my lack of faith in others. My self-faith is my faith in my own strength or will or knowledge, competence or experience and it seems like the more I trust myself, the more I value strength but the result of that is I'm unable to trust others. I guess you have to submit some degree of control or power to be vulnerable and trust others and perhaps I unconsciously and automatically process this as a resounding no because the idea conflicts with my defense mechanism of strength. Maybe this is also tied to instincts. I'm SX-first, SX/SP and I can see the focus of attention on trusting others as a result of the SX focus on individuals.
> 
> Interesting post. I don't think I'm focused on the concept of reliability. I guess I'm ok with the idea that "nothing is reliable" because I would rather rely on myself anyway given that I trust myself more (but the tradeoff is that I can't trust others).
> 
> Thanks for your post! Sorry I'm late.


Heh, no problem. I haven't been around much this much, either. (PS that's not at the end: my ADHD and pain is kind of hell this week, so this may be a bit long...)

I think when people say "6s can't trust others," there may be a tendency to forget that there's several 6s who just aren't socially-oriented, be it a wide or narrow orientation. The reasons for this are varied, including: mistyping some people as, say, 1 or 5 (etc.), when they may actually be 6, because they aren't as obviously people-oriented; sometimes, it might be projection, since commitment or trust (small t) issues are not inherently type-specific; some people who are distrustful may actually be another type (9, 2, etc.) but self-type as 6 because of the misconception. And that's only a small fraction of the possibilities! I do think it's important to explicitly note that a lot of people everywhere have been betrayed, cheated on, stepped on, and have been "damaged" by that, so we can't exactly make "unable to trust" a litmus test.

But if we focus on 6 in particular, one of the more common reasons, I believe, is because humanity is inherently social, meaning it's _natural_ for "problems with Trust (Faith)" to manifest as "problems Trusting... _people_." It's incredibly common, especially if you're in a society (Western ones, stereotypically) that encourages individualism. However, because humans are infinitely diverse, it stands to reason that the opposite exists, as well: having Trust issues in places that are _not_ socially-oriented. That doesn't mean these 6s don't have a lack of Faith or Trust, it just means their focus lies elsewhere; they're still 6s because they lack Faith/Trust and have the primary preoccupation of Existential Fear, but the orientation is just different.

So for me, my Enneagram-related issues are more rooted in not trusting _the universe itself_ to be transparent, reliable, etc. I could've easily turned into the type of person to be suspicious of others, but somehow I've avoided doing so. It's just not a trait that has stuck, for various reasons that would probably turn into a novel and wouldn't entirely be accurate since it's part personality and part life experience. But regardless, I _think _I'm so caught up in trying to put Faith in myself (albeit, _not_ in a "insecure personality" way, but in a "I must make sure I'm being honest, especially to myself," way) that I don't primarily focus on putting Faith in other people. That doesn't mean I don't get heartbroken over being 'betrayed,' or that I don't have moments of the stereotypical "distrustful 6" attitude, it just means that it's not the first place I put my attention. I tend to drop people (and topics) rather than try actively look for flaws, actually, and I have almost no drive whatsoever "to prove them wrong." It's not particularly great, because I could avoid issues if I weren't this way... But the grass is always greener on the other side, eh?

Because I'm a 6 tongue, I just want to clarify that this is in addition to my other explanations, not replacing any. I still stand by that post you quoted, and the post I linked, as being a facet of myself, too.

Edit: 
* *




I'm wary of truly going too deep down this particular rabbit hole, but one _could_ theorize that this is a fairly natural way for my combo of types - Ni-dom + Te-aux/creative, 6w7 SP/SX - to manifest. It's not exactly common, so it's hard to say. But if I were to go down that hole, it seems like not trusting the universe would be a very Ni thing (what kind of weirdo mistrusts the universe itself?), and being self-centered and too flakey to look for flaws seems like a w7 SP-first, SOC-last thing xD


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

Paradigm said:


> Heh, no problem. I haven't been around much this much, either. (PS that's not at the end: my ADHD and pain is kind of hell this week, so this may be a bit long...)
> 
> I think when people say "6s can't trust others," there may be a tendency to forget that there's several 6s who just aren't socially-oriented, be it a wide or narrow orientation. The reasons for this are varied, including: mistyping some people as, say, 1 or 5 (etc.), when they may actually be 6, because they aren't as obviously people-oriented; sometimes, it might be projection, since commitment or trust (small t) issues are not inherently type-specific; some people who are distrustful may actually be another type (9, 2, etc.) but self-type as 6 because of the misconception. And that's only a small fraction of the possibilities! I do think it's important to explicitly note that a lot of people everywhere have been betrayed, cheated on, stepped on, and have been "damaged" by that, so we can't exactly make "unable to trust" a litmus test.


Interesting. I can see my focus of attention on trusting individuals as a result of my SX-first since the nature of it is directed externally.



> But if we focus on 6 in particular, one of the more common reasons, I believe, is because humanity is inherently social, meaning it's _natural_ for "problems with Trust (Faith)" to manifest as "problems Trusting... _people_." It's incredibly common, especially if you're in a society (Western ones, stereotypically) that encourages individualism. However, because humans are infinitely diverse, it stands to reason that the opposite exists, as well: having Trust issues in places that are _not_ socially-oriented. That doesn't mean these 6s don't have a lack of Faith or Trust, it just means their focus lies elsewhere; they're still 6s because they lack Faith/Trust and have the primary preoccupation of Existential Fear, but the orientation is just different.
> 
> So for me, my Enneagram-related issues are more rooted in not trusting _the universe itself_ to be transparent, reliable, etc. I could've easily turned into the type of person to be suspicious of others, but somehow I've avoided doing so. It's just not a trait that has stuck, for various reasons that would probably turn into a novel and wouldn't entirely be accurate since it's part personality and part life experience. But regardless, I _think _I'm so caught up in trying to put Faith in myself (albeit, _not_ in a "insecure personality" way, but in a "I must make sure I'm being honest, especially to myself," way) that I don't primarily focus on putting Faith in other people. That doesn't mean I don't get heartbroken over being 'betrayed,' or that I don't have moments of the stereotypical "distrustful 6" attitude, it just means that it's not the first place I put my attention. I tend to drop people (and topics) rather than try actively look for flaws, actually, and I have almost no drive whatsoever "to prove them wrong." It's not particularly great, because I could avoid issues if I weren't this way... But the grass is always greener on the other side, eh?
> 
> ...


I wrote a bit about my relationship with trust and faith here.

Interesting that your lack of faith/trust seems to be tied to your focus on reliability whereas my lack of faith is tied to my issues with trusting people and an unconscious fixation on strength.

I don't think I have existential fear though. Existential skepticism or distrust, perhaps. It was really hard for me to relate to 6 because of this fear-based emphasis. I'm curious, would you say you're a highly skeptical person (since you're a 6 and you don't relate to the focus on trusting people)? I'm trying to sort out the different manifestations of our type. lol 

Thanks for your post!


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Asd456 said:


> Interesting. I can see my focus of attention on trusting individuals as a result of my SX-first since the nature of it is directed externally.


Yeah. If you wanted to put it into those terms, I would say a focus on (dis)trusting individuals is first hinted by one's instincts, then by one's wing. An SP-last 6w5 is probably more distrustful than a SOC-last 6w7. I don't think that tells the whole story, merely trends.



> I wrote a bit about my relationship with trust and faith here.
> Interesting that your lack of faith/trust seems to be tied to your focus on reliability whereas my lack of faith is tied to my issues with trusting people and an unconscious fixation on strength.
> I don't think I have existential fear though. Existential skepticism or distrust, perhaps. It was really hard for me to relate to 6 because of this fear-based emphasis. I'm curious, would you say you're a highly skeptical person (since you're a 6 and you don't relate to the focus on trusting people)? I'm trying to sort out the different manifestations of our type. lol
> Thanks for your post!


That was a good post  I related a lot to this part:


> I don't think Sixes simply lack faith in themselves (as the literature likes to emphasize) or others but that they lack faith in the concept of faith in general. My self-faith is my faith in my own strength or will or competence, knowledge or experience but it's not faith. I'll call it a sense of false faith. It's like there's something removed inside of me.


I would agree that I struggle knowing what Faith is in the first place, and especially with putting the concept into something else (believing in a creedo or a person). But I also think that some 6s are (again) opposite and struggle with knowing when to "remove" their Faith from an outside source -- although, I think those people can be 1s just as often, if their focus is on "how right/perfect" (or the opposite) a belief is.

I am a skeptical person... but I don't think I'm a pessimist. I'd say I'm an idealistic skeptic, and I'm quick to change my mind about something. I want to understand things, foremost, although I accept that I'm a biased human and thus can't understand everything. Like, I don't think a human can be a "realist," as one example. I tend to take the opposite stance of people around me, not in attempts to tear it down, but to find the stability. It sounds a bit nitpicky, but I think there's a difference... Many people find that taking a "devil's advocate" to be a safe, comfortable position, but that's not what I'm doing. I dislike the whole "devil's advocate" thing, really, as I think it's taking the attempt to understand something just a step too far. I'm not trying to find the flaws of something, I'm trying to find the merits. And yeah, sometimes finding the merits means you have to criticize, but it doesn't mean you have to take apart every piece and rebuild it. 

My mom is an ISFP 6w5 SP/SO and is far more skeptical / pessimistic / devil's advocate-y than I am, funnily enough. I've been asking her, lately, why she's quick to judge things and poke holes into them. Like, the other day I was looking at an odd product just to figure out wtf it was, but the fact I pulled it up meant she felt she should question why I would want it! She pokes holes in _everything_ and it gets tiring for me. I'm not sure if it's primarily because of the wing difference or the P/J difference, or both, but I can't imagine doing that all day about everything! As I said, I tend to abandon intense questioning in preference of "long-term" observation. And, yeah, I do want to understand things, but only for my own curiosity and desire for predictability of experience, not as a way of self-protection or pushing things away. Sometimes it feels like those uber-skeptical 6s question things so much just so that they give up, ending up in a self-fulling prophecy of the 6 going "I knew it wasn't good enough!" xD


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

Paradigm said:


> Yeah. If you wanted to put it into those terms, I would say a focus on (dis)trusting individuals is first hinted by one's instincts, then by one's wing. An SP-last 6w5 is probably more distrustful than a SOC-last 6w7. I don't think that tells the whole story, merely trends.


I was rushing my last post; I should clarify, I can see the nature of the directed external energy of the focus on trust (or lack thereof) as a result of my SX-first. It is interesting not all Sixes relate to this. As for trust, it is interesting different Sixes fixate on different motivations and not all fixate on the same (trust, reliability, skepticism, etc.).



> That was a good post  I related a lot to this part:


I'm glad it was relatable. Honestly, I probably don't relate to over 90% of type 6 related posts so that's nice to hear. In fact it's easier for me to fit different descriptions if we're going by quantity of type descriptions or posts in general but that's a different topic. 



> I would agree that I struggle knowing what Faith is in the first place, and especially with putting the concept into something else (believing in a creedo or a person). But I also think that some 6s are (again) opposite and struggle with knowing when to "remove" their Faith from an outside source -- although, I think those people can be 1s just as often, if their focus is on "how right/perfect" (or the opposite) a belief is.
> 
> I am a skeptical person... but I don't think I'm a pessimist. I'd say I'm an idealistic skeptic, and I'm quick to change my mind about something. I want to understand things, foremost, although I accept that I'm a biased human and thus can't understand everything. Like, I don't think a human can be a "realist," as one example. I tend to take the opposite stance of people around me, not in attempts to tear it down, but to find the stability. It sounds a bit nitpicky, but I think there's a difference... Many people find that taking a "devil's advocate" to be a safe, comfortable position, but that's not what I'm doing. I dislike the whole "devil's advocate" thing, really, as I think it's taking the attempt to understand something just a step too far. I'm not trying to find the flaws of something, I'm trying to find the merits. And yeah, sometimes finding the merits means you have to criticize, but it doesn't mean you have to take apart every piece and rebuild it.
> 
> My mom is an ISFP 6w5 SP/SO and is far more skeptical / pessimistic / devil's advocate-y than I am, funnily enough. I've been asking her, lately, why she's quick to judge things and poke holes into them. Like, the other day I was looking at an odd product just to figure out wtf it was, but the fact I pulled it up meant she felt she should question why I would want it! She pokes holes in _everything_ and it gets tiring for me. I'm not sure if it's primarily because of the wing difference or the P/J difference, or both, but I can't imagine doing that all day about everything! As I said, I tend to abandon intense questioning in preference of "long-term" observation. And, yeah, I do want to understand things, but only for my own curiosity and desire for predictability of experience, not as a way of self-protection or pushing things away. Sometimes it feels like those uber-skeptical 6s question things so much just so that they give up, ending up in a self-fulling prophecy of the 6 going "I knew it wasn't good enough!" xD


I actually don't relate to the devil's advocate label of 6 or the taking the opposite stance of people around me so that's quite interesting. 

From what I can gather it seems like you don't quite fit the questioning label or trait of the 6. Do you relate to the whole rebelling against or being fearful or submitting to authority trait of 6 (I'm assuming no at this point, it's probably just a misunderstanding of the skeptical or questioning nature of the type)?

Thanks for your post.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Asd456 said:


> I was rushing my last post; I should clarify, I can see the nature of the directed external energy of the focus on trust (or lack thereof) as a result of my SX-first. It is interesting not all Sixes relate to this. As for trust, it is interesting different Sixes fixate on different motivations and not all fixate on the same (trust, reliability, skepticism, etc.).


Hey, sorry for the delay. I alluded to it before but now I can confirm my mental health has kinda sucked lately, hence delays. I went through like three drafts of this post for no real reason, for example >_<

Anyway:
Yeah, that's why 6 is interesting, I think. But it can easily put off people, being so complex. A lot of 6s get upset that it can't be more black and white, but I almost distrust anything seems to be B&W so I'm glad it's not. If something isn't 'complex,' it's probably not finished or thought through, so my brain starts doubting it!



> I'm glad it was relatable. Honestly, I probably don't relate to over 90% of type 6 related posts so that's nice to hear. In fact it's easier for me to fit different descriptions if we're going by quantity of type descriptions or posts in general but that's a different topic.


Yup, I can relate to that, too xD Lately I've been relating to the 5/8 line, which is actually quite unusual for me... It's not so much that I never related to them before, more that I've always related to their words but not their motives and it's been somewhat clear-cut like that. I usually steer more towards the 1/7 line much harder.

Though as I reflect on it... It's most likely because (4/)5/8 get all the "outcast," "rebel" stereotypes that we (as 6s) aren't 'allowed' to relate to. I've been feeling very outcasty lately. (I apologize if that feeling taints my more current messages xD)



> I actually don't relate to the devil's advocate label of 6 or the taking the opposite stance of people around me so that's quite interesting.


I'm mildly surprised to hear that, although I didn't think you would be a more "severe" devil's advocate. I know I kinda ranted about it in that post, but it's not always a bad thing to be. Like, I want people to point out if I'm being dishonest or something, and I like talking things over which usually means pointing out the "bad" stuff. I just don't like my motives/thoughts being assumed, mostly. They're usually misunderstood... But I'm sure it's usually my own fault, not being a great conversationalist and all.



> From what I can gather it seems like you don't quite fit the questioning label or trait of the 6. Do you relate to the whole rebelling against or being fearful or submitting to authority trait of 6 (I'm assuming no at this point, it's probably just a misunderstanding of the skeptical or questioning nature of the type)?


I do relate to the questioning nature, actually  But it depends on context. I'm intellectually curious and I routinely seek new things out. I'm often asking people (those close to me) about things, anything from random facts to subjective opinion; me asking something seemingly random isn't seen as weird, the more they know me. I just don't relate the the "vigilance" side of "being questioning." I think, to sum up how I relate to 6, I would say I do share many the 6 stereotypes/traits _up until_ one tries to apply those stereotypes to the social arena, at which point I tend to stop relating.

It's just that I've always been set aside in my life, in various ways. I guess you could sum it up as me always being an "independent thinker," but that doesn't feel right. Not quite sure what phrase would, but for all that I've always _felt_ like I'm fairly "everyman," once I open my mouth and try to relate to people around me, it becomes obvious that... I wasn't affected by the same things my peers were. And like, I've never had a role model, because I never felt like "living up to" anything, or like there was anyone else "like me." In primary/secondary school, the most common reason I got into trouble wasn't that I was making trouble or breaking rules, it was that I wouldn't 'follow orders' I didn't understand - but once you explained it to me in a way my child mind understood, I was more than happy to help. And when I did that, I never (still don't) thought of that as "rebellion," because I never questioned their motives or their status, I just questioned how it was beneficial or logical. (I got lucky that my mom understood this about me and I didn't receive as much flak as I could've.) Since I didn't go out of my way to break rules, I was overall seen as a nice, but stubborn, child. 

So, socially, I've always been very much a sort of... floating island, I guess would be an okay metaphor: I didn't interact with the world much at all, and the world didn't interact with me. That's somewhat uncommon, but I believe there are some people who are like that, for whatever reasons, and they may or may not be 6s. I don't believe that always results in being/becoming a 4/5, in other words. And, in me, you could say it resulted in my "6(w7) issues" being more internalized than typically seen from most other 6(w7)s. 

Anyway, yes, I'm a questioner :tongue: Probably even moreso as I grow up and notice the world around me more, and notice how many things are corrupted or unfair.


I was wondering, how do you relate to the stereotypes of 6 and leadership? I find myself at a similar place as I started above, that it's not an easy answer for me to say "I'm a leader" or "I'm a follower." I hate being responsible for other people, so I usually fly under the radar as a "follower" who will immediately question if things start to feel sour. Overall, I just rather things be easy, honest, etc, but humans never make it easy, so most of the time I feel like I'd rather not be involved but end up getting so indignant on others' behalf that I fight for 'em. (Which some people would have you believe is 8ish. It's pure 6/1 for me, at the end of the day!)


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

Paradigm said:


> Hey, sorry for the delay. I alluded to it before but now I can confirm my mental health has kinda sucked lately, hence delays. I went through like three drafts of this post for no real reason, for example >_<


I'm sorry to hear that. Please don't feel pressured to post in a specific timeframe. Take your time and I hope you're feeling better. 



> I'm mildly surprised to hear that, although I didn't think you would be a more "severe" devil's advocate. I know I kinda ranted about it in that post, but it's not always a bad thing to be. Like, I want people to point out if I'm being dishonest or something, and I like talking things over which usually means pointing out the "bad" stuff. I just don't like my motives/thoughts being assumed, mostly. They're usually misunderstood... But I'm sure it's usually my own fault, not being a great conversationalist and all.


I know a 6w7 Sx/So who fits the devil's advocate more but I don't relate to it. I've also met a lot more ENTP 7's similar to the devil's advocate description, come to think of it. 

If I am in an argument with someone my aim is to point out why they're wrong, it's nothing personal. In my mind I'm just telling the truth or pointing out their inconsistencies. I don't really take the opposite stance of people around me, it's more of a tendency or compulsion to want to correct someone or point out the truth.



> It's just that I've always been set aside in my life, in various ways. I guess you could sum it up as me always being an "independent thinker," but that doesn't feel right. Not quite sure what phrase would, but for all that I've always _felt_ like I'm fairly "everyman," once I open my mouth and try to relate to people around me, it becomes obvious that... I wasn't affected by the same things my peers were. And like, I've never had a role model, because I never felt like "living up to" anything, or like there was anyone else "like me." In primary/secondary school, the most common reason I got into trouble wasn't that I was making trouble or breaking rules, it was that I wouldn't 'follow orders' I didn't understand - but once you explained it to me in a way my child mind understood, I was more than happy to help. And when I did that, I never (still don't) thought of that as "rebellion," because I never questioned their motives or their status, I just questioned how it was beneficial or logical. (I got lucky that my mom understood this about me and I didn't receive as much flak as I could've.) Since I didn't go out of my way to break rules, I was overall seen as a nice, but stubborn, child.
> 
> So, socially, I've always been very much a sort of... floating island, I guess would be an okay metaphor: I didn't interact with the world much at all, and the world didn't interact with me. That's somewhat uncommon, but I believe there are some people who are like that, for whatever reasons, and they may or may not be 6s. I don't believe that always results in being/becoming a 4/5, in other words. And, in me, you could say it resulted in my "6(w7) issues" being more internalized than typically seen from most other 6(w7)s.
> 
> ...


I'm guilty of questioning motives. If that's not something you pay attention to, that's interesting. 

I don't relate to the everyman association. I think it's overemphasized, insignificant and irrelevant. 

I don't feel partial to being a leader or a follower. My view is if a leader is incompetent, then that person should step down. If I am the right person or the only person for the position, I don't mind fulfilling the role but it's more about principle or just common sense. I have a detached or unemotional view on leadership (it's essentially a means to an end and just delegating). I wouldn't describe myself as a follower but if a leader is more qualified than me I don't see why I wouldn't let the person lead the group, unless the person fucks up.

It all goes back to my core motivation - trust (or lack thereof). If you're incompetent, why should I trust you? You should step down (I suppose this is the rebelling against authority or leadership part) but again seems like it's just common sense. This is why I think it misses the point to over-focus on buzzwords or behavioral traits instead of underlying patterns and motivations because you end up with mischaracterizations. 

Thanks for your question. :tongue2: It's nice to examine differences and similarities of the same type. If you have any 6 related questions, let me know.

edit: I do relate to fighting for other people. I see it as a tendency to point out the truth, perhaps motivated by a lack of trust.


----------



## brianbsmiley (Jun 29, 2013)

As a type 3, I find that when I read descriptions about my type it misses the mark by a lot. It paints us as these awfully vain and selfish people, which is so far from the truth. A lot of the descriptions make it seem like money and prestige are the most important things to us and that we are so hollow and empty inside. Even our basic fear of being worthless seems to only scratch the surface of what really goes on in our heads.

Believe me when I tell you, as a type 3, we have so much more depth than what the stereotypes portray. Feeling worthless, or the fear of actually being worthless, goes so much into absolutely everything I do in order to prevent that from ever happening. And it is not necessarily this need to be the best or be better than others. 

I've tried to understand the enneagram in terms of childhood wounds as well, and that can be quite tricky to understand. There are some wounds or "traumas" from my childhood that seem to relate to quite a few of the enneagram types core wounds. So I tried to dig even deeper to figure out what aspect of that particular wound led me to feel a particular way. For example, I can't just say my core wound is fear of abandonment if I had a friend betray and leave me. It's deeper than that. As a 3, I had to realize that almost every wound has resulted in me feeling completely worthless, no matter what happened.

I recently just got out of a terribly toxic relationship and it has definitely taken its toll on me emotionally. Outwardly, it looks like I am fine and that I moved on. On the inside, however, I’m left completely hurt and broken. This person blocked me on everything without even wanting to have a conversation about my needs and come to a compromise about a certain issue. Just threw me away like garbage and now it’s as if I didn’t exist to him. That is the part of me that makes me feel the worthlessness, that thing that I and many 3s have feared. It’s like I did so much for us in the relationship and wanted that recognition of being the perfect boyfriend and I never even got that recognition. The more I didn’t get the recognition, the more I craved it from the person I thought was supposed to give it to me the most, and that caused me to try harder and harder to get that from him. 

In the end, I was left completely exhausted and destroyed inside. That disintegration to 9 is true as well. Feeling completely out of touch with everything and just kind of floating through life in a haze. That is so not like me normally. I am usually way more efficient and confident and outgoing. But like I said, I feel like it only scratches the surface of that. 

I’m curious how other 3s feel about these descriptions as well…


----------

