# Jung And The Enneagram



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Taken from Amazon.com: Personality Types: Using the Enneagram for Self-Discovery (9780395798676): Don Richard Riso, Russ Hudson: Books



> *Jung and the Enneagram*
> 
> The nine personality types of the Enneagram can also be correlated to the eight "psychological types" of Jungian typology. In the descriptions of each personality type, we correlated a Jungian type to the Enneagram type and gave a relevant quotation from Jung.
> 
> ...


----------



## Spades (Aug 31, 2011)

There is a link @_Wake_ posted once (I'll ask him online since he's taking a break from PerC) which included a large amount of JCF/Enneagram correlations, done by various researchers.

At the end of the day, few/none of them match each other and there is an extremely weak (I would say almost negligible) actual correlation. A huge issue I see is people thinking "I can't be Type X because I'm an XXXX" or "I'm probably a Type X because I'm a XXXX". It annoys me to no end. The two theories are *mutually independent*.

Thanks for the post though.

Edit: Fooound it!! Enneagram-CF Correlations.
Discrepancy much?


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

That is such bull. I'm so excited about how many people might read this and believe it. That will prove to be fun  lol.


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Extraverted is spelt wrong
and it has extraverted feeling for 1 & 2
I would mix those up a bit anyway...


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Ace Face said:


> That is such bull. I'm so excited about how many people might read this and believe it. That will prove to be fun  lol.


Why is it such bull?


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

MrShatter said:


> Why is it such bull?


Stereotype heaven has been created. I'm overflowing with joy.


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Ace Face said:


> Stereotype heaven has been created. I'm overflowing with joy.


That isn't a reason :tongue: it's an effect of ignorance.


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Spades said:


> There is a link @_Wake_ posted once (I'll ask him online since he's taking a break from PerC) which included a large amount of JCF/Enneagram correlations, done by various researchers.
> 
> At the end of the day, few/none of them match each other and there is an extremely weak (I would say almost negligible) actual correlation. A huge issue I see is people thinking "I can't be Type X because I'm an XXXX" or "I'm probably a Type X because I'm a XXXX". It annoys me to no end. The two theories are *mutually independent*.
> 
> Thanks for the post though.



Personality Types: Type Correlations - Enneagram and Myers Briggs
This woman is very knowledgeable in my opinion.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Somebody actually needs to do a _real_ study _before _writing about them in a tone where they sound absolute and concrete when in reality they are just as hocus pocus as any form of non-scientifically proven correlations.


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

MrShatter said:


> That isn't a reason :tongue: it's an effect of ignorance.


Look, if you like the idea, that's your thing. I for one, do not, and I gave you a perfectly good reason as to why. It's just like every "which type is most likely to" thread we have on here. It paves way too many pathways for stereotypes to be derived. Next thing you know, there are going to be herp-n-derp juniors typing people based off this unreliable information.


----------



## kiskadee (Jan 9, 2009)

MrShatter said:


> Extraverted is spelt wrong
> and it has extraverted feeling for 1 & 2
> I would mix those up a bit anyway...


Extroverted and extraverted are both valid spellings.


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Grish said:


> Extroverted and extraverted are both valid spellings.


It's more correct to say extravert when speaking in Jungian terms.



Jawz said:


> Somebody actually needs to do a _real_ study _before _writing about them in a tone where they sound absolute and concrete when in reality they are just as hocus pocus as any form of non-scientifically proven correlations.


If you scroll to the bottom of that page - they have survey data, do you find it insufficient? Why?




Ace Face said:


> Look, if you like the idea, that's your thing. I for one, do not, and I gave you a perfectly good reason as to why. It's just like every "which type is most likely to" thread we have on here. It paves way too many pathways for stereotypes to be derived. Next thing you know, there are going to be herp-n-derp juniors typing people based off this unreliable information.


You say it's bull because it leads to stereotypes. MBTI lead to stereotypes. Plenty. So many people on this site type based on unreliable information it's not even funny. It doesn't mean it's an invalid idea. I'm not saying I like it - I just think if you are going to discredit an idea you need a solid reason - not "It will cause too much uproar with the people". Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you, but that's what I'm taking away.


----------



## Waiting (Jul 10, 2011)

Ace Face said:


> herp-n-derp juniors


lmao. made my day.


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

MrShatter said:


> You say it's bull because it leads to stereotypes. MBTI lead to stereotypes. Plenty. So many people on this site type people based on unreliable information it's not even funny. It doesn't mean it's an invalid idea. I'm not saying I like it - I just think if you are going to discredit an idea you need a solid reason - not "It will cause too much uproar with the people". Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you, but that's what I'm taking away.


I don't like MBTI either, lol. I have every right not to. The stereotype shit gets really old really fast. "More likely to" idealizations usually lead to problems. For instance, the senator of Wisconsin is trying to pass a law because "single parents are more likely to abuse their children". That puts a false stereotype on the single parents who are busting their asses to provide their children with food, shelter, clothes, and adequate love and time. The fact is that many people take statistics/possibilities and treat them as if they were absolutes/100%. Surely you're not so dense as to not see the problem and the effect that stereotypes can have. I don't like this type of thinking. A person can explore into this particular (Jung + Enneagram) possibility all they want, but that does not change the fact that stereotypes can come from it. If you have anything else to say to me, private message me and we'll go from there. I'm not about to rudely derail a thread.


----------



## lolthevoidlol (May 19, 2011)

I don't really understand what this is trying to say. Going by MBTI, my functions are Ni Te Fi Se. Going by this comparision and my enneagram tritype, my functions are Ti Si Nothing?

I dun get it


----------



## Teen Rose (Aug 4, 2018)

six introverted sensing
four introverted feeling


----------

