How do you decide on an enneagram type?

[Silveresque]

[MENTION=6971]21%[/MENTION] - For me, being called "average" is nearly the same as being called a "failure". If I'm not outstanding, notable or above average in what I'm doing, then I've failed. I haven't done well enough.

I agree with this. I feel horrible when I'm "average", and in some ways I actually feel that either extreme is better than being average. Not only is average not living up to my standards, but it's ordinary and boring as well.

You can't seperate being called weird and being called an idiot? I was a bit shocked when I read this. It's definitely something worth looking into and I'm sure it'd help in sorting out your Enneagram.

Before I go on giving my definitions, would you mind elaborating on what you said above?
What makes those two words synonymous for you?
Being weird makes you feel like an idiot?

Well, generally when I do something weird, it's also dumb. Like when I say something that makes no sense or I dress oddly (by accident), so I'm referring to mistakes that make me look weird or stupid. Or if I start a thread and nobody responds, I'll think it's because people thought it was weird or stupid.

I don't know, I guess I'm mainly self-conscious about doing or saying stupid things rather than just weird. Being a recluse probably makes me weird, I guess, but I wouldn't mind if people considered me weird for that. Maybe I just have a weird definition of weird?

Do you honestly think that's a weird point of view? Can you relate to it at all?

I can relate to wanting to be unique, but I'm generally too self-conscious to feel good about being weird. I do kind of like being an asexual atheist loner because it increases my uniqueness, but I wouldn't be able to wear odd clothing because I would feel too self-conscious. I want my appearance to be "normal", and I want to sound normal as well, but I like having unique and interesting ideas and opinions.

 

[Silveresque]

^In case that didn't make sense, I think I've figured it out. I try to be "normal" to avoid looking stupid and making dumb mistakes in social situations. "Normal" to me means not taking unnecessary risks which make me stand out and thus feel vulnerable. But I want to express myself, so occasionally that desire leaks through the mask of "normal", and often I end up feeling like an idiot when that happens (because I'm putting myself out there and that's dangerous), even though the other person might not see anything wrong with it.

I hope I didn't just confuse you more.

 

[EJCC]

^ Well if that says anything, it says more about instinctual variants than your actual Enneagram type, imo -- definitely So first, maybe So/Sp.

 

[Silveresque]

^ Well if that says anything, it says more about instinctual variants than your actual Enneagram type, imo -- definitely So first, maybe So/Sp.

Really? I can't see myself as an So first...Shouldn't being reserved, private, and cautious in order to protect against feeling vulnerable go with Sp?

EDIT: And it sounds to me more like 5 than 9, since I think a 9 would be reserved to preserve the peace rather than protect against vulnerability...But it may not necessarily be type related.

 

[EJCC]

Really? I can't see myself as an So first...Shouldn't being reserved, private, and cautious in order to protect against feeling vulnerable go with Sp?

"Social" is a misleading word in this context -- it has a lot more to do with being aware of how people relate to each other (i.e. social dynamics), and where you stand in relation to other people, than it has to do with actually being a "social" person. Otherwise the So instinct would overwhelming be attributed to extroverts, and that's not the case!

I actually related a lot to elements of your post, because of being So/Sp. I absolutely hate hate HATE being embarrassed, and I am the most embarrassed when I feel like I've violated a social norm, when I feel people's eyes on me and imagine them thinking "What a freak" or "What an idiot" -- just like what you were saying about combining "weird" and "dumb", or whatever your word choice was. The thought process is: I must have been an idiot to have violated that social norm. But a lot of people don't think that way, you know? A lot of people honest to god don't care (or notice!!) where they stand with other people.

EDIT: And it sounds to me more like 5 than 9, since I think a 9 would be reserved to preserve the peace rather than protect against vulnerability...But it may not necessarily be type related.

Hard to know. I can think of very few types that wouldn't consider protecting against vulnerability to be a priority. But then again, my type (both MBTI and Enneagram) is like that to the max, so I dunno how it is with other people.


EDIT: You could easily be Sp/So also... but I feel like the fact that your vulnerability coincides with feeling "weird" by social standards is very very So.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Really? I can't see myself as an So first...Shouldn't being reserved, private, and cautious in order to protect against feeling vulnerable go with Sp?

Social types are simply preoccupied with how they relate (or don't relate) to groups. You can still be private and reticent. Being a social type doesn't automatically make you gregarious. You might want to be, deep down...

 

[Vizzy]

Interesting views from everyone.

About saying weird things (weird, not stupid) and behaving different, some might say that a 5 just wouldn't worry too much about that sort of attention/judgement from others.
They worry more about other things.

 

[Silveresque]

I'm actually leaning toward sp/sx. I seem to have a sort of push/pull relationship where on one hand, I want to express myself and share my inner world with my thoughts and feelings, but on the other hand, I feel vulnerable whenever I do this, so I often remain reserved and private in order to protect myself. I've been quite expressive and self-revealing in some of my posts, especially in my blog. I think for an sp/so or so/sp, the motivation to come out of the protective sp mode would be the desire to be successful socially...which doesn't appeal to me in the slightest.

I think anyone would be embarrassed when they mess up in front of a group, whether so first or last. But for me, the focus often isn't on the group, but on one person I respect who I feel must have a low opinion of me because of this stupid mistake I made. I sometimes do worry about how the things I say will affect my reputation I guess, but when I'm thinking about my reputation I tend to focus in on the perspective of one other person (e.g. this person must think I'm a complete idiot now...how will I ever be able to interact with this person again? ). I don't know if this is different from so or not.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Being SP-dom has nothing to do with being private or reserved or quiet. Would you call Steven Spielberg private or reserved? Or Alan Sugar?

The self-preservation instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their own sense of comfort & familiarity (or lack thereof), just like the social instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their place within groups of people (or lack thereof), and the sexual instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to intimacy and significant others (or lack thereof).

I think you're confusing your own Five-ish tendencies (being emotionally guarded, reviewing and obsessing over mistakes) with the SP instinct.

 

[Glycerine]

Being SP-dom has nothing to do with being private or reserved or quiet. Would you call Steven Spielberg private or reserved? Or Alan Sugar?

The self-preservation instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their own sense of comfort & familiarity (or lack thereof), just like the social instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their place within groups of people (or lack thereof), and the sexual instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to intimacy and significant others (or lack thereof).

I think you're confusing your own Five-ish tendencies (being emotionally guarded, reviewing and obsessing over mistakes) with the SP instinct.

Can you please elaborate on the lack thereof part? I dismissed SO dominance because of the lack of the group-orientedness but I seem to be highly aware of group dynamics.

 

[VagrantFarce]

Can you please elaborate on the lack thereof part? I dismissed SO dominance because of the lack of the group-orientedness but I seem to be highly aware of group dynamics.

You might be a loner, but think of yourself as being separate from "the group" - that's still a social instinct, since you're identifying yourself in terms of group relations. It's a very dysfunctional way of thinking about yourself, but it's more than possible.

Think of them as radars - they skew your overall attention in a certain direction. Whether you pay enough attention to take care of those needs is a different matter entirely.

 

[Silveresque]

Being SP-dom has nothing to do with being private or reserved or being reticent to open up. Would you call Steven Spielberg private or reserved? Or Alan Sugar?

Sp is about protection and security. I don't see why that can't include emotional security. Regardless of that, I'm pretty sure I'm Sp first.

The self-preservation instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their own sense of comfort & familiarity (or lack thereof), just like the social instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to their place within groups of people (or lack thereof), and the sexual instinct is meant to reflect people who are most drawn to intimacy and significant others (or lack thereof).

Interesting. I relate to sp's comfort and security. As for the other two, I don't have either--no place within groups and no intimacy or close friends, but the one that concerns me more is definitely sx. Not being a part of groups or having a social life doesn't bother me, but not having a single close friend bothers me very much. My biggest concern lately has been not being able to connect with anyone in any meaningful way. I feel like there's no point trying to make friends if there's no real connection or depth. I wonder if I could be an unhealthy sx/sp...

 

[VagrantFarce]

Sp is about protection and security. I don't see why that can't include emotional security.

I didn't say that, just don't think that because you're emotionally reticent that you're sp-dominant. Everyone's afraid of being "hurt".

 

[Glycerine]

You might be a loner, but think of yourself as being separate from "the group" - that's still a social instinct, since you're identifying yourself in terms of group relations. It's a very dysfunctional way of thinking about yourself, but it's more than possible.

Think of them as radars - they skew your overall attention in a certain direction. Whether you pay enough attention to take care of those needs is a different matter entirely.

Hmmm, that makes a lot of sense. I am probably so/sp then. I think of myself in terms of where I stand in the group a lot/compare myself/constantly observing the group dynamics and interactions and making mental notes. The so/sp descriptions don't really describe me all that well but the way you reframed it sounds like me. It also aligns more with my Fe dominance. Thanks a lot for the help.

 

[Silveresque]

Hmm...Now I think I could be So. Every time I type up a post, I'm extremely careful with the wording because I feel like I'm writing for an audience. I don't think I could post something without making at least a few minor edits (I've already made three edits in this post so far ). But then again, maybe it's just perfectionism and has nothing to do with instincts.

On the other hand, self-consciousness/wanting to seem normal is really the only thing about So that fits me. I don't care about elite groups, social status, group dynamics, or anything else So. And I don't care about "fitting in" so much as not standing out in a potentially bad way.

I can never seem to decide whether I have so, sx, neither, or both. Which one I relate to more depends on what examples I happen to be thinking of at the moment, and I can't get a clear picture of what kind of "radar" I have without looking for specific examples as evidence, so I don't see how I'm supposed to figure this out...

So...new question: how do you decide on an instinctual variant?

(I have now edited this post a total of 19 times before posting.)

EDIT: (And once after posting...)

 

[Noon]

I think you're a phobic 6 with a 5 wing.

 

[Glycerine]

or at least really strong 6 wing if not a 9.

EDIT: you picked something. yay!

 

[Silveresque]

I think you're a phobic 6 with a 5 wing.

Hmm...I do seem to act like a 6 on the forum, but I don't irl. I don't know, the type 6 descriptions make it seem like they're constantly worrying about something, but I prefer to just not think about things that could cause me anxiety or stress. By the way, people assume that I'm worrying or anxious about my type, and I'm not. I'm just curious.

 

[Southern Kross]

Hmm...Now I think I could be So. Every time I type up a post, I'm extremely careful with the wording because I feel like I'm writing for an audience. I don't think I could post something without making at least a few minor edits (I've already made three edits in this post so far ). But then again, maybe it's just perfectionism and has nothing to do with instincts.

On the other hand, self-consciousness/wanting to seem normal is really the only thing about So that fits me. I don't care about elite groups, social status, group dynamics, or anything else So. And I don't care about "fitting in" so much as not standing out in a potentially bad way.

All sounds like So to me - even the second paragraph. I'm so/sp and I very much identify (and I practically edit and re-write my posts 1000 times too ). I'm not especially ambitious nor interested in improving my social status, either, but I can be more aware of these elements than others. I put some stock in prestige and critical consensus, regarding say when choosing a book or film to read/watch, because it says that there is some agreement among experts on it's worth - this won't stop me from disagreeing with them but I still treat that work with a degree of respect. Focusing on group dynamics isn't necessarily what you think too; there are many ways that you could do this unconsciously.

 

[EJCC]

On the other hand, self-consciousness/wanting to seem normal is really the only thing about So that fits me. I don't care about elite groups, social status, group dynamics, or anything else So. And I don't care about "fitting in" so much as not standing out in a potentially bad way.

You may be overly focused on details -- it's not about "caring" about groups/status, it's about noticing it. I'm So dominant and I couldn't care less about status. But I can't help but see who's friends with whom, who's ambivalent about whom, who groups with what crew of people because of what. Not that I take part in any of it, but I'm very aware of social networking when it's taking place (i.e. all the time, because it doesn't stop!). And it's not about "wanting" to fit in -- it's about noticing when you don't. Some people are oblivious to that, but if you're aware of social dynamics, that also means you're aware of norms. You know what's "normal", but that doesn't mean you follow that norm, or even want to follow it, just like Vagrant Farce said.

From all the posts of yours that I've read in this thread, you definitely seem So, especially in that last regard.

Also regarding Sx -- desiring close friendships only matters to instinctual variants in a relative degree. As much as you want intimacy, how often do you think about that need? Also keep in mind that Sx is about more than just intimacy and relationships -- it's about intensity of experience. I have an Sx/Sp friend, and the type of intensity he actively seeks out is the type that involves very serious, nonstop, five hour long conversations about life, love, science and philosophy (he's an ENFJ). But any other intense "intimate" experience could be included here. In general, you seem much more Sp and So than you do Sx -- your communication style and the things you take notice of in your life (yes I know this is a big generalization from very little data but hear me out) don't seem all that Sx relatively speaking. You only mentioned wanting a close friend that one time, and the rest of the time it was all security, reclusiveness from groups, abnormality.