szero's personality self-assessment guide

Personality Self-Assessment Guide
written by szero

TABLE OF CONTENTS

UPDATE HISTORY

GUIDES & FAQs

1) Enneagram of Personality
2) Global 5 & MBTI

RESOURCE & TEST DUMP

STATISTICS:
1) Enneagram of Personality
2) Global 5
3) MBTI

THEORY RESOURCES:
1) Enneagram of Personality
2) Global 5
3) MBTI
4) Socionics
5) EXTRA: Fourth Way

TESTS:
1) By theory
2) By web domain

HOW TO TYPE & PERSONAL COMMENTS

HOW TO TYPE
1) Enneagram
2) MBTI

PERSONAL COMMENTS:
1) On Tritype® theory
2) Typing advice (introduction)
3) On the Fourth Way

CONTACT INFO

UPDATE HISTORY

After 1.0

A forewarning: the borderline pathological emphasis of certain theories in psychology proposing to explain personality and personal development, such as those described in [1] or [2], suggests that attempting to orient oneself independently according to them may produce harmful results for people at lower levels of mental health. The same goes for discussion, which would have a negative focus by default. Initially, a list of various resources for self-help can be found at [3]. Proceed at your own risk.

Typing can be pretty hard! Turns out trying to fit literally everyone into a set few checklists defined not-so-scientifically some 100 or 1600 years ago [4] isn't always easy. Add in the limited and contradictory nature of the information available online about personality types and its typical dismissal by academics as nothing but astrology and you have a recipe for disaster, also known as the typology community. A myriad of long, aimless arguments abound, most of them essentially boiling down to "what did [celebrity/politician/my dog] mean by this" over and over again, after little more than a year of misadventures among the MBTI and Enneagram of Personality folks of the Internet I thought I should step back to try to help out. Thus, I began compiling everything I could structure into a simple tutorial for people to learn more about personality types, find out their own and get themselves started into what can end up being a pretty fun way to look at the world. So whether you're on a journey of self-discovery, in need of reference material for your discussions or simply looking for a way to systematically tease people out of their adaptively developed ego patterns, you've come to the right place. Typology can be a great tool for learning more about yourself and others, so don't be discouraged by the less than savory types (get it? Lol) you may meet around these parts [5] and, just as this page continues to be updated, keep digging around for more. You're not alone. You might be dumb though:

https://www.wikihow.com/Develop-Critical-Thinking-Skills

Jokes aside, linking the article above is just a very basic attempt at ensuring you get the most out of whatever you decide to take out of this guide, especially since it'll probably be quite a while until any of it is as methodically scrutinized as other, more popular branches of psychology (at least in comparison, one would imagine [6][7]). This means you're going to need to sort out a lot of the content you come across relying on your own sense of skepticism, and so to aid with that I'm not going to assume everyone who reaches this page is equally skilled at logical reasoning or even that they're suited for it at all (and there's nothing wrong with that) - be sure to check the following link out too if you need to build up or refine your basics. My assumption is that, if you're here after all, then as far as you're able to apply theory you may be looking for more than, well, nothing but astrology:

http://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/series/critical-reasoning-beginners

Once you're done with that, go ahead and jump to whichever of the following sections interest you the most. My favorite theory is the Enneagram so I put it first, but starting from whichever one you're most familiar with should give you a better feel for how the content here is laid out and an easier time navigating in search of what you want.

Next update, a series of brief paragraphs to introduce each section.

By the way, looking to get further into psychology? Then make sure to also check out:

https://allpsych.com/psychology101/
http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Psychology_Wiki

[1] Page 3 of "Part I: Deconstructing Freud" at http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/articles/type_is_with_us_at_birth_part_I.pdf#start
[2] http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/articles/lets_depathologize_the_enneagram.pdf#start
[3] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EwTIDprEbPQ7jZZVIg7pSw2ITHGz2evXNfy6fN5N8Z0/edit?pli=1
[4] Carl Jung's psychological types and the Enneagram of Personality, respectively.
[5] https://www.sciencenews.org/article/psychology-results-evaporate-upon-further-review
[6] https://www.sciencenews.org/article/psychologys-replication-crisis-sparks-new-debate

GUIDES & FAQs

1) Enneagram of Personality:

2) Global 5 & MBTI

RESOURCE AND TEST DUMP

STATISTICS

1) Enneagram of Personality:
https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/articles/SHLresearch.pdf
http://www.9types.com/writeup/enneagram_relationships.php
http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/articles/Person_into_personality.pdf
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b2/31/dc/b231dc79b6169f9dd62e3268f28e7699.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/xS9Gc.jpg
https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/Enneagram_and_MBTI_Correlation
https://thoughtcatalog.com/heidi-priebe/2016/01/mbti-and-the-enneagram-2/
https://web.archive.org/web/20091027053816/http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/stats.htm

2) Global 5:
https://web.archive.org/web/20060708183734/http://testdex.com/Global5-SLOAN_Manual.pdf
http://oi67.tinypic.com/264nted.jpg (source)

3) MBTI:
https://web.archive.org/web/20121202010939/http://leadu-library.com/mj/2007/club/MBTI/MBTI-5factor.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20061022023253/http://harvey.psyc.vt.edu/Documents/BessHarveySwartzSIOP2003.pdf
https://www.themyersbriggs.com/download/item/86cb0a51bdef4595812cdd0282d5eccd
https://www.psychometrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/mbti-st2-ms.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator#Big_Five
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/51304-Personality-traits-correlations
https://thoughtcatalog.com/heidi-priebe/2016/01/mbti-and-the-enneagram-2/
https://thoughtcatalog.com/heidi-priebe/2015/10/each-myers-briggs-personality-types-preferred-love-language/
https://web.archive.org/web/20091027053816/http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/stats.htm

THEORY RESOURCES

1) Enneagram of Personality:

1.1) General:
https://www.enneagramworldwide.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Enneagram-Guide.pdf
http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/introducing_the_subtypes.htm
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/32188-How-Enneagram-Types-Pay-Attention
http://skepdic.com/enneagr.html
http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/articles.htm (Highly recommended read)

1.2) Mistypings:
http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/articles/enneagram_and_prototype_theory.pdf#start>
https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/misidentifications-of-enneagram-personality-types/
https://www.enneagramworldwide.com/type-comparisons/
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/04/enneagram-misidentifications-type-one.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/04/enneagram-misidentifications-type-two.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/04/enneagram-misidentifications-type-three.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/04/enneagram-misidentifications-type-4.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/04/enneagram-misidentifications-type-5.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/05/enneagram-misidentifications-type-6.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/05/enneagram-misidentifications-type-7.html
http://pstypes.blogspot.com/2009/07/enneagram-misidentifications-type-8.html

1.3) Enneagram subtypes:
http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/articles/on_the_nature_of_subtypes.pdf
https://www.integrative9.com/enneagram/27-subtypes/
http://www.enneagramcentral.com/Enneagram/27Subtypes.htm
https://beatricechestnut.com/2017/08/instinctual-subtype-dimension-enneagram/
http://enneagramsubtypes.weebly.com:80/instinct-ranges.html
http://enneasite.com/the-stackings/

1.4) Type descriptions by source

2) Global 5:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
https://web.archive.org/web/20060708183734/http://testdex.com/Global5-SLOAN_Manual.pdf
https://www.similarminds.com/sloan.html
https://78.media.tumblr.com/df04b6403e847b32f47ddc400fdeb211/tumblr_inline_myberqHR9T1qg6347.png

3) MBTI:
https://www.truity.com/view/types
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
http://www.skepdic.com/myersb.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator#Criticism
https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/Reckful_On_Type_Dynamics
https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/Debunking_the_MBTI_Debunkers
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/51304-Personality-traits-correlations
https://web.archive.org/web/20121202010939/http://leadu-library.com/mj/2007/club/MBTI/MBTI-5factor.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20061022023253/http://harvey.psyc.vt.edu/Documents/BessHarveySwartzSIOP2003.pdf
https://www.themyersbriggs.com/download/item/86cb0a51bdef4595812cdd0282d5eccd
https://www.psychometrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/mbti-st2-ms.pdf

4) Socionics:
http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Introduction_to_socionics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics#Criticism
http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Wikisocion_home
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics#Nuclear_power_plants'_security

5) EXTRA: Fourth Way

5.1) Fourth Way introduction and guide:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Way_enneagram
https://selfdefinition.org/gurdjieff/Seymour%20B.%20Ginsburg%20-%20Gurdjieff%20Unveiled.pdf
http://www.gurdjieff.am/in-search/index.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari1.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari2.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari3.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari4.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari5.pdf
http://www.gianfrancobertagni.it/materiali/gurdjieff/nicoll_commentari6.pdf

5.2) Wait, what?
http://skepdic.com/gurdjief.html
http://skepdic.com/ouspensk.html
http://www.kheper.net/topics/Gurdjieff/Gurdjieff.PDF
https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-way-to-access-Gurdjieff%E2%80%99s-teachings-Where-do-I-find-those-teachings-What-should-I-read
http://www.gurdjieff.org/index.en.htm
https://www.citizenthought.net/Gurdjieff_Life_and_Controversy.html
http://www.gurdjiefffourthway.org/controversy.htm
http://www.gurdjiefffourthway.org/pdf/negative.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20060710124904/http://home.cfl.rr.com/mpresley1/PDO.html

TEST DUMP

1) By theory:

Enneagram
http://alameda.peralta.edu/sarah-peterson-guada/files/2012/05/RH_Enneagram_V2.5.pdf
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13caxBzustYWkrBs1Qdv-g7DWcpW1BrDeCuy8O2Z9KVg/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qKSIhFQKHj_hh2h4C2WboD7qda0nIjKNe8hlJN4eBEI/edit?usp=sharing
http://enneagramuserguide.com/enneagram-tests/type-preference
http://enneagramuserguide.com/enneagram-tests/type-wing
http://enneagramuserguide.com/enneagram-tests/instinctual-stacking-variant
http://enneagramuserguide.com/enneagram-tests/tritype-wing
http://www.9types.com/rheti/index.php
http://www.9types.com/newtest/
https://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/test
https://www.onlineassessmenttool.com/instinctual-variant-test/assessment-42570

Big 5-based
https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/
http://www.personal.psu.edu/~j5j/IPIP/
https://www.truity.com/test/big-five-personality-test

MBTI
https://www.16personalities.com/
http://www.humanmetrics.com/personality

Socionics
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Wikisocion:Links#Socionic_Tests (scroll down to "Socionics Tests" if link doesn't work)

2) By web domain:

IDRlabs
https://www.idrlabs.com/tests.php

Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests

sakinorva.net
https://sakinorva.net/tests

Similar Minds
https://similarminds.com/personality_tests.html#.W3Q5_sJFfIU

Social Media-based
https://www.typologycentral.com/forums/personalitytest.php

HOW TO TYPE & PERSONAL COMMENTS

HOW TO TYPE:

1) Enneagram

Commentated excerpts from "Personality Tools: Understanding the Enneagram (from a Myers-Briggs expert)". Full article here: https://personalityhacker.com/understanding-the-enneagram/

"When studying what makes people tick, there are a lot of angles from which to come and lots of models from which to choose. There’s how people were raised (the Birth Order), their level of development (the Graves Model), how they understand information and make decisions (Myers-Briggs), what motivates them (the Six Motivations), etc. We tend to erroneously place things in the ‘nature’ or the ‘nurture’ compartments, but since we’re only beginning to understand how grafted those two things are it’s still helpful to separate them. Some of what we study comes from an understanding of what’s intrinsic to us (‘nature,’ or our natural proclivities and talents) and what’s extrinsically influenced us (or, ‘nurture,’ the context and experiences that have influenced how we see reality).

And then there’s this awesome thing called ‘strategy.’

Strategy isn’t just how we learn, evaluate or see ourselves in terms of life experiences. Strategy is how we decide we’re going to navigate the map, what tools we’ll be bringing and how we’re going to ‘auto-respond’ to threats.

Two people could be the same Myers-Briggs type (they learn new information and make decisions similarly). They may both be, say, firstborn children. They could both be in an achievement period of their lives, and both feel motivated by gaining power. Yet, if their primary strategy for navigating the world is different, they might argue with you if you were to say they’re the same personality type in all of those other models! That’s how powerful strategy is.

That’s where understanding the Enneagram comes in."

Comments: A lot of people tend to look at various surface, bullet-point traits when picking an Enneagram type for whatever subject they have in hands without taking into consideration how they come to show in someone and what that "how" entails. That "how", however, is what you're looking for when assigning any of the types from 1 to 9. While Enneagram is typically described as dealing with motivation, it should be understood how those 9 motivations create an specific order of fixations in someone's mind which, in turn, end up producing at least 9! = 362880 personality patterns. And that's not even considering the 18 Instinctual Variants combinations!

"Now, as with everything, there’s some disagreement about ‘nature’ and ‘nurture’ — are we born with our Enneagram type, or did we discover it? While I’m more in the camp of ‘born with it,’ it’s way easier to explain as something that we discovered.

The Enneagram is a 9-pointed system. Each of the nine types is a different strategy for dealing with trauma. Some argue that you discovered your Enneagram type at your first childhood trauma, and it’s been with you ever since. Considering side-stepping, mitigating, handling and dealing with trauma is a big deal for the psyche, your mind created a ‘go-to strategy’ for navigating it, and so your Enneagram type — your ‘trauma navigation tool’ — is born and subsequently becomes an influential part of you. It’s with you all the time, and since your brain is an ecosystem of self-referencing concepts which get folded into other concepts, your Enneagram type impacts you in a number of ways you may not be able to predict.

To state that more simply, your brain isn’t built with tidy compartments, so everything gets jumbled together, and your Enneagram type informs more things than just ‘trauma.’ (So many times when understanding the Enneagram [my type is 3, by the way], I’ve said ‘Oh, THAT’s why…’)"

Comments: If you're interested in this line of thought, I suggest picking up some books on evolutionary psychology. Given enough time, you should come to see how who you are now worked a bajillion hundred years ago to survive in the wilderness, somehow.

"Here’s an overview of how it works.

The 9 Types are divided into 3 triads that are hyperfocused (in an unhealthy way) on one of three emotions: Fear, Anger, and Shame.

The triads share other components, as well. The Fear triad is also called the ‘thinking’ triad, Anger is ‘instinctual’ (or, ‘gut’), and Shame is ‘feeling.”
8-9-1 is in the Anger triad, 2-3-4 is in the Shame triad, and 5-6-7 is in the Fear triad.

What does that mean? Depending upon your Enneagram type, it means you run toward one of these three emotions as your ‘go-to’ emotion. Things get tough, things get frustrating, things don’t go your way — there’s an inner ‘default’ setting that triggers one of these and says, ‘What you’re ACTUALLY feeling is [anger/shame/fear].”
Now, obviously all of us can feel all three of these emotions, and part of the theory behind the Enneagram is that all nine types dwell within us. However, one is our favorite, go-to tool in our toolbox (like Myers-Briggs!), and thus our preference — or, ‘type’ — is born.

That’s the most zoomed out layer. One more zoom in and we see that there are three numbers within each triad. These also have a pattern they follow.

The first number in each triad ‘expresses’ the emotion upon which it hyperfocuses. So, 8-2-5 is what I call ‘externalized.’ That is, 8 ‘externalizes’ anger, 2 ‘externalizes’ shame and 5 ‘externalizes’ fear. (I’ll explain further in a moment.)

The second number in each triad ‘represses’ the emotion that it’s hyperfocused upon. So, 9-3-6 attempt to repress their emotion. 9 ‘represses’ anger, 3 ‘represses’ shame, and 6 ‘represses’ fear.

The third number in each triad ‘internalizes’ the emotion that it’s hyperfocused upon. 1-4-7 attempt to internalize their emotion. 1 ‘internalizes’ anger, 4 ‘internalizes’ shame, and 7 ‘internalizes’ fear.

The types that ‘internalize’ tend to turn the emotion in on themselves or experience the emotion inwardly, those that ‘externalize’ experience the emotion outside of themselves or project it outwardly, and those that repress the emotion do what they can to pretend the emotion doesn’t exist for them at all."

Comments: It should be noted that, unfortunately, there's not even a scrap of evidence about what the Triads actually are or how they were discovered, even in Gurdjieff's own writings. Some theorists have nevertheless attempted to take them into consideration by mean of what have come be known popularly as "Tritypes", which describe an individual based on the type of each Triad that most accurately describes their real motivation, even if not as much when compared to their core type. I don't encourage that approach - instead, I strongly believe a given person should be reading about the ego fixations of each type and assigning them to themselves in order of prevalence so as to not discount the influence of all the 9 types which compose Enneagram in their personality.

"Anger/Instinctive Triad:

8 – “The Challenger”
Externalizes, or expresses, anger as the primary strategy for getting what they want and for dealing with stresses/challenges. There’s a tendency to bulldoze through life, and let you feel their anger if they don’t get it. 8’s tend to be self-confident, decisive, willful and confrontational.

9 – “The Peacemaker”
Represses anger as the primary strategy. They don’t like showing or even acknowledging anger, and so tend to ‘smolder’ underneath. Of course, they don’t let on to the self or others that they’re stewing. 9’s tend to be receptive, reassuring, complacent, resigned.

1 – “The Reformer”
Internalizes, or focuses their anger, inwardly. This leads to a perfectionistic streak. Since they give themselves no mercy, they tend to be judgmental of others, as well. 1’s are principled, purposeful, self-controlled and perfectionistic.

Shame/Feeling Triad:

2 – “The Helper”
Externalizes, or focuses their shame, outwardly. Their shame is your problem, and thus your problem to solve. If you can give them enough feedback that they’re of value to you, it soothes their soul. They’ll do whatever they can to get that feedback and so are often totally focused on getting others needs met and neglecting their own. 2’s are generous, demonstrative, people-pleasing and possessive.

3 – “The Achiever”
Represses shame as a primary strategy. Just like 9’s who have a distaste of their own intrinsic anger, 3’s are forever running away from their secret fear of having no value or worth. In order to quiet the thought, they do whatever they can to ‘prove’ such a thing is ridiculous. 3’s are driven, adaptable, excelling and image-conscious.

4 – “The Individualist”
Internalizes, or focuses their shame, inwardly. There’s no way anyone else could possibly understand what they deal with, and they are wholly unique. ‘ The desire for uniqueness and emotional depth gives a feeling of artistic melancholy in average 4’s. They tend to be intuitive, unique, self-absorbed and temperamental.

Fear/Thinking Triad:

5 – “The Investigator”
Externalizes, or experiences their fear, outwardly. The world is a scary place, and preparation is the key to dealing with it. 5’s are forever in strategy mode, knowing if they could just hone their skills enough they’ll be ready for the scary world ‘out there.’ 5’s tend to be perceptive, innovative, secretive and isolated.

6 – “The Loyalist”
Represses fear as a primary strategy. Like the 9’s and 3’s, 6’s are just as good at pretending there is absolutely no reason ever to feel fear. They repress it by surrounding themselves with safety/security systems (often in the form of people), and by being suspicious of the unfamiliar. Since they can neither trust themselves or the outside world, but they can’t actually experience it as ‘fear,’ there is a Janus-like quality to 6’s. They are engaging, responsible, anxious and suspicious.

7 – “The Enthusiast”
Internalizes, or experiences their fear, inwardly. The outside world is filled with fun, but inside… There be dragons. So 7’s flee from the inner world and gorge on the outer world of pleasures and possibilities. 7’s tend to be versatile, acquisitive, spontaneous, scattered, a total blast to be around — but tough to pin down."

Comments: Always keep in mind when reading these descriptions that you should pick a type and one of its neighbors for yourself. There's not supposed to be anything stopping you from relating to 5 with 6 and 5 wing 6.

"Did you find yourself in any of these strategies?

If you could identify yourself in more than one, that’s because you are in more than one. However, your primary Enneagram type is well worth discovering, as identification is just the first step.

The second step is growth. Which is why I love understanding the Enneagram system. While I personally believe that Myers-Briggs (and the Personality Hacker take on MB, the Genius System) has personal development built into the system, I know most MB enthusiasts are comfortable just understanding the system. However, with the Enneagram, the stated purpose is to grow to a place where your go-to strategy is no longer a hyperfocus, no longer something that can hurt you by being a one-trick pony.

There are nine levels of development for each Enneagram type, with three levels of ‘unhealthy,’ three levels of ‘average’ and three levels of ‘healthy’ development.

That’s a little deeper than we’ll be diving into in this post. Suffice to say, acknowledging that our strategy may not be the end-all, be-all in dealing with life, and to surrender to our ultimate fear is powerful stuff.

As I mentioned earlier, I’m an Enneagram 3. That means I repress shame, and I do everything I can to pretend there’s no reason ever to feel valueless. Except, of course, when the feeling rushes over me and I suck my thumb while in the fetal position, believing no one can ever love me. (Okay, it’s been a while since I was there, but believe me – I’ve been there.)

In unhealthy 3’s, the response is to be a chameleon of value – no matter what you want me to be (or what I perceive you want me to be), I’ll be! Give me a mountain to climb, pat me on the head and tell me I’m oh so worthy! YOU set the tone, and I’ll follow you… until, for some reason, you withhold approval from me, and suddenly I’m collapsing in on myself.

To be a healthy three is to find self-worth and self-value. Not to dance to other people’s fiddles, but to be self-directed and hold strong in my own identity and sense of value. As in, I’m valuable just by being me. I have intrinsic worth. Anything else I give is gravy.

Holding that understanding has been massive in my personal development. And, of course, there’s one for every type.

8’s realize… there is no contradiction between being sensitive to the hearts of others and being a force in the world. In fact, the more they connect with others, the more they become a powerful force for good in the world. Healthy 8’s can become the kind of leader for which others fall on their swords.

9’s realize… that staying with the discomfort of the moment, being present and being willing to engage even if there’s confrontation, is the key to true inner peace. When 9’s stay present and don’t retreat from anger or other negative emotions, they can become their best selves, helping others feel truly loved and accepted with limitless patience and a true creator of peace.

1’s realize… that they aren’t responsible for fixing everything. That accepting a situation isn’t the same as endorsing it, and they can still accomplish a higher good while having patience with ‘what is.’ When 1’s are at their peak, they are conscientious, accepting, serene and inspiring missionaries for a just cause.
2’s realize… that getting their own needs met doesn’t mean they’re neglecting everyone else. It is, in fact, the opposite. When the needs of the self go unmet, the result is exhaustion and manipulation. When 2’s finally see that their own needs are neither more or less important than others, they are sincerely generous, nurturing, unconditionally loving, gracious, and humble.

3’s realize… as I mentioned before that they have intrinsic value. They don’t have to ‘be’ or ‘do’ anything. And since there’s already a focus on the preciousness of life, 3’s are at their best when they’re Bigger Game contributors.

4’s realize… there is richness and depth in ordinary experiences. They don’t have to be exotic to be unique. 4’s are at their best when they move away from emotional indulgence and move toward being authentically connected to their heart. 4’s see beauty everywhere when at their best.

5’s realize… they have all the information and understanding they need to truly engage in and live life. There is a host of inner resources, and there’s no need to simply sit by observing or being a spectator in life. When 5’s stop being the chrysalis and start being the butterfly, they are visionaries with groundbreaking insights.

6’s realize… that courage is found from within. They have an innate capacity for courage, which allows them to trust their own judgment and take on new challenges. At their best, 6’s are what Roxanne Howe-Murphy calls “Spiritual Warriors.”

7’s realize… that there is wonder in each moment. There’s no need to flee unpleasant feelings or feel trapped. Being here and now is the only true freedom. Healthy 7’s inspire others with their deep gratitude and wonder of the world.

So, what do you need to realize? How can you meditate on your strategy, and better yet, remember it’s just a strategy? And, powerfully, how can you both accept and love yourself and your strategy fully? What would you look like at your best and at your healthiest?"

Comments: I decided to leave the author's self-assessment as type 3 for those who prefer learning from examples. Anyway, being able to look past your own personality in order to lead a harmless yet still fulfilling life is definitely an important aspect of growth for anyone. The recent Joker memes have shown that we do, in fact, live in a society - therefore, it's in your best interest not to step on anyone's toes so you don't have to deal with their crap later and instead put your energy into helping those you care about to also live smartly. For that, it's best not to always rely on any patterns your primate ancestors used way back when to survive and reproduce however they could. In other words, using that there shiny computer thingamajig is fun and all and can maybe even let you get some chicks or dudes, but have you done your homework yet?

2) MBTI

Commentated excerpts from "Type Spotting Guide". Full article here: https://mbti-notes.tumblr.com/post/149191973762/type-spotting-guide

"There are several factors that can lead to faulty type analysis. Examine where you might be going wrong, especially when other people’s assessments often disagree with yours.

1. Lack of knowledge about type theory and how to apply the concepts correctly: Many newbies might not realize how complicated type theory can get. If you don’t understand the basic principles well enough, chances are, you won’t be looking for the right things when doing type analysis. These are some important points to keep in mind:

Cognition vs Behavior: Cognition refers to mentally processing information; behavior refers to the manifestation of one’s cognitive processes. Type is more accurately defined as cognition rather than behavior because two different cognitive [traits] can motivate the same behavior but for different underlying reasons. Therefore, type analysis should focus on deducing a person’s cognition.
Consistent Patterns: A person’s cognitive processes include: how they perceive the world, what they value in life, and how they go about making decisions. Type describes common cognitive patterns that manifest as relatively consistent behavioral patterns. Therefore, do not take a single/random behavior at face value, rather, look for consistent patterns of behavior over time that inform you about which cognitive processes a person is reliant upon to make sense of their situation.
Factors Unrelated to Type: There are factors other than personality that can influence a person’s behavior, such as: past learning, life experiences, accumulated skills, genetic predispositions, environmental pressure, situational stress, mental illness, socioeconomic pressures, etc. Account for extraneous factors so that you do not misattribute behaviors to personality when the cause was something else. In other words, type does not explain all behaviors, so ask yourself whether you have identified the true cause of the behavior.

2. Lack of knowledge about the person or fictional character: Imagine that you are a lawyer who is trying to convince the jury. Building a good case has two aspects: 1) gather enough details, proof, and evidence to support your conclusion, and 2) organize your evidence such that you are able to rule out all the other fifteen types, leaving only one option that is most probable. It is not enough to say things like, “He must be a Feeler!” You should be able to explain your reasoning and how you came to that conclusion, back it up with the most relevant facts and details, and provide good reasoning for why the other types are less likely. Of course, you might not have access to all of the information you would like to have depending on who you are analyzing.

3. Biased assessment due to identifying/relating too closely with a person/character or being blinded by your strong feelings of like/dislike: Do you understand the person objectively? Avoid projecting your hopes, emotions, or issues onto them. Sometimes, how much you like or dislike a person says more about you and your type than the other person. Therefore, it is useful to understand yourself better and why your type influences you to like/dislike certain kinds of people.

4. In fiction: character motivations can be hard to decipher when they are only vaguely implied, writing can be confusing or inconsistent, or characters can be flat or poorly developed. You sometimes have to look at the bigger picture, such as: what literary themes the writer is trying to explore (as this sets the main goals for the characters), what character tropes are being employed, the purpose of a character or what role they play in the plot, how characters grow/develop from beginning to end, how the characters relate to other characters. Literary analysis might provide important clues about the character and what is motivating them."

Comments: There's also bias in thinking MBTI type can be properly applied to a given subject in the first place, however inaccurate of a picture it may paint.

"MBTI dichotomy analysis is imprecise but it can be useful because: 1) it helps narrow down the field to just a few possibilities, and 2) it keeps your mind on the bigger picture when cognitive function analysis gets you lost in the trees. This starting process gives you a good idea of which letters seem certain and which require more detailed analysis. Some important points to keep in mind:

Default Cognitive Preference: The dichotomies do not represent trait spectrums but rather two different and opposing cognitive processes that people choose between as they see fit, with one side being more dominant or chosen more automatically/willingly than the other. A person can use either cognitive process in each dichotomy depending on the circumstances, therefore, look for their default preference.
Natural Behavior: Are you observing their natural behavior or are they being influenced by factors/forces unrelated to personality? Look for consistency over time. If possible, look for what they are like when left to their own devices without extraneous pressures.
Personality Development: Are they in the process of stretching the other side of their personality for the sake of character growth, e.g., an introvert who is learning to be more extraverted? If so, they are less likely to match up to stereotypical type descriptions.

1. EXTRAVERSION vs INTROVERSION (E/I)

People tend to look for traits like “outgoingness” or behaviors like “sociability” as a shortcut but these are crude concepts that are easily distorted by situational factors. Extraverts process external stimulation more quickly, therefore, they have a higher need and tolerance for stimulation and tend to be more action-oriented in order to create the stimulation they desire. Introverts have more difficulty processing external stimulation, therefore, they have a lower need for stimulation and tend to be more slow and reflective in order to take sufficient time to process information before taking action. Anyone can want to withdraw when feeling overwhelmed or feel bored if solitary for too long, but what is the default mode under normal conditions?

Energy Level: Do they show a consistent level of energy, proactiveness, or spontaneity in what they do (E) OR are they easily overwhelmed or fatigued when too much is happening (I)?
Action-oriented: Are they consistently moving along or influencing events, easily getting involved or making themselves a part of what is happening (E) OR do they need time to reflect to themselves before taking action, a bit more passive in terms of keeping psychological distance or needing to be compelled into action (I)? Extraneous Factors: Do they have special, preexisting knowledge or skill that allows them to act immediately without reflection? Do they have some psychological/emotional issue that is making them more withdrawn than normal (for extraverts)? Do they have some stress or environmental pressure that is making them behave more “loudly”, erratically, or impulsively than normal (for introverts)?

2. SENSING vs INTUITION (S/N)

People tend to look for “creativity” or “intelligence” as a shortcut but these do not get at the heart of the dichotomy. Talent, skill, and intelligence fall outside of type. S and N are perceptual processes that describe how people gather information about the world, therefore, it can be hard to deduce this aspect of personality because these mental processes might not always be evident or always observable in a person’s outward behavior.

S/N describes a person’s relationship to abstractions, whether they believe that abstract ideas/theories are real even when not fully realized. Ns like to theorize or speculate because they are more likely to believe in potential and fulfilling a vision of potential in due time. Ss generally do not mind theorizing or speculating for short periods of time, however, they are more quick to demand that ideas be realistic, practical, and put into practice. This means that: Ns are more willing to entertain seemingly complicated, counter-intuitive, idealistic, unrealistic, hypothetical, or even fantastical ideas, whereas Ss tend to gather information about the world more efficiently because they do not feel so compelled to explore many different interpretations or possibilities before being able to arrive at a conclusion. When Ss indulge in fantasy or explore possibility, they usually express the belief that they are being “unrealistic” or just “dreaming” but perhaps choose to do it as a mental or emotional escape of some kind, whereas Ns are more likely to treat abstract/theoretical possibilities seriously.

Keep in mind that Ns are a statistical minority and they might not always feel free to express that aspect of their personality and/or they might not be encouraged to develop that part of their cognition. As a general rule, it is safe to assume that a person is a Sensor until they prove otherwise. Also, since the N process often operates subconsciously, some individuals may not be aware of it even if you have the chance to ask them about it.

Conversation Focus: Do they consistently talk about descriptive details like what happened/is happening, how things look/looked/feel/felt, reactions to events, the need to act, how to prepare for doing something (S) OR do they tend to talk about speculations, possibilities, potential, improvements, implications, generalizations, conceptualizations, deeper meanings, questions, the unusual, interesting connections of ideas (N)?
Mental Timespace: Are they consistently present-oriented, focused on assessing or responding to what is happening in the here and now (S) OR do they tend to be somewhat detached/drifting/distracted from the present insofar as being focused on interpreting implications or entertaining ideas (N)?
Degree of Realism: Do they “face facts” in terms of being sensitive to how events change, possessing realistic expectations as they get feedback from their actions (S) OR do they tend to have some degree of “blind faith” that makes them seem too idealistic or aiming too high/low in their expectations, less willing to give up on an idea even when facts suggest that they should (N)?
Extraneous Factors: Account for the reason for a conversation, whether a person is just responding to others and not really expressing their personality. Account for situational/plot factors that might force a person to focus on the present or the future. Account for environmental pressures or personal problems that might influence a person’s attitude, confidence, or beliefs about what to expect.

3. FEELING vs THINKING (F/T)

People tend to look for “emotional expressiveness” as a shortcut but this is misleading and actually more related to E/I. Everyone has feelings and everyone is driven by emotional needs because the brain processes data through the emotional centers of the brain before reaching conscious awareness. The concept of emotional stability falls outside of type. However, Fs are indeed more sensitive to feeling/emotional states (both their own and others’) because they require such information for decision making, whereas Ts are more likely to believe that information about feeling/emotional states is not necessary or perhaps detrimental to good decision making.

F/T describes the criteria that a person prefers to use when making rational decisions. Both cognitive processes have their own set of logic for drawing conclusions: Fs prioritize decision making based on personal and moral values that are presumed to enhance human well-being, whereas Ts prioritize decision making based on impersonal and consistent principles that produce good outcomes. A person can theoretically use either approach depending on the situation, so what is their default mode? You can often deduce F/T by observing how a person responds to moral dilemmas (when they feel torn between doing what is most convenient vs doing what is morally difficult).

People-Centric: Are they consistently concerned with people’s feelings, needs, desires, intentions, or motivations in order to make decisions that take into account emotional well-being or social harmony (F) OR do they consistently seem to misunderstand or overlook those factors, perhaps needing to be reminded of them (T)?
Moral Reasoning: Do they consistently give moral values high/highest priority when decision making (F) OR are moral factors/arguments ignored or grudgingly acknowledged later in the reasoning process (T)?
Source of Moral Beliefs: Do they consistently derive moral “values” based on the needs, feelings, and perspectives of the people involved (F) OR do they formulate moral rules or “principles” based on impartial and dispassionate analysis of cause and effect (T)?
Problem Solving: Do they try to do the “right” thing as dictated by feelings of what is morally good, addressing moral dilemmas with nuance, sensitivity, empathy (F) OR do they try to do the most “reasonable” thing as dictated by results/outcome, relying on formulaic principles for efficient goal achievement (T)?
Independence: Do they consistently find themselves in dialogue, negotiation, or consensus-seeking, hearing different viewpoints when decision making (F) OR do they often appear to be self-sufficient in carrying out plans or assertive in expressing their opinions because they operate on what is presumed to be factual information (T)?
Confidence: Do they easily waver when their feelings are conflicted or when hearing dissenting/disagreeing opinions (F) OR do they only waver in confidence when they lack the technical skill/knowledge to solve a problem quickly/satisfactorily (T)?
Extraneous Factors: Account for skill level because anyone can feel confident, independent, or solve problems well when they have the right knowhow at the start. Account for environmental factors or personal problems that might influence a person’s ability to make good decisions. Fs are not necessarily ethics experts or experts at reading people, rather, they simply rely heavily on this information for decision making (immature Fs can be immoral or bad at reading people). Mature Ts take time to understand people because they know it is necessary but the key is whether they do it mostly for the sake of feeling like a moral person (F) or mostly for the sake of achieving a goal (T).

4. JUDGING vs PERCEIVING (J/P)

People tend to look for “being organized” as a shortcut but anyone can learn to have good organization skills and implement them when necessary. J/P is about your attitude towards the external world (regardless of E/I): Js require more structure in the world because they like closure and for life to be easily predictable, whereas Ps require less structure in the world because they want openness and freedom to explore options.

Sense of Time: Do they value the concept of time, wanting to use it well, sensing how slowly/quickly it passes, easily feeling time pressure, wanting to complete tasks on time or follow through with plans efficiently (J) OR do they easily/frequently lose track of time, often oblivious or highly distractible (even if momentarily), generally easygoing or blasé about completing tasks in a timely manner (P)?
Resoluteness: Do they strongly desire that plans/decisions/problems be quickly settled and do they require closure on events before being able to move forward, often seeking to control situations because they are uncomfortable with uncertainty, ambiguity, or lack of preparation (J) OR do they tend to be relaxed and flexible, able to go with the flow, okay with putting off decisions for awhile, okay with changes in plans, okay with not immediately knowing how things will go, willing to just wing it (P)?
Extraneous Factors: Account for situational/plot factors or environmental pressures that force people into being very decisive or time conscious. Account for situational/plot challenges, obstacles, or dilemmas that are difficult for anyone to resolve quickly. Remember that anyone can be focused when they are doing something very important or easily distracted by interesting stimuli - look for consistent patterns over a longer period of time whenever possible."

Comments: Shockingly, for example, being I doesn't mean you hate people and being F doesn't mean you have brain damage. Instead, being a healthy exemplar of any time means knowing when to apply each of your non-natural preferences. So don't forget to pay your respects to that ESFJ math teacher of yours.

"When doing type analysis, people have a tendency to only look for confirming evidence of their hypothesis while not paying enough mind to properly considering all 16 possibilities. You might notice that the types are often grouped together according to their “temperaments” and commonalities (...). For example:

Es: active, outgoing, unreflective
Is: passive, detached, brooding
Ss: realistic, literal, nitpicky
Ns: optimistic, idealistic, impractical
Ts: calm, detached, blunt
Fs: warm, pleasing, overdramatic
Js: planful, uptight, controlling
Ps: easygoing, unpredictable, procrastinating
EJs: friendly, helpful, organized
EPs: fun, easygoing, positive
IJs: focused, disciplined, responsible
IPs: unique, individualistic, free-spirited
ENs: witty, aspiring, persuasive
ESs: expressive, resourceful, down to earth
INs: introspective, reserved, complicated
ISs: observant, affable, plain spoken
SPs: spontaneous, impetuous, cavalier
NPs: creative, fantasizing, disorderly
TJs: expedient, categorical, aggressive
FJs: diplomatic, insecure, overbearing
SJs: modest, fussy, risk averse
NJs: insightful, ambitious, presumptuous
TPs: analytical, calculating, callous
FPs: romantic, vulnerable, irrational
STs: pragmatic, stubborn, trite
SFs: amenable, self-deprecating, conflict averse
NTs: innovative, arrogant, egotistical
NFs: advocates, oversensitive, want to be “special”

These groupings are useful because they should give you pause. Look at the evidence you have collected and ask yourself whether it could be true of other types as well, especially similar types that are usually grouped with that one. If the answer is ‘yes’, then your evidence is probably too general or vague and not as supportive of your case as you would like. For example, if you observe that a person/character is often very “uptight”, how should you attribute this characteristic? Since this characteristic tends to be common for all the J types (8 possible types!), determine whether the evidence supports/contradicts Si, Ni, Te, Fe motivations (or a combination of two). By doing this, you ensure that your analysis is precise enough to narrow down the options properly."

Comments: The same approach is better although still not great for Enneagram of Personality typing. Do note, however, that Enneagram can help clear up why someone that isn't meant to typically display these traits does.

PERSONAL COMMENTS

1) On Tritype® theory

I generally dislike the concept since there's no theoretical explanation for how the types that aren't part of your core center come to be. The idea behind a person's Enneagram type is that it originates from patterns in childhood emerging from reliance on specific defense mechanisms against major traumatic experiences and how these very same patterns can be observed in the form of a person's current personality traits. Perhaps using three of such defense mechanisms the most for each center is how Tritype manifests; this is never elaborated upon in any material I've come across on the subject, however. Besides, if you're just going to list three numbers from 1 to 9 divided by center for no reason, then why not be even more descriptive of your personality and list them all arranged by test scores instead? "In real life, people are not an arbitrary combination of psychological components. If they were, there would be no overall pattern to their personalities. They would be like characters in a badly written novel whose traits conflict in nonsensical ways. (Traits can be, and are, in conflict with each other, but they cannot be mutually exclusive, like being an honest man and a thief at the same time.) For instance, a combination of the traits of a Seven and a Three in the same person is contradictory, like simultaneously having sight and being blind. Such random mixtures of traits and types do not occur in human beings, and they do not occur in the personality types of the Enneagram. The structure of the Enneagram itself, the nine personality types, and the interrelationships of the personality types are not arbitrary. They are unified in a system of amazing complexity and simplicity." (Don Richard Riso with Russ Hudson, "Personality Types: Using the Enneagram for Self-Discovery").

Tritype® theory also seems to not handle integration and disintegration or provide any tools to analyze them with, for no particular reason - indeed, "The 27 Tritypes Revealed" booklet by Katherine and David Fauvre mentions it as part of its introduction and then makes no attempt to connect it to anything else or even address it later, perhaps because proper descriptions of those movements such as the ones provided by Russell Rowe in the files above come close to rendering the new theory as unnecessary. Russ Hudson has since shared the following insight: "Katherine and David's work on the Tritype is fresh, innovative and illuminating. Even those well acquainted with the Enneagram will be surprised at the precision of this approach in identifying key features of the personality. Highly recommended!" One would therefore think other Enneagram professionals, such as himself, would actually rely on the theory as it is allegedly more "illuminating", precise or whatever; Hudson's own https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/ does not contain any mention to it or any of the Fauvres' work, for example. Finally, my personal interpretation is that your core Enneagram type and wing deal with an individual's conscious behavior and are capable of simultaneous integration and disintegration while the rest of the types would be static and part of their subconscious, serving the function of alternative perspectives which may be accessed through directed effort whereas the core type would be naturally under use. This does not necessarily exclude or invalidate Tritype® theory.

2) Typing advice (introduction)

After you're done with this guide, keep in mind you might still not be ready to begin typing properly. Now, why would that be? In theory, personality typology is supposed to take into account the types of all people that have ever been, and thus, should the validity of it remain absolute, various tendencies in common across the same 16 MBTI or 108 Enneagram types should be observable in terms of cognitive processes or motivation to a certain degree of clarity. This is going to depend both on your access to reliable information regarding the subject being analyzed and the context they're inserted in as well as your own understanding of the various personality type theories and actual psychology. Ideally, what this means is that now it's important for you not only to start researching typology literature on your own but to acquire a strong understanding of the bigger picture of human history in order to be able to fit each person in its place and time in it. 6w5 Sp/So ISTJs may commonly be accountants today in well-developed western countries - it seems like a profession that would suit them quite well, at least - so how about looking for historically parallel occupations in order to identify more of them in the past? Conversely, a great general of the heavens from ancient China may have been ESTP 8w9 Sx/So - where would they be if born nowadays, on another side of the world? And what lead or attracted them to become what they came to be in the first place? Personality types don't seem to account for every possible facet of human behavior, yet the basic assumption here is that they do for two codependent reasons: because proper scientific research on their nature is likely to remain extremely limited for the years to come; and secondly, so that you're able to at least grasp the full range of their workings. Who knows what kind of insights the theory behind them might lead you to? Regardless, if you're just starting off, there's no need to be this pretentious at first.

Find a niche of people involved in an interest of yours - say, famous movie directors - and then proceed to look for biographies and interviews to analyze them with while also keeping an eye out for which types other people will assign them and why. This two-sided engagement should help you develop a healthy sense of skepticism, by learning how to verify data for yourself, and awareness of bias, by coming to understand how different people come to different conclusions. As you continue, you'll also find that you may start developing your own profiles for each type, ones which allows you to compare, contrast and perhaps even identify flaws in typical descriptions of them.

3) On the Fourth Way Enneagram

As I see it, in a non-exhaustive nutshell, the purpose of the Enneagram of Personality is to provide a detailed description of the individual's ego and thus help them detach more easily from the notion of its equivalence to one's own self-identity. What should be understood by "ego" may be addressed by those traits described in typology as well as that part of yourself which makes you feel like you're going to die if you don't do something specific even when it isn't the case at all. One may experience this in the form of anxiety outbreaks. If that sounds weird, think of obsessive-compulsive disorder - likewise, somebody who's Enneagram 1 doesn't need to heed the details in every situation they're in just because they experience a strong drive to do so, it's just part of a strategy which has worked for them previously at vulnerable stages of life and which they've thus grown accustomed to bring up pretty much automatically; were they not 1s, they might not even be worrying about details there in the first place. Noticing how every type's perspective can be equally valid depending on the circumstances is a good starting point. This understanding of the human psyche is derived from a Freudian model which, while not necessarily accurate, is still sufficient for your first steps in this line of thinking: the catch you're supposed to be aware of here is that your brain is just another tool for natural selection and is therefore trying to fool your primate self into not doing stupid stuff that's going to end your entire lineage. Nowadays, however, not only is it not the case that we need to rely so closely on those sorts of personality patterns for survival, we might be under increasingly appropriate living conditions to be able to grow past them and find out much more about ourselves and how we relate to others and our surroundings. While it may already be common knowledge in typology communities that being of a certain personality type by no means makes anyone unique or special, it should additionally be noticed that there are further qualities which one may typically assign to their notion of "self" when this is not necessarily the case, especially when considering potential modern advancements in neuroscience (e.g.: https://qz.com/506229/neuroscience-backs-up-the-buddhist-belief-that-the-self-isnt-constant-but-ever-changing/). This kind of detachment has been traditionally performed in the seeking of spiritual awakening (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment_(spiritual)); in other words, this is supposedly done so that you're able to see things for what they are with regards to the true nature of reality. It's literally kind of like Ultra Instinct except for nerds. If you're not Sx-blind you should be interested by now - for an example, refer to the two "Letter to Mr. Bush" sections on volume 1 of Nicoll's "Psychological Commentaries" as linked in the Fourth Way section above, dealing with G. I. Gurdjieff's teaching.

CONTACT INFO

Satisfied? Download everything if possible and don't forget to share! Come join us at http://index.sakinorva.net/. Contact szero#0663 on Discord for more information.

"Without self knowledge, without understanding the working and functions of his machine, man cannot be free, he cannot govern himself and he will always remain a slave." - Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche.