[Traditional Enneagram] The new and improved Enneagram! From the sponge and evan.

[Delphyne]

Yeah, except that I was taught to suppress them, and the enneagram is something I'm supposed to have learned in infancy.

You´ve developed your filter and your focus of attention at the end of your infancy at the latest (though I think you´re born your type), but that doesn´t mean that you won´t react on your environment. It´s part of your focus of attention to react very sensitively on specific messages.
If you were simply taught to suppress your anger than now it shouldn´t be a problem to do as you like. You call yourself „mom“, so I guess you don´t live with your parents anymore, right? If you can´t let go of your suppression, it´s because you subconsciously wanted yourself to suppress your anger.

The other problem is that Xander says I'm not a five.

I don´t think you´re a five either. Your previous post points to quite another type. Ones specifically suppress their anger, because they think it´s not okay to express it under normal circumstances. It´s important to do the “right“ thing, to be “good“. Though Ones will express their anger if they think it´s morally justified. For example, they can angrily denounce injustices. Political Ones often show a lot of their anger.

 

[Haphazard]

The wing theory confuses the hell out of me.

 

[INTJMom]

You´ve developed your filter and your focus of attention at the end of your infancy at the latest (though I think you´re born your type), but that doesn´t mean that you won´t react on your environment. It´s part of your focus of attention to react very sensitively on specific messages.
If you were simply taught to suppress your anger than now it shouldn´t be a problem to do as you like. You call yourself „mom“, so I guess you don´t live with your parents anymore, right? If you can´t let go of your suppression, it´s because you subconsciously wanted yourself to suppress your anger.

I feel like this isn't the point I was trying to make. The point is that I think I would have been a "turbulent" if I would not have been squelched by my parents for showing my feelings. I was forced to suppress. It did not come naturally, and furthermore if I were a "supressive", as somebody suggested, then that would make me a five, which I am not. Since I am most likely a four, I am probably firstly a turbulent deep down inside, but that ruins the whole thing because I was trying to confirm that I was a four with the information in this thread, but that did not happen.

Though it is interesting to learn that I probably am a "turbulent" who likes to show their feelings.
This explains a lot of the faces I make, and why I like to be dramatic every so often,
and why I like to be wild and crazy at concerts.

I don´t think you´re a five either. Your previous post points to quite another type. Ones specifically suppress their anger, because they think it´s not okay to express it under normal circumstances. It´s important to do the “right“ thing, to be “good“. Though Ones will express their anger if they think it´s morally justified. For example, they can angrily denounce injustices. Political Ones often show a lot of their anger.

I used to think I was a one, but the description reminds me too much of the SJ type, and before I had kids, I was pretty wild anyway.
If you guys think that Russell site is pretty accurate, then I'm pretty sure I'm a four,
which would make me avoidant-turbulent.

 

[Delphyne]

I feel like this isn't the point I was trying to make. The point is that I think I would have been a "turbulent" if I would not have been squelched by my parents for showing my feelings. I was forced to suppress.

The enneagram is not about what you would have been if you had the most understanding and loving parents, it´s about the prison you unconciously put yourself into. It´s part of the type to blame your environment.

It did not come naturally, and furthermore if I were a "supressive", as somebody suggested, then that would make me a five, which I am not.

Why? There are actually three suppressive types: 1,3, and 5.

Since I am most likely a four, I am probably firstly a turbulent deep down inside, but that ruins the whole thing because I was trying to confirm that I was a four with the information in this thread, but that did not happen.

Type Four´s passion is envy. Can you identify with that?

Though it is interesting to learn that I probably am a "turbulent" who likes to show their feelings.
This explains a lot of the faces I make, and why I like to be dramatic every so often,
and why I like to be wild and crazy at concerts.

I don´t know about Magic Poriferan´s system, but in the „normal“ enneagram the „turbulent“ is equivalent to the „reactive“ type and it´s about how you react to conflicts and problems. Everyone can be wild and crazy at concerts and dramatic, that has nothing to do with being a „reactive“ type.

I used to think I was a one, but the description reminds me too much of the SJ type, and before I had kids, I was pretty wild anyway.

Being wild doesn´t negate being a One. There are certainly INTJ Ones.

If you´re interested, you can ask yourself these two questions:
- What would happen if you wouldn´t suppress your anger anymore?
- What would happen if you wouldn´t be different from other people anymore?
Don´t answer them right away. The more you ponder over these questions, the more you are likely to tap into your subconsciousness.

 

[INTJMom]

I'm a 4>5>1>8

 

[TenebrousReflection]

When I've looked at various Enneagram descriptions in the past and taken several tests, I thought I was either a 4, 5, 1 or 2. (4w5 seemed to make the most sense under what little I know of the normal Enneagram system)

I also had a hard time with the descriptions in your system trying to figure out which really apply to me, since I also don't show a lot of emotion most of the time, but I sometimes have to focus a lot of energy to supress emotion in public (depending on the strength of the emotion), so its definately not somethign that comes naturally to me, and trying to show a fake emotion is next to impossible for me, so I would choose teh following order for those...

turbulent
suppressive
controlling

For the other set of variables, it was also hard to figure out which apply to me. There are a few things that are important to me that I do put a lot of effort to and give nearly complete disregard to the negative aspects of if it will bring me closer to those goals, but for everything else avoiding makes more sense, and when the benefit fo somethgin is intriguing, then I go into a more anyalytical pro/con analysis applying personalized weights to various aspects of the decision, so in the end I went with

avoiding
anticipating
persuing

I don't really understnad the inscintual/motivation stuff, and you did not give links for additional reading on that or give much of a description, so I don't know how I'd rank those.

If I understand your system, I'd end up somethign like this under it.

4>5>6>1>9>8>2>3>7

They one type I'd say I'm absolutly certain I am not and do not relate to at all is 3, and there is also a lot in 8 that is definately not me. After following the link that INJMom posted, I could see a strong case being made for me being a 1. Stronger than a 5, but still not as good of a match as a 4. The most surprising thing about the above results using your system is how low 2 scored and how comparativly high 8 scored. 6 and 9 also feel a bit out of place to me.

 

[mlittrell]

this is an interesting little system and all, only problem is, its nothing new. with mbti and the enneagram, one could come up with 1000s of different logical systems that all logically work. personally i dont think the enneagram is deep enough for there to be any point to looking into it this much. it seems that the enneagram is especially helpful when used in conjunction with mbti as a means of explaining motives and thats about it. props for you efforts though. it is quite impressive

 

[locke]

I think I understand it. I believe I'm a 9>4>6 I-S-P.

 

[surgery]

Avoiding | Anticipating | Pursuing
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

4|5|6 SPI

According to the system, is this combination possible? I know I am a Four, so I decided that I relate most to Five in the avoiding column and Six (based on descriptions) in the turbulant row.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Avoiding | Pursuing | Anticipating
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

4/5/8 So|Pr|In

According to the system, is this combination possible? I know I am a Four, so I decided that I relate most to Five in the avoiding column and Eight (based on descriptions) in the turbulant row.

Yes, it is possible. 4 and 5 bond on avoidance, 4 and 8 bond on turbulence. You will find that a combination is possible if both of the wings you pick are adjacent to the core type on the grid map I presented. I guess, that should be extended to mention that, however, all three types cannot be on the same row/column, even if they do meet the other requirement.

This also means the type you are least like is the 2.

 

[surgery]

Yes, it is possible. 4 and 5 bond on avoidance, 4 and 8 bond on turbulence. You will find that a combination is possible if both of the wings you pick are adjacent to the core type on the grid map I presented.

This also means the type you are least like is the 2.

Suddenly, I've decided that I am more of Six than an Eight. So, I bond Four and Six on turbulence. I think I just wanted to see myself as an Eight more so than Six, which further confirms that I am a Four.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Suddenly, I've decided that I am more of Six than an Eight. So, I bond Four and Six on turbulence. I think I just wanted to see myself as an Eight more so than Six, which further confirms that I am a Four.

Well, that's possible, too. It would shift everything around though. That makes the 7 the type you are least like.

 

[surgery]

That makes the 7 the type you are least like.

I think I am beginning to better understand the system now.

If I my preferences order is:

Avoiding | Anticipating | Pursuing
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

Four must be at the beginning and then Seven must be last, does that mean One would be somewhere near the middle? Potentially, I am 4|5|6|-----|7 SPI. How do I determine the remaining five?

 

[redacted]

There's no deterministic way to pick the rest of the types.

 

[surgery]

There's no deterministic way to pick the rest of the types.

So, it's best to just use descriptions to determine what suits you best?

This system is very interesting, by the way. Thanks for investing the time to create it, as well as answering all my questions.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I think I am beginning to better understand the system now.

If I my preferences order is:

Avoiding | Anticipating | Pursuing
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

Four must be at the beginning and then Seven must be last, does that mean One would be somewhere near the middle? Potentially, I am 4|5|6|-----|7 SPI. How do I determine the remaining five?

Based on what you have written, this should be your order:

4-5-6-1-9-8-2-3-7.

The reason for this, is that 5, being your primary wing, indicates that you are more likely to shift on mood than behavior. So your secondary type shifts one level on mood. Your tertiary type shifts one level on behavior. Your quadrinary type shifts one level on both. After that, there's one that stays on the first level of behavior, but shifts two levels on mood, then one that stays on the first level of mood, but shifts two levels on behavior.Then there's one that's one level down on behavior and two down on mood, then one that's one level down on mood and two down on behavior, and finally one that's two levels down on both.

It's pretty tedious, but I hope you can see the pattern. By deciding your first and second wing, you are determing if you would sooner shift on your mood, or on your behavior. There's only one debate here, as an aspect of the system I have not determined. Your order could arguably also go like this:

4-5-6-9-8-1-2-3-7.

You see, the difference is, on one hand, we could have the one shift on both variables come first (type 1), or we could have the types that double shift on one variable and don't shift on the other at all, come first (9 and 8). I have never decided which is more accurate.

All of this is assuming that it should logicall fall in that order, too. Of course, the further you go down the line from your original point of determination, the less reliable the theory becomes. Just like with the lower level functions in the MBTI. Their perscription based on the high level functions is highly questionable. However, while I don't know what Evan (formerly dissonance) thinks, I do honestly believe that you can use the first three types to figure out what type a person is least like. That is to say, the type that is at the bottom, of sorts.

 

[redacted]

I was thinking you could do it that way, but it seems a little shaky. For example, if you were really really really turbulent, and just barely highest in avoiding, couldn't 8 come even before 1? (it could even come before 5 technically.)

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I was thinking you could do it that way, but it seems a little shaky. For example, if you were really really really turbulent, and just barely highest in avoiding, couldn't 8 come even before 1? (it could even come before 5 technically.)

As you can see, I did propose two possiblities, one in which 8 did come before 1. What is interesting though, is your suggestion about 8 coming before 5. This would be the idea that someone so extremely leans on one variable, and so mildly on the other, that they would sooner drop two levels on the mild one than even one level on the extreme one.

Well, when you're right, you're right. That is entirely possible, though also a very fascinating case study. We have here two kinds of people. One who is so set in his/her mood that behavior will be flexed in whatever direction necessary at the behest of their dominant mood, and similarly, another person who is so set in one mode of behavior as to maintain no matter how far his/her mood gets pushed around. I dare say such people might be maladapters. Never the less, they would still exist, and need to be acounted for.

Indeed, such a possiblity would have to be accounted for no matter the system is approached. If it is simply a list of type based on similarity to those types, or a schematic for actual shifts in personality, or whatever... those who lean extremely toward mood or behavior still present a problem.

 

[Domino]

Where do I fit, Magic? *confused*

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Where do I fit, Magic? *confused*

Hmm, hard to say, miss googily-eyes. Your core type is 2, right?