INFJs and Enneagram

[Eric86]

I agree - they're not the same thing at all, so no correlation should be drawn.

I test as 9w1, which is apparently not a good match for INFJ. But if you think about it, it works ^^

I'm definitely a 9w1. I think INFJs who have a higher J score (mine is quite high) and lower F score (mine is almost borderline, though still noticeably F dominant) would be more likely to have that enneagram type.

 

[ElleG]

I noticed, that most of INFJs are Fours on Enneagram.It comes naturally. Few INFJs are Ones or Fives.Thats fine. But I am INFJ and 6w5. I am really pissed. Why me?! I suppose, that INFJs are not so compatible with type Six. I think, that type Six is more suited for Sensors like ISFPs, ESFPs or ISFJs, not for so rare and precious INFJs. I have been so proud to be INFJ and still I am, but 6w5?!!! Its strange. Do you think that even Sixs can be smart? Because my father and grandmother/ both ISFP and 6w7/ are not very brainy. I am afraid, that I am not smarter. Do you know, why is possible to be 6w5 INFJ?! Because I think, that it is bad accident. Someone wants punish me!
How I wish I could be Four. I envy you Fours.

What's wrong with being an INFJ 6w5?

I just finished up a book on the Enneagram that mentions that a lot of people are challenged when trying to embrace their type--I know I have been. I'm an INFJ 8w9! It took a lot of study and deep diving to learn about the enneagram and figure out things that were confusing (tritypes made everything clear for me).

And as others have stated in this thread already: your MBTi doesn't determine and predispose your to a specific enneagram. MBTi is a tool for quantifying cognitive process. Enneagram is about motivations. Two very different things.

 

[charlatan]

MBTi is a tool for quantifying cognitive process. Enneagram is about motivations. Two very different things.

I hate to complicate it, since on one level that's true, but I must I think the complication here is that Jung's types were, indeed, about cognitive processes, BUT, they were about psychological factors leading people to prioritize certain processes over others. The processes themselves are appealed to by anyone and everyone, independent of motivation, but generally what leads to prioritizing one over another tends to be about motive.

In fact, Jung pretty much wrote exactly this when he described why one dominant function arises: it is due to a necessity for clarity of motive that two functions with different underlying principles of operation can't become equally dominant.

his absolute sovereignty always belongs, empirically, to one function alone, and can belong only to one function, since the equally independent intervention of another function would necessarily yield a different orientation, which would at least partially contradict the first. But, since it is a vital condition for the conscious adaptation-process that constantly clear and unambiguous aims should be in evidence, the presence of a second function of equivalent power is naturally forbidden'

or instance, feeling can never act as the second function by the side of thinking, because its nature stands in too strong a contrast to thinking. Thinking, if it is to be real thinking and true to its own principle, must scrupulously exclude feeling. This, of course, does not exclude the fact that individuals certainly exist in whom thinking and feeling stand upon the same level, whereby both have equal motive power in consiousness

Now, what this DOES NOT do is prescribe *how* different motivations/conscious aims of the ego can map onto prioritizing different functions. But it does establish that motivations influence (decisively) this prioritization.

So I tend to find the correct perspective is that we see instances of certain enneatypes with certain dominant functions/mbti types/big 5 types/whatever frequently, because there's a very natural way those two can pair together, but that doesn't show more than correlation: theoretically there's no constraint on what pairs with what.

 

[ElleG]

theoretically there's no constraint on what pairs with what

This sums up my point exactly.

 

[LeahLunaa]

Mine is 5w6, my tritype being 512. So it's not not strange at all. INFJ's come in all different flavours.

 

[bonfire]

I'm a female 5w4 and I think that makes it harder to develop Fe than enneagram 4. I notice that INFJs with enneagram 4 have their feeling function manifest more naturally and freely. Usually in my daily life, I try to be cheerful and encouraging to others but I get embarrassed or swept away by shyness too easily by an intense display (or expectation to display) of emotions. I get along better with thinkers in general but I simultaneously crave the warm and fuzzy closeness of feelers, without too much attachment too soon, which is really hard to express or make sense of (especially when you're female and risk being seen as cold or heartless which is not something I see myself as) I call being INFJ and enneagram 5 a "double whammy". It's like you're jinxed or something, but I guess most INFJs feel this sort of feeling too, so..

 

[Wyote]

It's like you're jinxed or something, but I guess most INFJs feel this sort of feeling too, so..

Yeah you pretty much just described being an actual infj

 

[Ren]

I'm a female 5w4 and I think that makes it harder to develop Fe than enneagram 4. I notice that INFJs with enneagram 4 have their feeling function manifest more naturally and freely. Usually in my daily life, I try to be cheerful and encouraging to others but I get embarrassed or swept away by shyness too easily by an intense display (or expectation to display) of emotions. I get along better with thinkers in general but I simultaneously crave the warm and fuzzy closeness of feelers, without too much attachment too soon, which is really hard to express or make sense of (especially when you're female and risk being seen as cold or heartless which is not something I see myself as) I call being INFJ and enneagram 5 a "double whammy". It's like you're jinxed or something, but I guess most INFJs feel this sort of feeling too, so..

Do you feel like your Ti sometimes takes over your Fe as a result of being an INFJ Type 5?

Ti is not often discussed as a function of the INFJ, yet I feel like it's really a crucial part of how we operate.

 

[bonfire]

Do you feel like your Ti sometimes takes over your Fe as a result of being an INFJ Type 5?

Ti is not often discussed as a function of the INFJ, yet I feel like it's really a crucial part of how we operate.

I think so. I sometimes scored higher Ti than Fe in cognitive functions tests. Personally I feel like using Ti on a daily basis is much easier than using Fe, although I see also that Fe is crucial and necessary to maneuver life. One of the reasons I don't relate on INFJs being emotionally articulate because it feels like such a taxing thing to do. I wish I were enneagram 9 or 4 really.

In my opinion all our 4 functions play the role in our personality. Ti serves Ni and Fe as mental frameworks for the knowledge INFJs have gathered about people. INFJs use Ti as the way to explain the phenomena and encounters in theories and sound analysis. It can also be used as the way to tone Fe down as in "I'll care about you until you give me reasons not to" kind of way. I like Ti but you wouldn't want to get stuck in Ni-Ti loop though.

 

[Ren]

I like Ti but you wouldn't want to get stuck in Ni-Ti loop though.

Ti for me is like chocolate: delicious but better had in moderation for my own well-being.

Ah, looping. The dangerously "comforting" refuge.

 

[bonfire]

It's fun because it a childlike function.

 

[Ren]

It's fun because it a childlike function.

Yeah, in a post by @Wyote Ti for INFJs was referred to as "childlike exploration of logical systems" and it made a lot of sense.

It's just exhausting after a while, I guess

 

[charlatan]

I suspect that 5w4s will more likely have strong F than will 5w6s, at least as commonly found in nature (no fixed rule).
But one has to remember F can operate towards objects, music, virtually anything, it can be completely detached from humanity.

The way I'd describe myself is having a lot more of the "cordial warmth" than discerning value judgment, and I think that's consistent with having some sp-6 at work (after all, this is more about preventing harm and making self/others feel non-threatened than about seeking deep value in things). My attitude is kind of dry and "just let's find the various angles on things, and try not to get destroyed" and the sole value judgments I seem committed to are moral ones, which are in some sense the most impersonal kind.

4s may in fact lack this cordial warmth, but are much more deeply invested in questions of significance and so on. And 5w4 at least has it as auxiliary.

 

[charlatan]

I wonder if I'll ever stop wondering lol. e6w5 vs 1w9.

 

[Ren]

I suspect that 5w4s will more likely have strong F than will 5w6s, at least as commonly found in nature (no fixed rule).
But one has to remember F can operate towards objects, music, virtually anything, it can be completely detached from humanity.

The way I'd describe myself is having a lot more of the "cordial warmth" than discerning value judgment, and I think that's consistent with having some sp-6 at work (after all, this is more about preventing harm and making self/others feel non-threatened than about seeking deep value in things). My attitude is kind of dry and "just let's find the various angles on things, and try not to get destroyed" and the sole value judgments I seem committed to are moral ones, which are in some sense the most impersonal kind.

4s may in fact lack this cordial warmth, but are much more deeply invested in questions of significance and so on. And 5w4 at least has it as auxiliary.

For what it’s worth I definitely have strong F and questions of significance are almost an obsession for me. But I don’t know, the way I approach these questions in writing I feel is quite cerebral and makes heavy use of Ni and Ti. I would agree that cordial warmth isn’t the predominant feature of a 5w4. But on the other hand a 5w4 might be less detached and more intense. I know that sometimes too much cordiality can seem distant and cold to me and make me feel strangely uneasy. I crave for meaning and deep connection with others and in some sense the “cordial” can feel like a dignified and polite wall to me at times. At other times I can feel quite detached myself… hence the uncertainty whether I’m 4w5 or 5w4.

I wonder if I'll ever stop wondering lol. e6w5 vs 1w9.

Superficially you strike me as having 6w5ish traits, but this is only based on a few posts and some of the stuff you’ve said in the past. I’m not sure my understanding of Type 6 is deep enough to give you useful insight into this. What is your take on tritypes and could this offer a solution?

 

[charlatan]

Superficially you strike me as having 6w5ish traits, but this is only based on a few posts and some of the stuff you’ve said in the past.

Do you have a rough sketch of what about me gave the impression? I think I still tend to lean somewhat more to it than to e1. At least in frequency. But honestly, lately I'm seeing so much of both.

I think tritypes at least tell me I probably have both influences, so in a way it makes it harder to choose 16X vs 61X. I strongly suspect both influences.

Probably the core-most thing about me is I hate the concept of persisting disagreement (which quite honestly seems really consistent with both more than any other enneagram)/find most are way less bothered by it/willing to live with it....I hate it a lot more than I have a problem being reminded I made a mistake. I'm the sort who will often prefer to engage in a discussion for ages to get why we're not coming to the same conclusion rather than prefer to just go separate ways. And I think I associate disagreement with dogmatism, something I also do very badly with.

Part of this is very 6-ish -- until you know exactly how the other person thought the way they did, how do you know you really should believe what you think? They could have a spin on it which makes you rethink.
This is why I find it very hard to understand when someone doesn't take the same time to internalize what I'm really saying.

Yet part of the motivation is pretty 1-ish too....if I can show you that you'll be self-inconsistent, I can prod in the direction of things going as I think they ought.... I for sure have a good amount of the 'rational idealism' going on. After all, I can't really stand pragmatism, and also view living with disagreement as pretty symptomatic of many versions of it.

 

[charlatan]

Oh yeah. It maybe/ probably was the bit about having a dry "let's seek the answer" attitude to things + not really admiring courage/just seeing it as either I know enough to cope or not. That's pretty 6-ish yeah. Plus it was related to why I have no problem with asking for comfort -- I don't really see myself as strong to begin with/find I either know or don't.

If 6, clearly am phobic 6. I tend to see 1 as a good auxiliary, because I often find seeking the ideal as a good way of dealing with the doubt inherent to 6. I.e.what could possibly solve all the existential unrest and uncertainty more than seeking the ideal....plus it's a great pacifier to feed the threatening outside others, as who can say no to the ideal if they're really convinced of it being the ideal? And dissatisfaction breeds unrest, yet the ideal is the ultimate pacifier to dissatisfaction.

Also I tend to adore extremely theoretical topics/shy away from the alternative, mostly because in the idealized cerebral, theoretical world, there's little danger. Probably again there's some auxiliary 1-action, as I might tend to try to convince myself that the crudeness of pragmatic reality leaves little to be desired, thus not much is lost in rejecting it.

 

[Ren]

Oh yeah. It maybe/ probably was the bit about having a dry "let's seek the answer" attitude to things + not really admiring courage/just seeing it as either I know enough to cope or not. That's pretty 6-ish yeah. Plus it was related to why I have no problem with asking for comfort -- I don't really see myself as strong to begin with/find I either know or don't.

There's that, plus some intangibles that I would have difficulty describing. Again, it might be linked to my simplistic understanding of types 1 and 6. In a lot of your posts I sense a healthy dose of critical distanciation and a proclivity for dispassionate and constructive exchanges which might be captured by the idea of "cordial warmth" you spoke about previously. I would sense in you a wish to keep things peaceful prior to a wish to act and change things towards more peace, because the latter in itself might involve a threat to the security that the type 6 treasures. This would amount to a more detached and contemplative rather than "interventionist" approach to otherwise strong ethical principles.

 

[charlatan]

I would sense in you a wish to keep things peaceful prior to a wish to act and change things towards more peace, because the latter in itself might involve a threat to the security that the type 6 treasures. This would amount to a more detached and contemplative rather than "interventionist" approach to otherwise strong ethical principles.

Yeah, my basic idea is that if you kill disagreement at the very start by reason (even if your conclusion is only that you both know nothing), harm is dodged. Once you have to intervene, it's already messy/harm-prone.

I try a lot to not just envision what someone is saying but also what the train of thought behind it might be. That way I refute not just the conclusion but guess the reasoning.

(Also I apply this to my own thoughts too; attack it before it can be attacked. Hence why I deeply value being able to think of every possible angle on something... perhaps even more than I value reaching an answer.)

 

[Ginny]

@charlatan You don't strike me as 1 primary as well. Of course, I don't know which your instinctual stack is, and am not particularly well-versed in the enneagram past the knowledge needed to learn which type I am and how it affects me. A test told me that I am a balanced-winged 1, but I think I lean more towards the w9 mentally, towards the w2, though, practically. I guess the 4w5 secondary explains why I act the way I do, however, it's not the primary mode of behaviour. It doesn't help if I give into the 4 completely, as this is also the path of disintegration for the 4 (makes me wonder sometimes if I really am that tritype, as it is considered an archetype, but why the hell not?). I am the kind of person that takes "an eye for an eye" almost literally, and wants to inflict just as much pain as I have felt at the fault of others. But with Fe, I still feel the pain the other feels, so I feel the pain twice (it is different if that person really deserves to feel pain - in my eyes, I know it's highly subjective -, then I can be heartless). So, in order to prevent it, I sometimes retreat, remove myself from the situation (and person responsible) and indulge in something completely different, so I can let the feeling pass. Of course, if I am reminded of the feeling, I feel it again, almost at the same intenstity. That certainly doesn't help letting things go.

Well, turns out I talked more about the other two than the first. But tell me: what do you think?


@Ren what aspects render you torn between 5w4 and 4w5? Have you looked at disintegration and reintegration (the arrows)? It might be illuminating.