# The difference between 5w4 and 4w5?



## WarmMachines (May 19, 2016)

I am googled this question multiple times, but the inquiry is still not clarified. Can someone please shed some light on it by answering? Is it possible for being a type 5 with a strong 4 wing? Thanks.


----------



## Eu_citzen (Jan 18, 2018)

*5w4*
Will show a preference for 5-ish traits, like:

Tends to emphasize thinking over doing.
Thoughts tends to become all-engrossing; they feel more at home in viewing the world from the POV of their thoughts. 
Which in a way offers a "filter", or detachment, from the real world.

Prefers to attain skills and knowledge to overcome their fears of not being able to operate "properly" in the world.
Which correlates with the base-fear of the 5, namely to be helpless.

Under stress the 5 minimizes needs. I know a 5 who's avoiding socializing, which is actually what she most desires. Because of stress.

*4w5*
Withdraws more to protect their feelings.

Their emotional world is more so their dominant reality (or focus) as opposed to thoughts.

They may show a preference for their subjective world of feelings, creativity, and individualism.

Often feels different then others because they are so caught up in their own world of emotions.
They are highly self-aware, both their strong- and weak-point. They (feel) like they need to be aware of themselves, but at the same time should really move beyond self-awareness as to not get caught up in self-consciousness.

I see no reason why the wing could not be strong. However, chances are one will dominate the other.
I'd say it's partially a matter of self-awareness and/or external help to ID your proper type. I know I needed help.:tongue:


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

The types are tricky for many reasons. @Eu_citzen pointed out some general points that are mostly in line with my own view.

Whenever you have wing types that cross over different areas between heart, mind and body types,
there are certain issues that are set in motion.

Firstly is that there is a deep inner ambivalence about one's main priority.
A 5w6 has no problem sticking purely in the mind as both are pure mind types,
but a 5w4 is conflicted by the issues of image and wanting to feel that how they are perceived matter.
4w3 is conversely all about how the world sees them, but the 4w5 have the distraction of an inner world,
there becomes a need to build a bridge between this inner world and outer perception.
This drives both 4w5 and 5w4 to try to innovate all the time, they become originals,
but they suffer greatly for this mind/image split in terms of stability of strategy.

5w6 and 4w3 wouldn't suffer this divide, though each combination has its own challenges of division of focus.
But also synergies that play on each other, but I won't go too much into that territory.


----------



## WarmMachines (May 19, 2016)

Eu_citzen said:


> *5w4*
> Will show a preference for 5-ish traits, like:
> 
> Tends to emphasize thinking over doing.
> ...


The descriptions were helpful. I know for a fact my emotional world does not dominate my thinking. And minimizing the needs part is very true for me, I always go on "dopamine-fasts" when I need to get something done quickly, under stressful situations. The individualism part is most probably a side effect of my age. I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me. 
Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


----------



## Eu_citzen (Jan 18, 2018)

WarmMachines said:


> The descriptions were helpful. I know for a fact my emotional world does not dominate my thinking. And minimizing the needs part is very true for me, I always go on "dopamine-fasts" when I need to get something done quickly, under stressful situations. The individualism part is most probably a side effect of my age. I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me.
> Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


I've seen enough to believe MBTI and enneagram are complementary, so variations are possible. See it as adding nuance to your MBTI type.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

WarmMachines said:


> I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me. Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


I'm an ISFP in theory I guess, I just choose to express it with the Socionics lable ESI. 
(To hell with anyone who thinks ISFP is SEI) :tongue: 

Your Enneagram and MBTI type does not influence each other directly, they stand somewhat alone.
One can get a certain understanding of the similar concepts, 
that the originators of the Enneagram and MBTI used to craft the typologies.

But that entails *REALLY DEEP DIVES* into both the writings of Carl Jung and Oscar Ichazo.
What you come out with on the other end will be an understanding that is beyond anyone to predict,
you will have picked up some notions that would be called heresy in more ortodox MBTI/Enneagram circles.
Which means that you either keep it to yourself, or you start your own cult.
Personally I've chosen to keep most of my insights to myself, unless I get into interesting discussions,
where my diverging takes are actually appreciated.


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

WarmMachines said:


> The descriptions were helpful. I know for a fact my emotional world does not dominate my thinking. And minimizing the needs part is very true for me, I always go on "dopamine-fasts" when I need to get something done quickly, under stressful situations. The individualism part is most probably a side effect of my age. I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me.
> Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


The Enneagram really has to do with basic desires and fears; examining those in your own life is the only way you'll ever be able to elucidate your true type. Yes, the 5w4 and 4w5 can resemble each other closely on the surface (I thought I was 4w5 for quite a while), but it's those underlying fears that really matter.

If your core type is Four, then Shame will play the largest role in your life. You will secretly crave Attention, perhaps often fantasizing about that moment when your genius/art/music is finally recognized. Yet in your heart of hearts you somehow feel you don't truly deserve it because, after all, you suffer from some undiscoverable, severe flaw that separates you from everyone else. You see what others have—happiness, joy, satisfaction, marriage, relationships, etc.—and you envy them because of what they have that you don't/can't. You're probably dark and brooding, not as flamboyant with your emotions as the 4w3, but still controlled or at least strongly influenced by them, particularly depression. When stressed, the 4w5 will most often react; seeking out someone to vent to and/or mirror the strong emotions he/she is feeling.

If your core type is Five, then Anxiety has been in the background for most of your life. Rather than attention, you crave Security, and likely have gone to great lengths to ensure it. Similar to Fours, Fives feel they lack competence in certain areas (usually physical) that somehow prevents them from going out into the world and surviving, so they compensate by "bulking up" their intellect. They minimize their needs in order to keep the world from overwhelming them, are often single, and can be very insistent in having privacy. All Fives struggle with the need to hoard—not money, necessarily, but certainly energy. Fives keep a running mental tally of all the things they have to do and how much energy they think they'll have left over. Trying to get them to expend more energy than they think they have is, well, a useless exercise. When stressed, the 5w4 tries to appear competent, perhaps becoming cold and analytical towards the stressor in order to maintain that competent image.

As I mentioned earlier, both of these subtypes can resemble each other superficially. Both are usually drawn to the arts (although the 5w4 is more likely to function better in both arts and sciences/math when compared to the 4w5). Both can have an interest in the dark or taboo/macabre. The biggest differentiator here is visibility. 5w4s will likely keep a low profile about their odd endeavors since they don't want others to pry into their business and possibly overwhelm them. 4w5s tend to care less about that and can be quite public with their "oddness."

In a way, it sucks that both of these types are pretty rare, since that means we typically can't find a real-life example to look to. But I hope this explanation helps!


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

WarmMachines said:


> I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me. Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


Sorry, forgot to address the last part of your post.

I wouldn't place too much stock in the relationship between your MBTI and Enneagram types. I've found the MBTI helpful in confirming my Enneatype (I'm a male INFJ, which are often 5w4s). There's a pretty cool study someone did that matched up MBTI and Enneagram, showing you the frequencies of the matchups: https://personalityjunkie.com/07/myers-briggs-enneagram-mbti-types-correlations-relationship/ Great rules of thumb, perhaps, but I wouldn't quote it as "science."

Personally, the ISFPs that I know are all Nines. They tend to be very artistic, like to read/write, and have a wonderful calm and unflappable demeanor about them. In my unprofessional opinion, it would be difficult to justify a primary S-user as a Four or 5w4 since those Enneatypes are among the strongest utilizers of intuition (seeing big picture, connecting dots, innovative thinking), but I suppose that would largely depend on how "strong" of an S-user you are.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

@*brazealnut* 

I read some of the feedback on "My true type", a five star comment gave the following warning.



> *User: **Katniss G*.
> One caveat to my 5 star rating however, is that I have noticed in various places in his writings ( on his website and a few places in this book) that he seems to be of the opinion ( and is not alone in it) that it's fairly impossible for a woman to be a "thinking" type.


At the surface it might not seem like much, but for many who takes typology serious,
it is a catastrophic conclusion, which obviously puts the validity of everything else to the question.
I won't try to justify my resistance to this, in this thread in detail.
Many of my opinions are already recorded here anyway.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WarmMachines said:


> I am googled this question multiple times, but the inquiry is still not clarified. Can someone please shed some light on it by answering? Is it possible for being a type 5 with a strong 4 wing? Thanks.


Motivational distinctions and emotional expressions. A 4 is less likely to hold back strong emotional expressions, whereas a 5 will try harder to mute expressing how they feel, regardless of how much turmoil it puts them under internally. They will disconnect, step back, withdraw. A 4 is far more likely to dive in and bathe themselves in emotional waves. It makes them feel more "real" to do so. It also demonstrates the distinction between the heart and the mind centers.

The difference between 5w4 and 4w5


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WarmMachines said:


> The descriptions were helpful. I know for a fact my emotional world does not dominate my thinking. And minimizing the needs part is very true for me, I always go on "dopamine-fasts" when I need to get something done quickly, under stressful situations. The individualism part is most probably a side effect of my age. I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me.
> Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


"No." Says the 5w6 So/Sx ENTP 584. 

Never stop asking questions. It is your best offense, and defense.


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

Inveniet said:


> @*brazealnut*
> 
> I read some of the feedback on "My true type", a five star comment gave the following warning.
> 
> ...


 @Inveniet

I have read over this post several times now, and I must apologize for my obtuseness. What are you referring to?


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Motivational distinctions and emotional expressions. A 4 is less likely to hold back strong emotional expressions, whereas a 5 will try harder to mute expressing how they feel, regardless of how much turmoil it puts them under internally. They will disconnect, step back, withdraw. A 4 is far more likely to dive in and bathe themselves in emotional waves. It makes them feel more "real" to do so. It also demonstrates the distinction between the heart and the mind centers.
> 
> The difference between 5w4 and 4w5


Very well said, @tanstaafl28! The 4w5s that I know seem to be tortured souls (no offense intended to other 4w5s, of course). They're very, very hard on themselves and appear to have trouble finding their identity. They also seem to enjoy finding songs or poems that mirror/amplify their dark emotional states and read or listen to them over and over. As a Five, even with a strong Four-wing, I don't seem to have that degree of self-loathing and willingness to remain in states of emotional turmoil. I tend to feel my feelings and move on.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WarmMachines said:


> The descriptions were helpful. I know for a fact my emotional world does not dominate my thinking. And minimizing the needs part is very true for me, I always go on "dopamine-fasts" when I need to get something done quickly, under stressful situations. The individualism part is most probably a side effect of my age. I was confused because my MBTI type is a feeler type (ISFP) so the 5w4 was not making sense for me.
> Should the MBTI type always match the Enneagram too?


FYI, being a "thinker" or a "feeler" does not mean what you think it means. A thinker is not necessarily more cold and logical and a feeler more emotional and mushy. 

What it really means is how do you prefer to make _value judgements and decisions_: do you filter your choices by how you think about them, or do you filter them by how you feel about them? Thinkers tend to be more _objective_ and feelers more _subjective_. While it does not always work out this way, it is common for thinkers to prefer to put facts before people, while feelers prefer to put people before facts. Despite this, I've known plenty of emotional thinkers and logical feelers in my day. 

I often say that MBTI is about _preferences_. Our cognitive function stack is our _preferred_ way of interacting and investigating our world, but it is not a limitation. My hypothesis in this is that we find our preferred set of cognitive functions when we are very young, when we're like "sponges" trying to absorb every drop of experience we encounter. Our cognitive function stack becomes the one we discover works best for us, given our individual genetic disposition, our environment, and how we are nurtured. These become our "fallback" functions. We may add others and even become proficient at them, but in times of stress or challenge, we will nearly always fall back to the ones we first learned as babies. This forms the nucleus of our type. It also explains how some of us can vary from the predicted "norm." 

MBTI: Thinking vs Feeling


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

brazealnut said:


> @*Inveniet*
> 
> I have read over this post several times now, and I must apologize for my obtuseness. What are you referring to?


I said thread not post, I didn't enter before many pages have passed.
I'll quote my first entry into that thread, and you should be able to pick up from there I guess.



Inveniet said:


> Hmm, I've reread some of Aion after skimming this thread
> It seems to me that the problem lies with Freuds Oedipus assumptions,
> and that Jung has just imported those assumptions in a very poor way.
> 
> ...


If you intend to debate me on this, you better have very convincing arguments,
else I will just unsubscribe and go watch anime. :tongue:


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

Inveniet said:


> I said thread not post, I didn't enter before many pages have passed.
> I'll quote my first entry into that thread, and you should be able to pick up from there I guess.
> 
> If you intend to debate me on this, you better have very convincing arguments,
> else I will just unsubscribe and go watch anime. :tongue:


It's not that I want to debate you or agree with you, it's simply that I don't understand why you're throwing all of this at me. It seems out of context. I'm posting in a thread about the difference between a 5w4 and 4w5, not about the correlations between Freudian and Jungian psychology/typology. I'm happy to delve further into this; I just need to understand how it relates to what's being said in this thread.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

brazealnut said:


> It's not that I want to debate you or agree with you, it's simply that I don't understand why you're throwing all of this at me. It seems out of context. I'm posting in a thread about the difference between a 5w4 and 4w5, not about the correlations between Freudian and Jungian psychology/typology. I'm happy to delve further into this; I just need to understand how it relates to what's being said in this thread.


I can see how the concerns you bring up is legitimate, but explaining it would cross my previous boundary.
I suggest you reread some of the things I wrote, it shouldn't be too hard to see the context.



Inveniet said:


> At the surface it might not seem like much, but for many who takes typology serious,
> *it is a catastrophic conclusion, which obviously puts the validity of everything else to the question.*


Note the bolded/underlined!



> I won't try to justify my resistance to this, in this thread in detail.


So basically, *sorry no!*
I'm not willing to hand hold people into that rabbit hole, 
unless they are very receptive to the way I process information.
Which you are clearly not.
Good luck though, try not to take it personal, it is just a rule of thumb on my side.


----------



## brazealnut (Nov 20, 2018)

> I can see how the concerns you bring up is legitimate, but explaining it would cross my previous boundary.


I don't know what you mean by "previous boundary," but I'm fine with having no explanation.



> I suggest you reread some of the things I wrote, it shouldn't be too hard to see the context.


Ah, but I have, and I still fail to make the logical leap that you made.



> At the surface it might not seem like much, but for many who takes typology serious,
> it is a catastrophic conclusion, which obviously puts the validity of everything else to the question.


Great, that's fine. I read that the first time you posted it. However, the conclusion it's referring to was that women cannot be Thinkers. I don't agree with that conclusion, therefore the validity of nothing is called into question.



> I'm not willing to hand hold people into that rabbit hole,
> unless they are very receptive to the way I process information.
> Which you are clearly not.
> Good luck though, try not to take it personal, it is just a rule of thumb on my side.


Handholding??? All I've asked is that you give me the context for this onslaught of information, and all I can get from you is that it should be apparent from previous information given. Something as simple as "you said this, therefore I believe this" would be astronomically helpful. The thread you originally quoted has hundreds of pages and is about animus/anima... I've read through many of those pages but I still fail to see how anything I've posted conflicts with that thread.

Anyway, yes, let's drop it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll peruse it as I have time.

Sorry for all the rabbit trails on your thread, @WarmMachines...


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

@*brazealnut* 
You misunderstand me, my simple premise that I thought was clear,
is that *the authors stance on MBTI taints his stance on the Enneagram correlations*.
Hence because the author has that stance, everything he says that he connects up to MBTI is automatically suspect for me.

The anima and animus is the core Jungian concepts that deal with the issue of male/female in Jungian psychology,
that is its relevance here.

I'm sorry if I blew you off too hard, but I really felt I was clear, 
but I realize now that I might have been ambiguous about the Enneagram correlations being the target of my disapproval.
Lot on my plate lately, so hard to focus clearly, 
which is part of the reason why I try not to commit to "holding hands".
:wink:


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Inveniet said:


> I said thread not post, I didn't enter before many pages have passed.
> I'll quote my first entry into that thread, and you should be able to pick up from there I guess.
> 
> If you intend to debate me on this, you better have very convincing arguments,
> else I will just unsubscribe and go watch anime. :tongue:


What exactly does this have to do with comparing/contrasting 5w4 with 5w6?


----------

