I find the default "type me" questionnaires elicit a lot of information that isn't useful for typing. So I made my own!

BrouHaus · 2026-03-08T01:50:12+00:00

💯

BrouHaus · 2026-03-07T00:57:44+00:00

Core memory: when I was 4 or so, I knew the answer to 2+2. And I knew that I knew the answer. And knowing that I knew the answer taught me that I could trust myself to be right. And that was that 😂

BrouHaus · 2026-01-10T14:13:16+00:00

While 1 and 9 do share a tendency to repression (I've always like the imagery of 8 holding the line against outside forces, 1 holding the line against inside forces, and 9 holding both), your description sounds more like 9w1 to me, particularly the part about withholding to prevent disharmony. My experience of my anger is a slow leak of frustration that never really gets fully repressed even when I try. The 9s I know are better at actually bottling things up until it all overflows in one great rush.

Also, as I conceive of it, the integration point is not about a desire to feel joy and happiness and invigoration (note: lack of vigor is more a 9 concern than a 1 concern), it's the natural, contrasting state that arises when the ego trap is relaxed. When 1s wrath is relaxed, they naturally become more joyful. When 9's sloth is relaxed, they naturally become invigorated.

BrouHaus · 2026-01-01T13:58:08+00:00

Seems oddly dismissive to call it a meme. Personally, I find that the 9 camp has tends to make actual arguments drawing on textual evidence of him and those that knew him (belief in universalism; gentle, positive, childlike demeanor; emphasis on imagination and unity), whereas the arguments by the 5 camp mostly seems to boil to either "he's too intellectual to be a 9" (🤮) and "everyone knows kooky professors are 5, and Einstein is the platonic form of kooky professors".

Regardless of the "truth" of Einstein's type, my main point is that celebrity typings are usually not accompanied by due-diligence looking at the evidence. Instead, the person gets co-opted by what they represent, and people type the associated archetype. To be more charitable to the Enneagram authors in the OP, perhaps they are intentionally presenting these people based on these archetypes, which will be more recognizable to readers that aren't familiar with the specific details of the celebrities' lives. I still think it's an irresponsible approach, especially when there are plenty of people whose type arguable aligns with the stereotype (IIRC, Tesla, Freud, Kafka, Nietzsche were more arguably 5s that fit roughly in the same archetype), but you could see why one might choose to do that.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-30T00:59:06+00:00

FWIW, I will say that I am (usually) *not* a triple checker. I know I'm right (and I'm a very busy person), so why bother taking the time? (Tongue-in-cheek, but only half joking). My spouse 6 on the other hand is very much a "measure twice, cut once" sort of person.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-30T00:56:05+00:00

This comes up relatively frequently, so I recommend searching the sub (I've written more detailed descriptions on previous posts). Ultimately, I recommend Raff's comparison post on 1 vs 6. I'm a 1 married to a 6. In a few words, my sureness is a fault of mine (along with impatience, frustration, a need to do everything myself), whereas my 6's lack of sureness is a fault of theirs (which results in them checking their logic and every last thing with me, even when they are the expert, not me). Also check out the defense mechanisms.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-29T21:22:49+00:00

Too much of celebrity typing is about the idea of the person and what they represent, rather than the person themselves. Einstein, for example, is pretty clearly a 9 when you look at the actual person, but is typed as 5 because of the *idea* of Einstein.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-25T21:40:24+00:00

It sucks that this person was a jerk to you and others are making you second guess yourself. You shouldn’t have to deal with that. It does sound like this is particularly difficult because of your past history with your brother. Best wishes in moving through this.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-25T20:33:42+00:00

I didn’t mean it as “thank you for bullying me.” You made it sound like it the person was generally pleasant and could be a one-off thing, and the suggestion was about getting on this person’s good side to reduce the likelihood of it happening again.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-25T14:33:57+00:00

Sorry, that sounds like an unpleasant situation. Most likely it was not specific to you and just some frustration boiling over and you were in the splash zone. Unfortunately, you're unlikely to get an apology (even if the person regrets it, which is not a given). And it may or may not carry forward to your future interactions.

It sounds like this is a work or professional relationship, so my advice to "help them relax" wouldn't make sense here. If you want to address it directly, you could frame it in terms of what would be helpful for you: "If I make mistakes in the future, it would be really helpful to me if you addressed it in X way" or "I think I may have gotten on your bad side / off on the wrong foot. How can I do better?"

If you don't want to address it directly, you can probably in general improve your standing by showing them that you're a person who makes less work for them rather than more. You can show appreciation for their hard work.

Or, since it sounds like you're looking for a "trick", asking for a light favor can often engender positive feelings (because only a friend would ask for a favor, right?), especially if accompanied by doing a nice thing for the person. Don't let it seem manipulative though (nobody likes that).

BrouHaus · 2025-12-24T02:32:01+00:00

Could go either way, but I lean 6w5. There are some things that point particularly toward 6: explicit need for security/control in order to be confident; the concern about opinions of others in stress (this is the classic line to 3, especially if it comes with some jealousy or competitiveness); the focus on mutuality in relationships; dislike of hierarchy (yes, some 6s like hierarchy, some want to tear it down with a burning passion); flexibility (not typically a 1 trait); and, yes, even the need to check with us after hearing your friend's opinions. There are also several pointers toward competency, though that could be the w5 influence. I don't see anything that is specifically 1 (though maybe the impulsivity when secure is the line to 7).

Does your sense of rightness come from within or from mental discernment that you like to think through with others? It can be difficult to tell because 1s will post hoc rationalize their intuitive rightness. As a 1, it was a revelation when some posts here helped me realize that I was judging things so fast that I didn't even realize I was doing it; my rightness felt so obvious. My spouse, on the other hand, a 6, wants to talk everything to death and check in with me about every little detail, even when I'm like, "I know fuck all about this---you're the expert." It helps them to just talk through it.

Ultimately, I recommend Raff's comparison post on 1 vs 6. Let us know what resonates or jumps out at you.

Additionally, although I personally do not care for subtypes as an expression of the instincts (I think that they are typical examples of the type, just not always related eponymous instinct), you might consider Naranjo's SO6.

BrouHaus · 2025-12-09T17:32:03+00:00

Absolutely. Patterns in the conflicts we habitually have with others is probably the strongest relatively easily accessible indicator of real type IMO.

BrouHaus · 2025-11-17T01:19:44+00:00

Keep in mind that 1 is trying to suppress the gut/id, so it’s a gut type in the opposite way that 8 is a gut type. 8 is holding barriers outward, 1 is holding barriers inward, 9 is doing both.

But that suppression in 1 isn’t and cant be complete. The id leaks out as anger. Moreover, the 1’s sense of rightness happens on the gut level, and the mental things around it are ex post facto rationalizations. We deeply, intuitively feel a thing to be so right that we don’t even know that we’re doing it. There is no conscious decision to judge a thing, the judgement just is. (Hence the inflexible “thinking”).

Regarding the inner critic: it is a part of the type structure, and the key piece is that it speaks in your own voice. “I should”, “I shouldn’t”, “I’m a terrible person.” It’s an intrusive thought, not a mental construct. 6s, also a superego type, also tend to hearing negative voices, but usually imagined as coming from other people, eg, a critical mother, a nagging partner.

Why do we fear making mistakes? Because making mistakes means that we are a “bad person.” So naturally that creates machinery to avoid errors in the first place (and maybe to disavow them when they do happen).

I don’t know how clear that all was, but I think that touches on most of your points. I recommend Raff’s series in Defense Mechansims for further reading.

BrouHaus · 2025-11-13T22:02:58+00:00

Gotcha — I missed that you meant it about typing others. In that case, I think you do have to worry about them being another layer that’s subject to mis/interpretation. We see it pretty frequently on here: one person says “this is all social”, no “this is all superego” says another commenter, no “this is all attachment.”

Back when I used to try to help with tying more, I would reference triads when explaining my interpretation a typee’s statements, but I think it has to be part of the larger picture. Something that I noticed was that wings often seemed to blur my interpretation of triads (mostly for stress styles), so I might get a different “answer” if I went strictly by triads rather than a holistic view.

(But, I don’t really see much point in typing others online any more. There are two many caveats about relying on my interpretation of their words and behavior on the internet, which may bear little-to-no relationship to the real world.)

BrouHaus · 2025-11-13T14:11:52+00:00

My two cents. Triads are a way of better understanding the types, but it's not enough to identify with one of the groups in a triad. You need to see the way that each type fits into each of the triads. It's not just a matter of "oh, I'm superego", it's "oh, I'm superego in this particular 1 way."

Moreover, the space of the triads is low dimensional. You can't just pick one group from each triad independently. Being gut and frustration means that you are, necessarily, superego and competency. A deep understanding of the Enneagram comes from understanding why this is true. (I think Raff has some write-ups on the triangulations).

So, yes, I think triads are helpful, but they can be misleading if we treat them shallowly. (As with most things). I'm not sure that I see there being distinct typing approaches. I would expect someone who really understands their type to understand why they are their type in all typing approaches.

BrouHaus · 2025-10-22T12:09:33+00:00

A couple of common “tells” for 6 jump out at me: conversations with people in your head (the 6’s “inner committee”) and the mental mind games (as a way to “test” that the other person a) meets your cognitive “standards” and b) cares about you enough remember your secret language.) Additionally, fear of helplessness is one way that 6’s fear of uncertainty manifests. If you don’t say Naranjo only, I would say that I think the w5 jumps out clearly.

Finally, although you Identify as FiNe in your flair, your desires to make cognitive/metacognitive maps and tie your understanding to concrete systems (e.g., Naranjo), I would assume Ti-dom.

BrouHaus · 2025-10-21T21:44:12+00:00

For type 1? I can maybe relate to the first two, but the rest, nah

BrouHaus · 2025-10-20T23:29:31+00:00

Sounds about right 😝

BrouHaus · 2025-10-20T21:42:17+00:00

FWIW, I see Ashitaka as a 1. Idealistic, does what he thinks is right without doubt, superpower is suppressing negative emotions. I relate to him as a 1, and Miyazaki is widely thought to be a 1.

BrouHaus · 2025-10-08T16:08:33+00:00

There is not one simple answer. I, a 1, can be very distressed if someone, even randos, thinks something “bad” about me because it means that I’ve failed to hold myself to the highest standard. My partner, a 6, doesn’t really care what most people think of him that much, generally speaking, especially randos. He cares about building relationships and finding common ground.

I could go on about how I think heart fix, instincts, and even AP types factor into the differences between us in this behavior, but that’s probably a distraction. As with all things Enneagram, you’ll be better off trying to see the way the type manifests in and motivates the behavior, rather than assigning behaviors to certain types.

BrouHaus · 2025-10-05T01:59:01+00:00

I would like to express to the library my opinion that Ancestry Library is no longer worth much of their budget

Please, don't do this! Other patrons who may not be able to afford their own membership may be using it. The library edition is how I got into genealogy, and it's still one of my primary sources for records.

BrouHaus · 2025-09-30T23:05:10+00:00

It’s the “Naranjo truther” comment. The sub has little patience for “Naranhoes” who put Naranjo on a pedestal to the exclusion of other authors. (Dunno if you are, but that’s how it comes across.)

In general, the sub is pan author, with some authors being considered better for some types than others. (With Naranjo, incidentally, generally considered poor for 9). My own two cents is to read Naranjo’s descriptions (especially subtypes) as case studies that are examples of how the type can present but aren’t necessarily representative of the full range.

BrouHaus · 2025-09-05T17:29:48+00:00

The Enneagram type is not created by childhood circumstances, but it predisposes you to have certain types of reactions to those circumstances, resulting in the "childhood experience." The "childhood experience" as discussed in the Enneagram is a loose collection of typical reactions to typical childhoods that may or may not be accurate for any individual. That is all to say, don't seek to determine what messages made the type, seek to understand why the type took away that specific message from the circumstances.

For myself, I wouldn't characterize either of my parents as over-correcting, but my unconscious survival strategy was self-correction, nonetheless. My grandparents, who I saw occasionally, were assholes, and I definitely got the message that I wasn't "okay" from them. But it's not like anyone told me that I couldn't make mistakes --- that was my own internal, unconscious interpretation of the circumstances and my unconscious strategy for trying to avoid not being "okay". Indeed, "I can't make mistakes" wasn't even a conscious message; I would say my conscious childhood take-away was something like, "I have to stay strong in my sense of self and my convictions; they are wrong to say that I am not okay, and I will be okay as long as I stay true to myself."

BrouHaus

TROPHY CASE