Download Episode Here – right click link and select “Save Link As…”
In this episode, Joel and Antonia chat with enneagram expert Dr. Beatrice Chestnut about her experience with Myers-Briggs® at the Personality Hacker Profiler Training live event.
In this podcast you’ll find:
- Guest host Dr. Beatrice Chestnut joins.
- Beatrice’s experiences as an Enneagram expert diving deeper into Myers-Briggs® at our Profiler Training live event.
- How does Beatrice initially think the two systems may correspond?
- The complexities of matching up the two systems – and why this isn’t simply a 1-1 correlation.
- What was it like for Beatrice to be profiled live on stage?
- The additional insight Beatrice gained through understanding her Myers-Briggs® type at a deeper level.
- What are some more challenges of merging the two systems?
- How do some of the enneagram types initially seem to match up with the cognitive function descriptions?
- The correspondences Joel and Antonia have found between their Myers-Briggs® and Enneagram types.
- Why is it possible that the two systems match up more closely in their “prescription” than in their “description”?
- How the instinctual variations of the Enneagram types bring additional nuance.
- Diving deeper into how the systems align – plus how the functions lower in our stack could align with our Enneagram type.
- A note on finding growth paths – the power of discovering your type in both systems.
- Find Dr. Beatrice Chestnut at https://cpenneagram.com
To subscribe to the podcast, please use the links below:
Subscribe with iTunes
Non-iTunes Link
Soundcloud
Stitcher
Google Play
Spotify
Radio Public
PlayerFM
Listen Notes
If you like the podcast and want to help us out in return, please leave an honest rating and review on iTunes by clicking here. It will help the show and its ranking in iTunes immensely! We would be eternally grateful!
Want to learn more?
Discover Your Personal Genius
We want to hear from you. Leave your comments below…
Share:
Podcast - Episode 0384 - Theory vs Reality of Personality Type Dynamics
Podcast - Episode 0386 - Personality And Paradox
33 comments
Really thought-provoking stuff, as usual!
I’m always extra excited for episodes that include Dr. Beatrice Chestnut (and Uranio Paes when he can make it), not only for their obvious expertise and the cross-pollination between them and PH, but also because I think that interchange is at the forefront of a more “formalized” synthesis of the best ideas of different systems. There has long been a push in that direction in the type enthusiast community, but lately there seems to be more of it starting to emerge on a more professional level (as another example, Dr. Dario Nardi incorporates some ideas from Dr. Viktor Gulenko, a Socionist, into his book “The Magic Diamond”).
Back to the main topic though — as an INTJ and Self-Preservation 4, there are definitely some interesting ways that I’ve experienced that alchemy between the two systems. For example, I definitely come across as “softer” than many INTJs, even taking into account that INTJs aren’t typically as cold and harsh as stereotypes would have you believe. I’ve even had someone tell me that their first impression was of “a really odd version of INFP,” and ISFP was briefly considered during a type assessment after they had figured out my functions.
On the plus side, I have a deep respect for my own and others’ emotional experience, and I don’t tend to lose myself in a role or aspiration that doesn’t truly resonate with me. On the other hand, my go-to solution for people who are hurting is to try and provide practical solutions, and it can be frustrating when that fails to really help them. Self-Pres 4s can have a particularly strong altruistic streak, so it’s a pretty common occurrence for me to really feel for someone, while making clumsy and ineffective attempts to comfort them in the way that they actually need.
The perfectionist streak in INTJs and Self-Pres 4 is also really magnified, as is keeping my suffering to myself, trying to do everything on my own, and seldom getting any actual satisfaction out of my accomplishments (due to not reaching that nebulous and fleeting goalpost of “good enough”). What you guys were saying about growth path alignment definitely checks out — being more objective, more willing to “get my hands dirty,” and taking action even if I don’t feel 100% ready, all really tie in with both healthy Te development and integration from 4 to 1.
On a side note, is there anything in the pipeline in terms of how less common type combos can cause mistyping, either of oneself or of others? Like, how might someone being a 7 obscure the fact that they’re an ISxJ (and vice-versa)? What red herrings might show up if someone has Te as a dominant/driver function, and yet is also a 2 or 9? It’s a lot of ground to cover in one episode obviously, but even just a few examples could really help others who are stuck on finding their type (it definitely would’ve sped things up for me). My hunch is that the less common (or even “impossible”) type combos are a bit more common than people think.
Thanks for this thoughtful look at Enneagram and MBTI and the explicit push back against attempts to reduce one system to the other, as many commonly do.
In my mind it’s essential to emphasize how MBTI is first and foremost a model of cognition, even if it relates to behavior, just as Enneagram is primarily about core motives, instincts, and emotional patterns.
As someone whose focus is split between personality type and astrology, I more often deal with astrologers who conflate the four functions with the four elements (fire-intuition, earth-sensation, air-thought, water-feeling) which do bear some similarities but also key differences: fire is assertive while intuition isn’t necessarily, air is sociable while thinking isn’t necessarily… And these are both fourfold systems, nevermind the distinctions of eightfold and ninefold systems
I believe the similarities between these systems suggest how certain qualities tend to entail others regardless of the domain of lived experience you find them, but that doesn’t make them all the same. The cosmos is too complex for that.
I’ve been thinking about and have had some other things I wanted to ask/mention:
1) I love how you guys called it “alchemical”— I was sort of imagining explaining how it works to someone, and realized that it’s like potentially “wrong way” it could look would be container of M&Ms and Skittles. As a whole, it can look the same (like a person’s personality), but that if you looked deeply, you could sort them out. You could look at each piece and say “This is because of my Enneagram type” and “This is because of my MBTI type”, like you could go “This is a skittle” and “This is an M&M.”
There might be a couple of things like that, but I think for the most part the personality nodes that influence us actually mix, amplify, and/or lessen each other.
It feels a bit obvious, but I liked having something of a metaphor for it.
2) It might not be a huge correlation, but I was wondering if Ti and Fi have any impact on what typology most people are drawn to.
It would seem like MBTI is very Ti/Fe— MBTI focuses on a more “technical” side of our personality—literally “cognitive functions” and “brain wiring”, which to some extent we’ve been able to get evidence for. A lot of the external actions involve getting functional needs met, and it almost feels like the path to growth is to be a good caretaker to yours (and others’) functions: Making sure you’re giving enough attention to your Dominant function, maturing your Co-Pilot, leaving space/appreciating your 7th/8th functions, etc.
The Enneagram, on the other hand, seems to focus on the emotional/evaluative parts of our personality. It focuses on our deepest desires, fears, and motivations and how it affects the way we see the world, which generally feels more Introverted Feeling. From what I understand, the method of growth is integration—incorporating the positive aspects from the other types with the ultimate goal (that may or may not be attainable) of taking on the positive aspects of all nine types.
This definitely isn’t concrete, and I can definitely have a bias — I like the Enneagram, but it went to the back-burner to MBTI. Now, I’m thinking that it could have something to do with needing to develop Ni and Fe (which I naturally value) vs integrating to type 3, which I don’t care much for (which could have something to do with 7th-function Te).
I figured it could be a good discussion, though.
I have noticed that there is a lot of MBTI vs Enneagram “which one is better” rhetorics out there, and I am so happy that you take a different approach. My view is that it is not that important to fit the types of the two systems but that the models COMPLEMENT each other in a beautiful way. When using them together, I personally have got a lot out of it as a tool for personality development, thinking about both how cognitive functions AND how my core motivations, fears, instincts etc play in concert. One plus one equals more than two.
I am confident that I got both my MBTI and my Enneagram type right and I have a combination that seems unusual (I am an ENFP sexual One). So, my Enneagram type explains why I’m not your typical ENFP and Enneagram work has immensely helped me grow toward joy and serenity, which I lacked in my life. And my MBTI type explains why I may not your typical One and helps me understand “my toolkit” to realize that development. Both systems help me in my relations to other people. I look very much forward to hearing more from you on this topic!
I meant to say more about the loud functions correlation to enneagram. The tertiary for instance was talked about as being loud and enneagram is a lot about our defenses. As though the coping skills we create may be to protect our primary function. I can feel that for myself. I feel like when I’m in my loop, my six-ness is more obvious and I rely on my memory or comfort more than creating new experiences. Or perhaps I’m in a situation that is making it difficult for me to access my Ne in conjunction with my Fi. Which will be often since the world values Si and Te much more so.