The relationship between ETI and MBTI or enneagram is something that has been queried from the beginning of this test. This suggests that any theory of personality types, if accurate, would point in the same direction as other theories. The assumption is that a true self is at the centre of a collection of labels. ETI doesn’t challenge this viewpoint in it’s lack of consistency with other forms of typing. Rather, it builds on it from a different perspective.
In ETI, every type exists within the individual. This is due to the fact that epistemic functions can be very easily challenged and changed by anyone. There remains a constant, unwavering primary type at the centre. This is built on habits of thinking rather than something innate. ETI is, in this sense, more superficial than MBTI or enneagram. Those seeking to use it are encouraged to type themselves and others quickly rather than pondering the true self of a subject.
Furthermore, the focus of ETI differs slightly from other typology systems. Other typing systems tend to place a lot of focus on how the individual relates to a wider social group. ETI on the other hand pays greater attention to how the true self exists within a cacophony of inner voices. It looks at the habitual perspective we cling to within ourselves rather than that which we cling to around others.
This is the result of an individualist approach to typing. MBTI is more functionalist by comparison. The cognitive functions of each MBTI type help an individual fulfil a larger, external role in society. The same could also be said for enneagram which, although more introspective, still analyses the individual in relation to societal values. A person’s ETI type has no bearing over their position in society though. An epistemic form of typing simply lets us see how an individual determines what they know. It looks at how we form beliefs rather than who we are and what we know as a consequence. These beliefs determine what people identify with. Therefore, ETI places greater importance on the individual’s identity rather than their utility.
It is for this reason that the MBTI and enneagram types show less correlation to ETI than they do to each other. ETI fulfils a need expressed more effectively in tritype theory and the theory of shadow functions. Namely, it focuses on the subjective experiences we have with each archetype as it exists within our own unconscious. This and more may be extrapolated by discovering the type a person identifies with. Therefore, the introspective journey doesn’t end with knowing the primary type. It begins.
Σχόλια