True Personality Typing

STUDY NOTES POST #8: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SOJT AND THE ENNEAGRAM, ATTIDUINAL PSYCHE AND PSYCHOSOPHY PART 5

Finally, we've made it. Now we are to the myth busters section! This is probably the part those of you who are not part of the Personality Database fan club have been waiting for. Here's the Personality Database and Tik Tok myths I have debunked , as well as thinks Afansayev, Rob Zeke and others believed, that my experiment proved are not the case. Mind you, a lot of typology creators do not have good knowledge of other typology systems, and have their biases and make mistakes.

Even, as much as I've talked about them, Marston and Jung both made mistakes. Marston thought that S and I, and D and C were conscious/unconscious pairs; but Jung's theory disproves that, and proves that the conscious/unconscious pairs are actually S and D, and I and C. Jung believed that some traits were associated with introversion/extroversion; but Marston's theory disproves that, and proves Jung should have been associating those traits with the 4 functions instead.

So now that I'm laying that out there, don't get mad if I say your favorite typology system creator was wrong about something.

>Myth #1: all those gatekept MBTI/Enneagram combos you see. I'm just going to let you read this, for that myth. I think it shows sufficiently that the gatekept combinations are a myth:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Enneagram/comments/1558xxi/what_they_say_on_personality_database_vs_what/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=1

You will have to copy and paste the link into your browser. Tumblr doesn't like it, for some reason 🙄

>Myth #2: Enneagram to Psychosohpy correlations

This is wrong in 2 ways. First, as I found in my experiment, Enneagram has very little to do with Psychosophy. Also, they say that Psychotypes can have varying dominant instinctual variants, when my experiment proved that Psychotypes can only have 1 dominant instinctual variant per type, however the core can vary

>Myth #3: "The Volition aspect represents extroversion in Psychosophy "

Apparently, this was something Afansayev said, but once again, remember how I said that a lot of the typology creators don't know too much about other typology systems. He obviously didn't know much about Jung's theory, because my experiment showed that the Volition aspect represents Jung's intuition function; not his extroverted attitude

>Myth #4: " Attiduinal Psyche is a watered down version of Psychosophy "

My experiment proved that Attiduinal Psyche is only slightly looser than Psychosophy; that's so that Attiduinal Psyche will type everybody, not just a few. For most types, Attiduinal Psyche only included the Psychotype, plus 1 to 3 other SOJT types that were closely related to the SOJT type of the people with the Psychotype; in my experiment. The only types that expanded beyond 4 SOJT types were the ones where the representative of the Psychotype in Afansayev's book had an ambiverted SOJT type, in which case, the Psychotypes cast a wider net to begin with.

>Myth #5: "VELF is a versatile type that can be any Enneagram or MBTI type"

This is because Rob Zeke has a bias toward the type VELF. In my experiment I found that VELF, just like all but 6 of the 24 AP types, has a very specific set of types that make up over 90% of the cases. MBTI types: ISFJ, ISFP, INFJ and INFP; Enneagram cores: 4, 5, 6 and 9; were nearly 100% of the statistics. Needless to say those MBTI types are part of the S quadrant of DISC, which contains 40% of the human population. *That's* probably why it's so common, not versatility.

By contrast, in my experiment, the 6 Psychotypes represented by ambiverts were the most versatile. Half of them could be 9 of the 17 SOJT type families in the experiment, and most Enneagram cores, as a result. Those were EFLV, FEVL and FLVE. The other 3 could be any of the 17 SOJT type families, or have any of the 9 Enneagram cores. They were: VFEL, FVEL and FLEV. Those are the 3 most flexible types in AP, right there, and VELF is not one of them.

>Myth #6: "If you're having trouble typing someone, they're probably VELF"

Once again, this is Rob Zeke's VELF bias. The reality is, in the experiment I did, I had many people who were hard to type, but none of them were VELF. These were the usual hard-to-type outcomes:

Well, that's it. I'm now going to get back to my Typing In Practice Posts. I hope to complete them all before my wedding, which looks like it will be happening before the year is out.

STUDY NOTES POST #7: SOJT TYPE RELATIONSHIPS TO THE ENNEAGRAM, ATTIDUINAL PSYCHE AND PSYCHOSOPHY PART 4

This is the section where I talk more extensively about the correlations that I derived from my study.

Basically, I listed all the Enneagram cores, dominant instinctual variants, tritypes, AP types and PY types (the AP types with an *) that I found for each SOJT type family, here:

Note: there is a mistake on here: there was no E2 Ne-f. It turns out, there was not enough information to type the E2 person correctly in DISC or SOJT; however there was plenty enough in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche. With her Enneagram and Attitudinal Psyche results, I was able to conclude the E2 person actually belongs in the Fe-s type family

Then I also made this graph that shows how the PY types expanded to become AP types in my study:

Note how in Enneagram, Attiduinal Psyche and Psychosophy, Undifferentiated Attitude is its own type, with its own unique set of results. So people with undifferentiated attitude SOJT types were not included in their respective type families for this study. However, all other SOJT types were.

Also, note the people who say AP is watered down PY. It's not. It's a Psychosophy inspired typology that types everyone, rather than just 35% of people. And when you look at Diagram 11, you see that most types, even when they expanded for AP, didn't expand too far beyond the PY perimeters. Only 3 of the "Undifferentiated Attitude " PY types expanded to include anybody as a possibility, and the "Undifferentiated Attitude " PY types cast a wider net as a PY type to begin with.

The next part, and last part of this study, is going to be the fun part, and I will call it "Mythbusters" , and show all the typology myths my study busted-and there's a lot. So stay tuned

STUDY NOTES POST #6 : SOJT TYPE RELATIONSHIPS TO THE ENNEAGRAM, ATTIDUINAL PSYCHE AND PSYCHOSOPHY PART 3

This explains how I typed each of the 200 dream people in AP and PY, and shows what the results were.

First, I typed the people in Attiduinal Psyche. Then , after I had typed a bunch of people, I noticed trends starting to emerge, for instance, all my Se-f sx3s were EFVL. In those particular instances, I went further with those people to see if they met the energy and defense mechanisms requirements to have the PY type. If they did, I turned to Afansayev's book, " The Syntax of Love ", and typed the main person Afansayev had representing the type in both SOJT and Enneagram. An interesting thing was a vast majority of the time, the person in Afansayev's book had the same SOJT type and temperament as the people who had the PY type. They also had the same Enneagram dominant instinctual variant, even though, a lot of times, they didn't have the same Enneagram core. That was when I came to the realization that Enneagram core doesn't determine whether or not a person has a PY type at all. You see all these misguided correlation charts for Enneagram and PY online, talking as if only certain Enneagram cores can be certain PY types. I'd hate to tell them, but the emphasis they're putting on the cores is completely wrong. Cores have little to nothing in determining if a person has a PY type, and what it is .

My study revealed that the biggest determining factors as to if you have a PY type, and what it is are: 1. Your SOJT type, 2. Your dominant instinctual variant, 3. Your primary temperament as derived from here:

I found that the people who matched Afansayev's type representatives on all 3 of those factors had the PY type. More similarities with the Enneagram made it even more obvious the person had the PY type, but people with less similarities in the Enneagram had it too. That points to, once again, how little Enneagram actually matters.

Here was evidence I gathered in my study. I will be talking about some additional stuff in the next post, where I'll be talking about correlations more specifically, but here's some good, interesting, compiled statistics:

As you can see, only about 35% of my sample had PY types. That is consistent with statistics I've heard from Rob Zeke, the creator of Attiduinal Psyche.

Anyway, that's all for now, and I'll be back soon with the 4th post in this study, where I actually reveal the correlations I came up with for Enneagram, Attiduinal Psyche and Psychosophy

STUDY NOTES POST #5: SOJT TYPE RELATIONS TO THE ENNEAGRAM, ATTIDUINAL PSYCHE AND PSYCHOSOPHY PART 2: THE ENNEAGRAM

Right now, I'm only going to talk about typing my 200 dream people, I had previously typed in SOJT, in the Enneagram.

The first thing I did was figure out the cores of at least one person per SOJT type. In some cases, it was obvious that more than one core was represented within a SOJT type. In those cases, every person I felt might have a different core than the first, I typed their core as well.

I was able to confirm my core typings using "The Dynamic Enneagram " by Tom Condon. Even though the main purpose of using " The Dynamic Enneagram " was to type the instinctual variants and wings, it also proved useful in confirming that the cores. How? If the core was correct, I would very easily be able to identify the wing and instinctual variants of the person involved. However, if the core was wrong, the wings and instinctual variants made no sense at all for the person, or I found myself stretching what Tom Condon actually wrote to make them fit.

So, anyway, I eventually got some Enneagram cores that became "usual suspects " for SOJT t type families, and toward the end of the study, I would check and see if people from a particular SOJT type family had one of the usual suspects as an Enneagram core, before I would test them for a new one. However, if none of the usual suspects fit, then I *did* test them for their own Enneagram core.

I also associated the Enneagram cores, wings, and instinctual variants with primary temperaments, based on their likely Big 5 results. For more information on how to figure out people's primary and secondary temperaments from the Big 5, see here:

The results were as follows:

The study results proved a lot of things some authors said about the Enneagram are right, but some are wrong. I will talk about those in Post number 4 on this study.

One last thing I want to mention though, before I start making any kind of correlations between SOJT and the Enneagram is this: SOJT is a third typology descended from Jung, and it has its own unique definitions of the functions and type descriptions, so don't shoot me if my SOJT to Enneagram correlations are different than Naranjo's MBTI to Enneagram correlations. You have to realize that different systems will correlate differently to the Enneagram, even if they're based on the same thing. Now we'll more on to post number 3 on thus study, which was me figuring out AP and PY types for the dream people, and what the results were

STUDY NOTES POST # 4: STUDY OF SOJT TYPE RELATIONSHIPS TO THE ENNEAGRAM, ATTIDUINAL PSYCHE AND PSYCHOSOPHY PT 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY, SOURCES AND DEFINITIONS

Hello, everyone. I finally completed my study of how SOJT types relate to the 3 systems mentioned above. It was such a detailed study that covered so much ground I'm breaking it down into several different sections, and posts. This section will be an introductory section.

How I did the study: Remember the 200 people from my dreams who I typed in study #2 for the Jungian types? I went back and typed all those people in the Enneagram, Attiduinal Psyche and Psychosophy. I followed all the rules spelled out in my sources to assure I was typing people correctly.

My sources were as follows:

Enneagram core-common knowlede

Enneagram wings and instinctual variants- The Dynamic Enneagram by Tom Condon

Enneagram Tritypes-Katharine Fauvre's website

Attitudinal Psyche-the Attitudinal Psyche website

Psychosophy-The Syntax of Love by Afansayev

I do want to explain a few terms you will see me use in this study:

Attitudinal Psyche type or AP type: when I mention that a person has an AP type, that means that they have the functions in the preference order indicated; the first is confident, second is open, third is insecure, fourth is unbothered. Most people only have this kind of a type, and *don't* have a Psychotype or PY type

Psychotype or PY type: if a person's oderof energy levels from the functions and use of the functions as defense mechanisms matches the order of the functions generated from their AP type, *then, and only then,* do they have a Psychotype or a PY type. I made a graphic that illustrates this well:

Christian was an Se-f sx3

Tim was an Fe-s sx2

Simplfied Original Jungian Typology (SOJT) types: An SOJT type is a very specific differentiation pattern that lists every Jungian function that ever appears as conscious in a person

Simplified Original Jungian Typology (SOJT) type family: the fully differentiated type, as well as any variations of it *

*in this study, however, the SOJT type families do *not* include the undifferentiated attitude variant. Thatis because in their internal workings, the Enneagram, Attiduinal Psyche and Psychosophy all recognize ambiversion as separate from extroversion and introversion. So most everyone with an undifferentiated attitude had similar results in Enneagram, Attiduinal Psyche, and Psychosophy; that were different from the other SOJT type families. So I had ,for this study, a 17th type family: the Undifferentiated Attitude family.

So I typed the 200 in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche first. If I spotted trends , such as all my Se-f sx3s getting EFVL, I then checked to see if the "trend" people checked out in PY. Nearly 100% of the time they did. Then I read the type description provided by Afansayev in his book, typing his main representative for the type in SOJT and in the Enneagram. Here's what I came up with:

Before I go any further with this study, I want to say I was absolutely shocked 😲 by a lot of the results, but not so much by others. A lot of you might have your tail feathers ruffled a lot, because the evidence of the study contradicts theories going around on Personality Database, Tick Tok , and other places; proving those theories false. So buckle up and prepare for a bumpy ride!

ANNOUNCEMENT: MY NEXT PROJECT

Hi, everyone. I'm sure you've noticed how I'm adding additional typologies to the bottom of my True Types posts. This is actually part of my next project, which was to do the same thing with the Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche that I did with the MBTI.

That, basically, is to use at least one of the 3 typing systems that are consistently considered accurate, reliable and valid (DISC, SOJT and the Big 5) to figure out someone's Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche types.

So I have recently started typing the people from my dreams all over again-this time in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche. I am looking for trends that develop, so that I know which of the 3 trustworthy systems I could use to type people in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche. So far, it looks like it would be a combination of your MBTI type (obtained from comparing your DISC and SOJT results) and your Greek Temperament Blend ( obtained from a surprisingly accurate correlation I found between the Big 5 and the 4 Greek Temperaments in January) for both of them.

I have already found some

MBTI +Greek Temperament Blend = AP type

and

MBTI +Greek Temperament Blend = Enneagram

correlations, so I think I'm on the right track.

I'll get back when I have typed all 200 dream people in Enneagram and Attiduinal Psyche, and I'll let you know what I've discovered

ENNEAGRAM POST #1: INTRODUCTION TO THE ENNEAGRAM

Even though People Keys failed the Enneagram, I am going to pass it, because I took two different Enneagram tests by 2 different companies 5 years apart from each other, and got the same result both times. So since I'm going to pass the Enneagram in my reviews, I promised to cover it as well. So here goes.

First of all, just so you know, the Enneagram is actually *not* compatible with DISC, Jungian typology, or the Big 5. It just isn't. But I find it useful, in that as well as DISC, the Enneagram can tell you a lot about your strengths and weaknesses, and help you work on your weaknesses, which is a good thing.

However, when you take an Enneagram test, please make sure that you read all the instructions! I didn't, and went around mistyped for a few months, until I read the instructions, and then was able to find out what my type actually was 😆😂🤣

So anyway, my best advice to type correctly in Enneagram is this:

First, take a test. Yes, Enneagram is definitely easier if you test first, and read second. Most other typing methods, it's better to read about the method before you ever take a test. But the Enneagram is the other way around

Second, print your results, including the graphic representation of your scores. This will be important later on for determining things like wings and tritype.

Third, read the type description given for your highest score. That is usually going to be included in your results. If it sounds like you, great 👍. You've found your Enneagram. You can skip to step 5. If it does *not* sound like you, move on to step 4.

Fourth, Read descriptions of your second and third highest scores. If your highest score was not your Enneagram, then one of these two will be. You will have to read about these scores outside of your test results, as descriptions of these numbers likely will not be included in your results

Fifth, after figuring out your core Enneagram, refer back to your graphic representation to determine your wing. Your wing will be the number with the higher score to the immediate left or right of the number that is your core Enneagram.

Sixth, after determining your wing, refer back to the graphic representation once more to determine your tritype. Your tritype will contain the highest score of heart (2,3 and 4), of head (5,6 and 7), and of body (8,9 and 1). Once you find your highest score in each of those 3 groups, organize them, with your core Enneagram first, even if it was not your highest score. Then organize the 2 remaining numbers by score.

Now you can put your test results away, and read outside of your results, to determine whether you are sp, so or sx.

Once you have determined all that, you're done with the Enneagram typing process! Now, you can just focus self improvement

Happy typing!

INTRODUCTION

Welcome all to my page.

Let me introduce myself. I am not going to include my actual name, or any identifying information about me, but I will say I am a middle aged person, who's been interested in typology for self improvement and group dynamics reasons since I was a teenager.

The personality typing method I have the most experience with is DISC, which I have used for nearly 25 years. I also have experience, or am familiar with many other typing methods, including Jungian typology, the Big 5, Briggs Myers, Socionics, the 4 Humors, and the Enneagram. I'm going to not reveal my type anywhere on this blog, except in my ratings of methods and tests. Obviously, there I will have to. But I don't want this blog to be about me. I want it to be about you getting to know yourself and others through the resources I provide

I will tell a little bit about my background here. I was first introduced to personality typing at the age of 13. I had already been through puberty, and was socially mature for my age, so I definitely don't feel like I got started too early. It was with Tim La Haye and the 4 Greek Temperaments, aka. the 4 Humors. I actually found my study of the 4 Humors very confusing, and hard to comprehend. The people Tim La Haye described sounded more like theories than people, to be honest. The first personality typing test I ever took was the Tim La Haye Temperament Test that was included in one of his books. And it also ended up being my first experience being mistyped. About 5 years later, a certified Tim La Haye practitioner, who went to a church, where I was a part of the college campus ministry, typed me correctly. He said he honestly couldn't understand how the test mistyped me, but still seemed to be sympathetic to my story.

Then, when I was 25, I was in a Christian bookstore, and I saw a book called, "Understanding How Others Misunderstand You ". I opened the book, and at first, thought it was another 4 Humors book, but it was not. It was actually about another typing method, called DISC. Right away, I found DISC a lot easier to comprehend than the 4 Humors, and the people in the DISC book seemed a lot more real than theororetical. So I bought the book, and I studied the book through and through. I noticed pretty early on that DISC was actually considerably different than the 4 Humors, and much more real. My nearly 25 years of loyalty to DISC started with me buying that book

My first intro into Briggs Myers came a few years later, in the early 2000's, when I was at a church women's event, and one of the speakers at the event encouraged me to read Kiersey's book, "Please Understand Me 2". I read the book, and I could almost immediately clearly identify myself as one of Kiersey's main types (guardians, artisans, rationals and idealists). I couldn't get any further than that, though. In 2007, I took what would end up being the first of many Briggs Myers tests I took over a 4 year period. I got a mistype on my first test, snd I knew it was a mistype, because it did not match up with the Kiersey type I had identified myself belonging to. So over the next 4 years, I took several different Briggs Myers tests, both dichotomy and function tests, and couldn't get the same result twice. I literally gave up on ever finding the truth about my Briggs Myers type

Then, I read Workplace ratings for Briggs Myers. I found they were not very high. However, Workplace did give significantly higher ratings to DISC and the Big 5. In 2009, I had taken 2 tests: my first DISC assessment and my first Big 5-and, go figure, like a good girl, I had saved my results for both! I then looked at the Big 5 results, and lo and behold, they had been correlated with a Briggs Myers type that was a part of my Kiersey type! I then tried to figure out if my DISC result correlated with the same Briggs Myers type. I had to do a few years of study and research to figure it out, but yes, my DISC result did, in fact, correlate to the same Briggs Myers type as my Big 5. But before I was going to say that the Briggs Myers type that correlated with those results was, in fact , my type, I wanted to get the same result twice on both DISC and the Big 5. So I took both tests again, years later, with different companies, and got nearly identical results. So I accepted the Briggs Myers type that both my DISC and Big 5 results correlated with as my Briggs Myers type. Notice how ultimately, I found out my Briggs Myers type by not even taking a Briggs Myers test, but rather, by focusing on other, more reliable, methods, and seeing how they correlated with Briggs Myers 😮

I first took an Enneagram test in 2015, I believe. Then I took it again last year. My 3 highest numbers were the same both times, and last year, I figured out what my enneagram was, by following the directions on the test

I also started learning about Socionics in 2020 and Jungian typology (SOJT) last year. I am not as well versed in them, as a result. But I can tell you that Jungian typology (SOJT) is the only typing method coming obviously out of Jung's work that Workplace gives a good rating to. It gives bad ratings to Briggs Myers and Socionics

So after that story, now I hope you can see where I intend to go with this blog. I will be talking about how to use the only 3 of all the methods I mentioned, that got at least a 60% (passing) rating from Workplace, to type yourself and others. Those methods are: DISC with a 97% Workplace rating, Jungian typology with an 80% Workplace rating, and the Big 5, with a 78% Workplace rating. I'm also going to look at Enneagram, because I think its Workplace rating would probably pass if people simply read the test instructions. I'm going to pass Enneagram on my reviews, anyway

The other methods, for obvious reasons, will not get good reviews from me, and I will not talk about them extensively outside of the review section, like I will the others.

And one last side note: I had a pediatric stroke, and 2 things I have as a result of that stroke are cerebral palsy and dyslexia. The dyslexia definitely affects my writing. So sometimes things might not flow, and I might not choose the best wording. Please understand that about me, as you read this blog.

Happy reads to you all, and I hope you learn a lot. Let's get typing!