Most common enneagram type
|public myers-briggs votes||(20/05/21 10:09) Creative Mind: INTJ|
|(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: INTJ|
|(19/07/15 02:59) tman: INTJ|
|(19/03/11 18:16) phsc: INTJ|
|(19/02/28 01:23) LadyX: INTJ|
|(18/12/24 05:01) kawaii: ISTJ|
|(18/12/23 12:47) Taco110: INTJ|
|public function votes||(20/05/21 10:09) Creative Mind: INTJ|
|(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: INTJ|
|(19/07/15 02:59) tman: INTJ|
|(19/03/11 18:16) phsc: INTJ|
|(18/12/23 12:48) Taco110: INTJ|
|public enneagram votes||(20/05/21 10:16) Creative Mind: 5w6|
|(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: 5w6|
|(20/05/13 13:57) bibliology: 5w6|
|(20/03/13 03:29) Lol: 1w9|
|(20/02/27 11:57) Thyssen: 1w9|
|(19/07/15 03:17) tman: 5w6|
|(19/03/13 15:31) bioomer: 5w6|
|(19/03/11 18:16) phsc: 5w6|
|(19/03/11 17:15) tch: 5w6|
|(18/12/26 06:38) Diobono: 5w6|
|(18/12/24 23:57) LadyX: 1w9|
|(19/11/01 13:09) fg: 1w9|
|(18/12/24 06:15) edza: 1w9|
|(18/12/24 06:01) Teru Mikami: 1w9|
|(18/12/24 05:15) kawaii: 5w6|
|(18/12/24 19:39) Taco110: 5w6|
|public instinctual variant votes||(20/05/21 10:09) Creative Mind: sp/so|
|(20/02/27 11:57) Thyssen: sp/so|
|(19/11/13 11:15) Tman: sp/sx|
|(19/03/11 18:16) phsc: sp/so|
|(18/12/24 06:03) Teru Mikami: sp/so|
|(18/12/23 12:45) Taco110: sp/sx|
|public tritype® votes||(20/05/21 10:09) Creative Mind: 513|
|(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: 513|
|(20/02/27 12:26) Tman: 513|
|(19/08/06 10:53) fg: 514|
|(19/08/06 03:23) Thyssen: 514|
|(19/03/11 18:17) phsc: 513|
|(18/12/24 23:58) LadyX: 135|
|(18/12/24 05:57) edza: 351|
|(18/12/23 12:47) Taco110: 514|
|public sociotype votes||(20/05/21 10:09) Creative Mind: LSI|
|(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: LII|
|(19/11/27 18:25) Thyssen: LII|
|(19/10/31 08:01) fg: SLE|
|(19/07/15 03:16) tman: LII|
|(19/03/11 18:16) phsc: LII|
|(18/12/23 12:49) Taco110: LII|
|(18/12/23 11:06) switchblades: LII|
|public psychosophy votes||(20/05/17 07:28) kashifirfanbhatti: LVFE|
|(19/11/27 18:25) Thyssen: LVFE|
|(19/10/31 08:01) fg: VLEF|
|(19/10/16 17:25) Tman: LVFE|
|public hexaco votes|
fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST|
i think we can't agree because of a matter of choice, you choose to refer to the combination of letter for your correlation and i am reffering to archetype definition. by strategy i meant utilitarian and power-related strategy which is the kind of strategy related to the INTJ personna . "Masterminds have an unusually strong will; they are tenacious, determined, and resolute. At times, because of their drive, and intensity of focus, they can often become single-minded, and can be hard driving with others. They have a competitive force that comes from within, and a fierce iron will, which drives them toward excellence and superiority in every undertaking. They are high achievers, and push themselves harder than anybody else. Masterminds work best when the stakes are high, with people who are highly competent. " that is Se base related, "Masterminds are not concerned with ideas, for their own sake, but rather are interested in ideas for their use and utility in reality. " that is not LII (those definition came from Kerseys). You use to convince me typing based on your interpretation (i agree with some and don't agree with others) but that is not the point, i choose deliberatly to use officialness, because if i don't this would have been even more biased than it's already is .
"About the historical argument, THE FAMOUS PEOPLE WERE SLE BECAUSE SLE CARES MUCH MORE ABOUT FAME THAN LII, a lot of historical figures are SLE because they are remarkable leaders" your argument don't work since history tend to remember thinker (more commong among LII) far more in term of proportion than millitary figure (more common among SLE). look at idr labs typing and you will see that there is more thinker than military figure
"Nietzsche is EIE but I see him as kind of an exception to the rule, in real life that seems extremely unlikely and most of those online who identify as that are personas or just edgy as fuck stupid people, ones not mentioned I am unsure/I don't know the person, then there are even EII in the list (Roger Waters)." i could not disagree more Nietzsche is one of the most emblematic INTJ if not the most, seeing him as an exception (not for his double-type) rather than a potential model (most INTJ share with him something imo). i agree that most internet idiots who identify with him are not woth it because they have a wrong perception of themselves.
also LII are Ixxj, after all their are not that anti-conformist, Descartes was extremly cautious with the religion, Kant despite being quite rebellious with religion made a system quite conformist historically speaking despite everything etc...
INTJ rarely are the most rigourous thinker like INTP or L first (Sartre, Nietzsche, Marx and Hegel tend to be despised by anglo-saxon logicians) but rather polemist and creative in their thinking like L second are. V first is the best guess if we refer to ARCHETYPE. i choosed to refering to archetype that's why i defend this position.
2019-10-31 03:18:51pm (post #7336)
I really like to compare typology to language, it has similar problems, and it ends up the discussion end up being mostly about people speaking spanish talking to ones who speak english and others who speak french or others who speak german, it really amazes me, and this is applied extremely well here, what are we talking about? INTJ, what INTJ? INTJ can mean so many things, so what is this poll asking for? Most common enneagram type
Well, but people are also voting for things not correlated with enneagram, but since it mentions Most common I would say it is about what is the most common and not the most logical fit, and even for most logical I would disagree with you, fg, but let me reply to each thing you say in a more specific way, but before I must question, is this MBTI INTJ? is this functions? if functions, what definition? author? etc.
For MBTI, I would say socionics corresponds pretty well with the Ij, Ip, Ej and Ep temperaments to MBTI, and LII is most commonly INTJ by letters, even in a few cases where they are INTP, with exceptions of course but it is the most common and most logical too I believe, also considering the functions (Ti being T and J, Ne being N) and I coming naturally.
For functions it really, it really depends on the author - and you do mention that - and now my reply shall being, strategy is not only Se, fg, this might seem weird considering how Se is defined many times as that, but Se is about applying it, and I believe in a more willpower/socially dominating way, it is not like a more logical type that has a general lack of Se (LII or ILI) would be bad at strategy, hell some are very good but in different ways (LIE comes to mind), and mostly in planning, but not applying and being pragmatic and action oriented, actually getting things done, a good way is to show this is how strategic these types can be in their fields, mostly academical but for LIE investing, economics and many other areas, even then it does not mean one cannot be willful on a specific field (a good example is how much of a "tryhard" Newton was in science, a complete workaholic at some points, while still being LII), I don't really see why SLE would be better than INTJ by this already, another good example of one I believe is LII and not ILE would be Tesla and how he viewed things, I really don't think he had Ignoring Ni, I believe POLR Se fits better than Fi, that he was more about possibilities within logical system than outside of them (most of his ideas were even internal, and the most important one in my opinion would be the alternating current - but then that could fit demonstrative Te better than ignoring Te but the way Tesla himself saw it makes me believe ignoring - was more about a logical possibility within a quite well defined system and at the time it seemed useless (Thomas Edison, LSE with an extreme use of Te and his view on it with a general extreme lack of Ni while Tesla would probably fit 4D).
About the historical argument, THE FAMOUS PEOPLE WERE SLE BECAUSE SLE CARES MUCH MORE ABOUT FAME THAN LII, a lot of historical figures are SLE because they are remarkable leaders, not many people care about heavily introverted scientists (again, Tesla and Newton fit that very well, as well as IxxJ for Tesla on top of all), but even then are we talking about many years in the past or modern days? what we see and what we don't see, this is very hard to talk about because there is no absolute data we can trust in (I know there is some chart correlating INTJ to SLE or some dumb shit but then if you want to talk about that I can easily show how ridiculous that data is, method is extremely important and statistics can easily be manipulated/biased/etc), according to IDRlabs, the view does not have to be so pragmatical and also theoretical, and even then, one can spend many and many hours in a "fight" in a theoretical field such as physics, it does take a lot of effort or time to show how a thing can be good and develop it for it to achieve perfection, I say that somewhat from experience.
Then you mention "official INTJ" which is no better than some definition by Beebe or Nardi, which are also valid function systems which I would say the % of use is not far from IDRlabs on this website (see how it is now called function vote instead of IDR), I also really don't care about professional typologist views or whatever is mainstream yet what seem like true and logical, within their systems and definitions, also 16P is extremely fucking stupid putting Newton as P, he is everything but P, showing how stupid they are, Lenin and Marx do fit that (I know nothing about Russel Crowe and find it funny he is part of this list), and there are a few other SLEs, but I believe that if I went around looking I would be able to find many and many INTJs in science that might have been forgotten who were LII, as well as one could find many SLEs, I don't see how Anders Breivik is EIE, I believe Marx is SLE just like you but that Tesla is LII, I don't think Keynes was much of a visionary, but Elon Musk clearly is, but out of the IDRlabs list, there are many other types:
LII: Newton, Tesla, Asimov, Hegel - James Cameron
ILE: Keynes, Hitchens - Francis Ford Coppola
LSI: Bobby Fischer, Krugman, Luther, Varg Vikernes
SLE: Marx, John Adams, Lenin
ILI: Zuckerberg, John Nash, Heraclitus, Ted Kaczynski
LIE: Hawking(could be ILE)
Nietzsche is EIE but I see him as kind of an exception to the rule, in real life that seems extremely unlikely and most of those online who identify as that are personas or just edgy as fuck stupid people, ones not mentioned I am unsure/I don't know the person, then there are even EII in the list (Roger Waters).
So you see, a lot of LSIs, ILIs and LIIs, more so than SLE even (I don't know much about Russel Crowe), but these are just specific famous people picked by them.
But back to your comment, LII can fit "Tenacious visionaries" very well in their respective fields considering 4D demonstrative Ni within Ti, and "oriented towards action" depends on what they mean by action, but if working hard and a lot fits, then it could still fit, not like a scientist works any less than some politician or leader, the anti-conformist temper could fit LII but in their respective fields (there are some extremely stupid things in the academy I myself hate but I've seen that it seems to make LIIs get further from it and work more alone), but bluntness really depends but it does fit Fi POLR more, but then that is one definition.
To Psyche Yoga, L first is actually very common, maybe in not the specific historical people you pick because they got famous because of being good leaders and thus fit SLE and V but not for being logical, but then in philosophy or science as a whole, L first fits more, Newton does not seem to be a V first but he could have been, I think it depends too much on the period of his life (later on it makes a lot of sense) but for most of it he was LVFE or LVEF (hard difference to find out about), logic can generate many possibilities and visions, insights can work within logical frameworks, "self-confident" fits both L and V for psychosophy, just in different ways, someone with L first is going to be confident in their own logic, etc, F last does seem to make sense and also considering Fi as a function but some definitions of Se (Beebe focuses a lot on it) literally fit some descriptions of insecurity at F.
I am going to make my vote based on MBTI as purely by letters and not as by functions because it does not seem to specify, also may I mention that I don't really think INTJ SLE 5 is a very common thing or that it makes sense, 8 and 3 are the most common enneagram types for SLE and 1 is also very likely a good fit here (Lenin comes to mind), but also that tritype 4 seems like not the best fit for your current vote in other aspects.
May I mention that even by the definitions you mention I still see myself as INTJ by functions but this is a thing I kind of forgot I did not mention, my constant need for logic within this social sphere does not mean I lack it or only have it, and thus I shall/might explain my future plans in private with you since I don't want them being public, but that later when I have more time again.
2019-10-31 01:56:50pm (post #7335)
fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST|
INTJ unlike INTP who can have obvious corellation with LII and ILI are harder to have an equivalent in socionics. LII would be the more obvious but IDR labs and Kersey's definition of INTJs as well as MBTI's put far more emphasis on it's strategic ability and strong willed attitude rather than a typical "NT/scientific" personna like LII or INTP . And historically speaking LII is not that common among INTJ if we make correlation between "official INTJ" ==> idr labs and 16P and typing made by professional socionists there is more SLE (Lenin, Marx,Russel Crowe), LSI (Luther, Nietzsche according to Stratievskaya, putin INTJ in 16p and voted massively LSI) EIE (Nietzsche according to most socionics and anders breivik) and ILE(Tesla,Keynes, Musk, Marx according to most socionist, Hitchens) than LII among emblematic INTJ. LII is problematic on both empirical and definitional level . LII rarely fit too "Tenacious visionaries, oriented towards action" (IDR labs). the bluntness and anti-conformist temper of kersey and idr labs INTJs is more XLE than LXI. i voted SLE over ILE because the strategic emphasis of INTJ type fit more to SLE than ILE, but ILE would have been my second guess.
on a psyche yoga level, L first is also not that common on INTJ (even Newton is according to the "syntax of love" a V first (i am not sure if it is right about newton btw)). INTJ is if we look at 16p , kersey or idr labs definition not a seeker of truth for the sake of it like INTP or L first. "Tenacious visionaries, oriented towards action" is not a L first characteristic either, it's a V first characteristic. same for Kersey's "planning", "self-confident", "willfull" attribution to the INTJ/mastermind personnality. F last fit with idr labs "Repress their Extroverted Sensing function, which means they may lose touch with factual realities and fail to adapt their opinions accordingly" . obvious 2nd L rather than 2nd E . So VLEF is the best psyche yoga option.
2019-10-31 08:38:08am (post #7334)
edza ENTJ 8w7 SLE|
INTP (strong P) - 5w4
INTx (borderline cases) - 5w6
INTJ (strong J) - 1w9
2018-12-24 06:10:47am (post #4357)
edza ENTJ 8w7 SLE|
3 Fix makes more sense than 4 to me, at least in the Riso-Hudson interpretation. And lol at 4 wing.
2018-12-24 06:00:20am (post #4356)