# MBTI/Enneagram combo common mistypes



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> - 4s and 5s are usually Ns


 IMO, this is just a myth caused by misunderstandings and mistypings. I can understand why people think it's true, though.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Paradigm said:


> IMO, this is just a myth caused by misunderstandings and mistypings. I can understand why people think it's true, though.


I think it is a true correlation, just one that is over exaggerated.
PS: definitely agree about INFPs. I think the most common type for INFP is 6w7


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> I think it is a true correlation, just one that is over exaggerated.


 Yeah, that's better phrasing. A lot of INxx (edit: and IxTx) identify with 5 because of how withdrawn it is, regardless of true type.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Paradigm said:


> Yeah, that's better phrasing. A lot of INxx identify with 5 because of how withdrawn it is, regardless of true type.


exactly, the core of type 5 is essentially a fear of venturing out into the unknown. in that regard it actually fits pretty well with ISTJ


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

What do you think of how enneagram typing is put here?


It would seem that certain mbti types might correlate with attachment, frustration, or rejection object relation, although I am not sure. I think this might be easier to determine than what triad you belong to. (I have a hard time figuring that out, anyway.) Using myself as an example, (I had forgotten about this method), I can assuredly say I am a frustration type, it's something I do in endless loops. Therefore, if this method is actually accurate, that would mean I am a 4, 7, or 1. 

Anyone more well versed in these things than I am have an opinion?


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

brainheart said:


> It would seem that certain mbti types might correlate with attachment, frustration, or rejection object relation, although I am not sure. I think this might be easier to determine than what triad you belong to. (I have a hard time figuring that out, anyway.) Using myself as an example, (I had forgotten about this method), I can assuredly say I am a frustration type, it's something I do in endless loops. Therefore, if this method is actually accurate, that would mean I am a 4, 7, or 1.


When I first came across those descriptions (last week or so), I was shocked at how well the frustration triad--specifically, type 1, but all three really--described me. It's no wonder why, I'm 6*w7*-*1*w9-*4*w5.

I think the descriptions there are a little biased: thinking and attachment sounds like sp-first. I'd have to be _really truthful_ to myself to type as an attachment triad by what TC said about it... EI's way of saying it isn't any more appealing. No one describes 6 well, I swear; apparently we're all co-dependent.


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

Paradigm said:


> When I first came across those descriptions (last week or so), I was shocked at how well the frustration triad--specifically, type 1, but all three really--described me. It's no wonder why, I'm 6*w7*-*1*w9-*4*w5.
> 
> I think the descriptions there are a little biased: thinking and attachment sounds like sp-first. I'd have to be _really truthful_ to myself to type as an attachment triad by what TC said about it... EI's way of saying it isn't any more appealing. No one describes 6 well, I swear; apparently we're all co-dependent.



I didn't think the attachment description sounded bad at all; it sounds content to me. Contentment can be a very good thing. What do you think would be a better way to describe attachment, though?


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

Actually, I really like these descriptions of the triads.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

brainheart said:


> I didn't think the attachment description sounded bad at all; it sounds content to me. Contentment can be a very good thing. What do you think would be a better way to describe attachment, though?


I was combining attachment + 6 in my head when I wrote that. For the record:


TypologyCentral said:


> People with the *attachment object relation* tend to have a sense of contentment that their needs (with people, situation, thinks) are being met. Their sense of self is based on being deeply attached to things perceived as good. To attach themselves, these types adapt their ways to be consistent with important people or things.
> *Thinking & Attached - Six:* Sixes adapt their belief systems to be consistent with those of an authority figure or system. Sixes doubt their own ability to cope with the world, so they seek security through another person or system. Their sense of self is based on an attachment or association and loyalty to important people or groups.





EnneagramInstitute said:


> *Attachment* represents the desire of the ego to maintain a comfortable and stable relationship with people or things that are identified with. Simply put, we want to hold onto whatever works well for us, be it a person, a job, a self-image, a feeling state, or a comfortable chair. The *Attachment-based Group* includes types Three, Six, and Nine. These types have problems with deeply held attachments to people, situations, or states that are "working" for them.
> *Sixes* have learned to associate certain relationships, social situations, groups, and beliefs with their security and safety. They invest themselves in these attachments and defend them, even when they may actually be harmed by them. (For example, a Six may stay in a bad marriage or a job out of a belief that it is necessary for security.)


The way I've described the attachment triad is "they prefer not alienating people, that they find more security in being 'nice' (doesn't mean they _like_ people, mind)." They raise a good point, though, about actual objects instead of simply relying on the social; I'll have to incorporate that. I realize my way of saying it isn't all that accurate, either.

But seriously, I can't see many 6s saying "YEAH that's who I am!" based off of those blurbs. Especially the counter-phobics and the soc-lasts and the Fi-users. Despite being the most common type, it's seemingly impossible for anyone to describe it well.



brainheart said:


> Actually, I really like these descriptions of the triads.


I'll read over it. You'll probably be interested in this page, too.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> I agree, with a few differences
> - I tend to think Fe when I think 2, so maybe xxFJ as opposed to ExFx
> - 3s are actually very likely to be Ps. I would just say Exxx
> - 4s and 5s are usually Ns


I purposely alluded to cognitive functions, because I figured this would become a muddling of three systems instead of two. Jung uses cognitive functions (Fe, Ne, Te, etc), MBTI uses dichotomies (F, N, T, etc). The enneagram and Jung’s cognitive system cannot correlate because well Jung’s functions are just that cognitive where they solely focus on how we mentally process and arguably are with at birth. The enneagram is far more complex and comprehensive combining, mental, emotional and our make-up due to environmental influences. 

If we were to compare Jung and the enneagram, it may look like this:
E1 - Te
E2 - Fe
E3 – all etraverting cognitive functions
E4 – Fi or Ni
E5 - Ti
E6 – Si or Se
E7 – Se or Ne
E8 - Te
E9- Fi/Ti-Se-Ne

But this limits the cognitive function process as well since we are more than just one cognitive function. If you look at the enneagram, you must take into consideration the most basic principles of the triad: Head, Instinctual and Heart which breaks down to 5-6-7, 8-9-1 and 2-3-4. However the 3-6-9 are actually opposites of their respective triads in 3 struggling to deal with matters of the heart (ergo dominant thinking), 9 struggling to deal with their instinctual side and 6 being unsure of their thinking. We could go on but it becomes quite complex.

I do appreciate where the Fe could be equal to E2, but I would think that there are many EFP types who are 2 as well. As for 3, I am reminded of Riso and Hudson’s basic description:


> Threes are self-assured, attractive, and charming. Ambitious, competent, and energetic, they can also be status-conscious and *highly driven for advancement*. They are diplomatic and poised, but can also be overly concerned with their image and what others think of them. *They typically have problems with workaholism and competitiveness.* At their Best: self-accepting, authentic, everything they seem to be—role models who inspire others.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@Functianalyst

I think it would look more like this (with lesser similarities/correlations in parenthesis)
1: Si, Te (Fi, Fe)
2: Fe 
3: Fe, Te, Se
4: Ni (Fi)
5: Ti, Ni (Si)
6: anything
7: Ne, Se
8: Te, Se (Fi, Ni)
9: any I function


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

I implemented information to your information based on Riso & Hudson:

1: Si, Te (Fi, Fe)
Ones are conscientious and ethical, with a strong sense of right and wrong. They are teachers, crusaders, and advocates for change: always striving to improve things, but afraid of making a mistake. Well-organized, orderly, and fastidious, they try to maintain high standards, but can slip into being critical and perfectionistic. They typically have problems with resentment and impatience. 

2: Fe 
Twos are empathetic, sincere, and warm-hearted. They are friendly, generous, and self-sacrificing, but can also be sentimental, flattering, and people-pleasing. They are well-meaning and driven to be close to others, but can slip into doing things for others in order to be needed. They typically have problems with possessiveness and with acknowledging their own needs.

3: Fe, Te, Se
Threes are self-assured, attractive, and charming. Ambitious, competent, and energetic, they can also be status-conscious and highly driven for advancement. They are diplomatic and poised, but can also be overly concerned with their image and what others think of them. They typically have problems with workaholism and competitiveness. At their 

4: Ni (Fi)
Fours are self-aware, sensitive, and reserved. They are emotionally honest, creative, and personal, but can also be moody and self-conscious. Withholding themselves from others due to feeling vulnerable and defective, they can also feel disdainful and exempt from ordinary ways of living. They typically have problems with melancholy, self-indulgence, and self-pity. 

5: Ti, Ni (Si)
Fives are alert, insightful, and curious. They are able to concentrate and focus on developing complex ideas and skills. Independent, innovative, and inventive, they can also become preoccupied with their thoughts and imaginary constructs. They become detached, yet high-strung and intense. They typically have problems with eccentricity, nihilism, and isolation.

6: anything
The committed, security-oriented type. Sixes are reliable, hard-working, responsible, and trustworthy. Excellent "troubleshooters," they foresee problems and foster cooperation, but can also become defensive, evasive, and anxious—running on stress while complaining about it. They can be cautious and indecisive, but also reactive, defiant and rebellious. They typically have problems with self-doubt and suspicion.

7: Ne, Se
Sevens are extroverted, optimistic, versatile, and spontaneous. Playful, high-spirited, and practical, they can also misapply their many talents, becoming over- extended, scattered, and undisciplined. They constantly seek new and exciting experiences, but can become distracted and exhausted by staying on the go. They typically have problems with impatience and impulsiveness. 

8: Te, Se (Fi, Ni)
Eights are self-confident, strong, and assertive. Protective, resourceful, straight-talking, and decisive, but can also be ego-centric and domineering. Eights feel they must control their environment, especially people, sometimes becoming confrontational and intimidating. Eights typically have problems with their tempers and with allowing themselves to be vulnerable. 

9: any I function
Nines are accepting, trusting, and stable. They are usually creative, optimistic, and supportive, but can also be too willing to go along with others to keep the peace. They want everything to go smoothly and be without conflict, but they can also tend to be complacent, simplifying problems and minimizing anything upsetting. They typically have problems with inertia and stubbornness.


----------



## PlushWitch (Oct 28, 2010)

...maybe I'm going to repeat something...

I like to believe that there's no real but only an imaginary correlation between cognitive functions and Enneagram types that is based on biassed MBTI type descriptions and people being wrongly able to relate to certain Enneagram or MBTI types because of their actual type combination.

An introverted 6w7 with a strong 7 wing can mistype as SO many different types that it's not even funny...that's partly because 6w7 descriptions are typically extraverted. And it might make an "iNtuitive" seem less "intuitive" while it can make a "Sensor" seem less "sensing".

6w7 as such do already mistype as 4w3, 7w6, 9w1, 5w4, 4w5, (cp=>) 8, 2w3... the most common mistype seems to be actually 4w5 for INFx 6w7s.

ENFJ 9w8 ~ INFJ 6w7
ISTJ 6w7 ~ INFP 6w5 (not sure)
...blah...

2s will probably mistype as Fe-users. (Yes, I'm also mixing MBTI and JCF right now. But I think that's legitimate since that's also part of why there are those confusions...)
6s can mistype as anything (BUT: depending on their actual CF and/or MBTI preferences)
5s will probably mistype as NTs
7s will probably mistype as EPs
8s will probably mistype as ETJs
1s will probably mistype as Js
9s will probably mistype as ..anything since they relate to anything...
3s will probably mistype as ETs (<= haha. ;P)
4s will probably mistype as INFs

INFJs will often mistype as 4s and 5s
INFPs might often mistype as 4 and 9
ISFJs might mistype as 1s
ISFPs might mistype as 4, 9, 7?
ENFJs might mistype as 2, 7, 8, 6...
ENFPs might mistype as 7 and 4
ESFJs might mistype as 2, 1, 8, 7, 6
ESFPs might mistype as 7...hm...
INTJs will most likely mistype as 5s
INTPs will most likely mistype as 5s
ISTJs might mistype as 1, 6...?
ISTPs might mistype as 7, 9, ...? [EDIT: 5]
ENTJs might mistype as 8, 3, 5
ENTPs might mistype as 3...hm..
ESTJs might mistype as 1, 8, 3
ESTPs might mistype as 7, 3...

And mistypes might be due to tritypes...

oh man... blah. x)


----------



## madhatter (May 30, 2010)

PlushWitch said:


> ISTPs might mistype as 7, 9, ...?


ISTPs are most likely to mistype as 5, since 5 triggers our Ti-dominance and withdrawn nature. On the ISTP thread "What's your Enneagram type?" the majority of votes is for type 5, when I know for a fact that many who voted 5 had turned out to be something else, including myself. 

I've seen ISTPs type as 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. All over the place.


----------



## dollybones_90 (Jan 22, 2012)

Does anyone think that both enneagram and mbti types are subject to change based on circumstances?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

madhatter said:


> ISTPs are most likely to mistype as 5, since 5 triggers our Ti-dominance and withdrawn nature. On the ISTP thread "What's your Enneagram type?" the majority of votes is for type 5, when I know for a fact that many who voted 5 had turned out to be something else, including myself.
> 
> I've seen ISTPs type as 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. All over the place.


I think most ISTPs are are 6, 9 or 8 with a few 7s and 5s


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

dollybones_90 said:


> Does anyone think that both enneagram and mbti types are subject to change based on circumstances?


No neither change, the type adapts with MBTI types using the cognitive function necessary to handle the circumstance and enneagram types integrating or disintegrating.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> exactly, the core of type 5 is essentially a fear of venturing out into the unknown.


No. 5s fear the unknown, but will venture out into it to make it known, although this might depend on MBTI type or just individual characteristics also.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> No. 5s fear the unknown, but will venture out into it to make it known, although this might depend on MBTI type or just individual characteristics also.


5s venture out when they integrate to 8. until then, they prefer to remain detached and learn by observing, analyzing and studied...methods requires as little experience as possible.


----------



## Wake (Aug 31, 2009)

PlushWitch said:


> 2s will probably mistype as Fe-users. (Yes, I'm also mixing MBTI and JCF right now. But I think that's legitimate since that's also part of why there are those confusions...)
> 6s can mistype as anything (BUT: depending on their actual CF and/or MBTI preferences)
> 5s will probably mistype as NTs
> 7s will probably mistype as EPs
> ...


Given that the subject types themselves starting with the preferences, why do you say that someone would mistype as those preferences? I would think that they would be characteristics most likely influenced by your Etype.


----------



## PlushWitch (Oct 28, 2010)

Wake said:


> Given that the subject types themselves starting with the preferences, why do you say that someone would mistype as those preferences? I would think that they would be characteristics most likely influenced by your Etype.


If a certain Enneagram type would automatically make you use certain cognitive functions that would mean that nobody could have an Enneagram type that's non-stereotypical for their MBTI type. But I have seen so many people (including myself) who aren't that stereotypical. @pinkrasputin, @Stephen and I have almost identical tritypes, yet our cognitive functions are completely different.

I also know of 1s with very different cognitive functions. Right now I can think of INFJ, ISTJ and INFP 1s I know. And I don't think that's limited to those. And the INFP 1 has mistyped himself as an INFJ, btw. But he's still an INFP.


----------



## Wake (Aug 31, 2009)

PlushWitch said:


> If a certain Enneagram type would automatically make you use certain cognitive functions that would mean that nobody could have an Enneagram type that's non-stereotypical for their MBTI type. But I have seen so many people (including myself) who aren't that stereotypical. @pinkrasputin, @Stephen and I have almost identical tritypes, yet our cognitive functions are completely different.
> 
> I also know of 1s with very different cognitive functions. Right now I can think of INFJ, ISTJ and INFP 1s I know. And I don't think that's limited to those. And the INFP 1 has mistyped himself as an INFJ, btw. But he's still an INFP.


I point to personal experience in dealing with the fixation of an Etype as making someone capable of typing outside of even the most likely MBTI function. Personally, I could never imagine type 1 being anything but J, and stats indicate a strong majority are, but there are some that aren't. We don't perceive our Etype's motivation quite the same way, and end up applying ourselves differently because our goal is different though generally of the same Etype.


----------



## PlushWitch (Oct 28, 2010)

Wake said:


> I point to personal experience in dealing with the fixation of an Etype as making someone capable of typing outside of even the most likely MBTI function. Personally, I could never imagine type 1 being anything but J, and stats indicate a strong majority are, but there are some that aren't.


J/P is not a very fixed thing... in Socionics an INFJ is and INFp and an INFP is an INFj. So where should you draw the line there? And actually I don't even believe it's possible to draw that line.


----------



## Wake (Aug 31, 2009)

PlushWitch said:


> J/P is not a very fixed thing... in Socionics an INFJ is and INFp and an INFP is an INFj. So where should you draw the line there? And actually I don't even believe it's possible to draw that line.


It is rather subjective, but to identify more with the typical P tendencies instead of J is hard to imagine.

I thought I would give my two cents on the topic, but MBTI isn't very appealing to me to carry on this conversation any further.


----------

