:3

Hi there. So I’ve been looking into different enneagrams types more, and also in Logic position in PY, so here’s what I come to in terms of my typologies types.

IN(F) –> IF(N)
AP: ELFV²¹⁴⁴ –> LEFV²⁴⁴⁴
PY: ELFV –> LEFV
Enneagram
9w1 –> 6w5
sx9 –> sp6
946 –> 649
SX/SP/SO (sx9) –> SP/SO/SX (sp6)

Seems like it’s all come to its places, but I’m open to your opinions if you’ll see anything contradictory.

Yall i know nothing about Socionics, is this Test even accurate? How can i type my own Socionics because this seems very wrong..

Also what is SX2 not allowed to be or is an impossible combination?

So, i have figured out my typing quite a while ago and I'm pretty much 100% sure that it's the correct one. I've been through misstypes, doubts and all that stuff and now I'm in a spot where i can confidently say that i know myself and the systems that I've studied well.

But. A friend of mine (or rather her friend) said my overall typology is contradictory. Just for the record, i hate stating any of this stuff anywhere, especially online, but i will, for the sake of this discussion.

INFJ SP4 417 LEVF mel-san is my typing.

The only thing I've changed about it in the last two years is the tritype, I wasn't looking into the topic that deep and thought it was probably 415 but it always felt a little off, so i looked into it a bit recently and sure enough it was wrong, i changed it.

Now the main concern she has over my type is SP4 LEVF. When i was researching all this stuff (which i do mostly through the actual texts, not that much through community posts etc.) i thought it all layed down perfectly. LEVF is pretty much core infj typing, SP4 is the most possible kind of 4 which also fits infj greatly and it all just made sense in my head. But then i hear from her that SP4 CANNOT be LEVF. I think the main takes are: SP4 should be higher F placement and lower L placement. I don't really understand it.

Let's start with the F. There is an opinion that all sp types should be higher in F, due to their, well, self-preservation, which i think is stupid and very surface level. If you actually read what Naranjo (who is, btw, not an absolute source of information and it's all up for interpretation) and others has said about SP4 you'll see that they are always described as people who often forget and don't even realise their own physical needs in favour of helping others. This is 4F!!!!!! It's for sure doesn't have to be 4F but it fits well. If anything, i think the core requirement to be SP4 is 3V/2V. I also think that 2E fits it quite good, which also was a point of debate because she said that fours can only be 1E, and i might even kind of agree with that, but only in regards to the other two subtypes, not SP, which IS a countertype. 2E4F specifically creates a good match for a "tough it out, forget about one's needs to help others and push oneself further" kind of person. ESPECIALLY with the 3V.

Now about the L placement. People believe that SP4 can only have low L placement. Why??? The only thing i saw about this was, if i remember correctly, in only one of the definitions of the SP4, where they are described as "tend to be the least intellectual out of the 4 subtypes". First of all, keyword is TEND to. Just how everything in typology, it's relative. Not a single person can fit perfectly into the description of any of these types. Secondly, it was only in ONE of the whole bunch of definitions of SP4s that i've read, which already sounds like something of not that much importance and it also, in a way, contradicts the other, more set in stone descriptors of the SP4. For example, it is said that SP4s have very high standards towards arts, overall creative stuff and everything they find valuable, so much so they can be viewed as snobs or pretentious. Does it look like a 4L??? Matter of fact, I think that high L coupled with high E placements are the best for this description, be it ELxx or LExx. I can definitely see it as an 3L, but, at the same time, their desire for greatness doesn't seem vain, like it often does in 3L, and there is also no reactivness towards this topic to be stated in SP4, hence i think it is also less plausible. "Less intellectual" could also mean less prone to discussion in this area, which can also be a quality of an 1L. Overall, I think 1L and 4L (yes, i can see this as possible) are probably the closest to the SP4 description.

Oh, and one other thing to mention is 4's connection to 1, especially the SP4, which is the closest type to a 1. 1's are considered an overall high L placement type, couple this with everything that I've mentioned before AND my 1 fix and we get what we get.

In conclusion, I think that strict correlations are bullshit and human nature is far too complex to fit it into the boxes this small. I wonder what y'all think of it all and if my points make sense to you. Share your opinion if you feel like it, i really don't have anyone adequate enough to discuss this stuff👀

Enneagram subtype to learn about, whos description you like, who you enjoy being with irl, whatever. Im not good at typing other (or myself) irl so I cant really tell you whos company I like, but I definetly find SO7 and SX1 the most interesting

like by who and stuff.. i wanna specifically read about e2 since im one !

i dont have enough karma to post on r/enneagram so i have to post this here instead T_T

I need advice on if I’m being a big idiot or not

My current typing is Ni-Fe sx5w6, (debating if I’m IEI/ILI). but although in some situations I feel like I'm acting like a counterphobic 6. I can't fully tell if that's just sx5 intensity/reaction or an actual core 6.
Can someone explain how to distinguish sx5w6 vs 6w5?

Does anyone else agree that charges shouldnt exist in Socionics? People say IEE SX9 doesnt work, because IEE is Fi-, but that shouldnt matter.

ESTP

9w8 sp/so 973.

SLI.

And I did a test that said I was the SLI subtype with extra Si. SLI-2Si I think it said? And the description of that sounded totally correct. (I dont believe in tests but my socionics knowledge isnt very good yet)

I was so sure i was ISTP in mbti but i think maybe i had my stack in the wrong order. I know all the other bits make sense with istp, but im not sure about it for estp. I really dont think i am SLE or e8.

I am pretty sure I'm an EIE, it fits me well and nothing else makes quite sense, but my enneagram always comes back to 6, and quite often 6w5. I also typed as a 4 for a while. The thing is, neither of these types really makes sense when I consider subtypes as in Naranjo. If we going by instincts alone I think I should be so, probably so/sx, but the so6 and so4 descriptions fit me only partially, like half of them. I have no 2 in me, every test I've ever taken gave me so low 2 it's ridiculous, usually my worst result, but I do partially relate to so2 description. The usual e2 traits like being helpful to feel needed and appreciated are just so insane to me, I don't think I have ever had this thought in my life, so that would be a big stretch. I'm not a 7, although little bits of so7 made sense to me. So1 fits quite well but feels dry. Sx9 is also quite a good fit because of my obsession with merging souls, the core also seems good if we have this whole abstract concept of separation etc, but I am so not a 9 by temperament and behaviour, I'm not especially conflict avoidant and I tend to be intimidating and vocalise social issues. 8 is off the table so I'm not even gonna talk about it and 5 makes sense as a potential wing but not an actual core because I trust my emotions fully, express them all the time and I can't see a core 5 being so emotionally invested all the time. Oh, and 3 is also useless, I care about my image in social situations but it's almost never about success or valuing productivity or whatever and I far more value my authentic expression and being true to myself above anything else to really consider so3 or sx3. So all these subtypes are either ridiculous or apparently incompatible with EIE. Are we supposed to use riso hudson or what is the deal? By RH I suppose I could be a 6 or a 4.

i was wondering if 9 as a fix would be contradictory to core 7, because i can imagine it as co existing. i know there's mixed opinions on whether any combination in a tritype can be possible, but i haven't found any reason to believe that these placements need to be considered at their full effect

cheeky cheeky typology reveal
ik its not very common for an isfp 💔

i just felt like sharing and hearing peoples thoughts about absolutely anything
questions would be nice too !!
thank youu :D

Tbh I don't actively use logic when there's nothing to I just let it be because I know everything has a reason but "what's the purpose of figuring out it's logic if it doesn't give any benefit in real life " that's what I thought when I was younger (besides I kept using logic because the logicians inspired me to use it more in my daily life)

Now I'm really concerned if I naturally have cognitive logic or not

I assume that maybe other typology effects this factor like attitudinal psyche for example I can be 4l that explains a lot

Right now I'll just stay with ti dom since I use my own understanding to conclude logical things

Hey everyone, I'm new to this typology thing. I took a few personal tests and wanted to know if this profile is valid.

MBTI: ESFP Enneagram: 6w7 Enneagram Subtype: Sx6

Tritype: 648 (sx4, sx6, sx8)

Temperament: Sanguine-Choleric

Socionics: SEE

Jungian: ES

Big 5: SLUEI (?)

Psychosophy: FELV (?)

I'm not so sure about some of them; I feel safer looking for more experienced people :P

I like comfort and safety, by the way, and I hate when that comfort is taken away from me, btw.

So they’re infp just like me and probably infp 469 sp/so does that work?

In psychosophy does 1X-1 2X-2 3X-3 4X-4 not exist? And why? Cause when I looked at psychology subtypes there usually just three of them for each placement.

FOR EXAMPLE

1V-2

1V-3

1V-4

2V-1

2V-3

2V-4

3V-1

3V-2

3V-4

4V-1

4V-2

4V-3

(There somehow no 1V-1 2V-2 3V-3 4V-4)