• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[Type 3] Could I be Type Three?

Jeffster

veteran attention whore
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
6,743
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx
Maybe I'm actually Type Ten - The Awesomesauce.
 

wren

New member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
384
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
4
Type Three: "Key Motivations: Want to be affirmed, to distinguish themselves from others, to have attention, to be admired, and to impress others."

Type Seven: "Key Motivations: Want to maintain their freedom and happiness, to avoid missing out on worthwhile experiences, to keep themselves excited and occupied, to avoid and discharge pain."

All of that seems accurate to me. But when I read the behavior descriptions found on the same site (Enneagram Institute: Enneagram Testing & Training) a lot of it isn't true at all. Especially the Three, which paints the picture of an energetic and super-charming businessman type, which doesn't fit me at all. But then, the Seven describes an extroverted type as well.

Behavior-wise, I am a closer match to the Nine or Four descriptions, yet I don't relate to their "Key motivations" at all.

:thelook:

This is once again why I say I don't fit into the Enneagram.

what is your question then?
 

theplacesyoullgo

New member
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
243
If you look at the types one at a time and go around the circle, you'll see how there's a sort of basic change that takes place from one type to the next on one parameter, but the more types you skip around the circle the more complex the nature of difference. For example, one is more deatached and objective and morality whereas two is personal about morality. A one with a two wing, and more so with a strong two wing, will make morality a more personal matter, and a two with a one wing, and especially with a one wing, will be more detached in their personal morality. The strong wings come close to blending in the middle without actually doing so; once you cross that line, you're in the realm of the next type. You could point out other type similarities, such as how fours and ones have a lot in common because both are in the frustration triad and both tend to be pretty serious people. However, in explaining these similarities you see that there is far more complex a difference than between one and two. Fours are an image-type, like twos. Once could basically say that a two is an image-focused one and a one is a gut-centered two. Take being image centered and take the locus off morality and onto internal feelings (how others feel vs. how you feel) then you have made a composite step from one to four. Further, the types are arranged according to gut, heart, and head triads along the circle. Looking at this, you can see you can be a three and have a seven in your trifix. Also, once you align the types in the circle, the directions of integration and disintegration also fit nicely into the enneagram symbol.

Rasputin, I just wanted to say that I appreciate you taking the time to type all of that for me. I understand it all better now, but the devil's advocate in me still has a few doubts. Namely, I can't help but feel that a lot of the theory behind the Enneagram is rooted in confirmation bias; I feel like even if the types were in a completely different order, one could still make the same case for it. Still, I enjoy reading about it and feel that the 3w4 descriptions out there are very accurate for me, even if I don't feel very "fourish."
 

Chloe

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
2,196
Namely, I can't help but feel that a lot of the theory behind the Enneagram is rooted in confirmation bias; I feel like even if the types were in a completely different order, one could still make the same case for it. "

I thought that too before I read about the development of whole enneagram system. (order of types etc.)
 

Rasputin

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
30
MBTI Type
ENTJ
I think what Chloee is talking about is the ordering of disintegration and integration that runs a line of 1-4-2-8-5-7 and 3-9-6 or 1-7-5-8-2-4 and 3-6-9. When you look at the type descriptions, along with their component desires and fears, you can see how the directions of disintegration and integration describe what similarities certain types have to other types with regard to being unhealthy/healthy and stressed/confident.

Chloee may also be talking about the triads. The three intelligence centers (gut, image, head) from a triad (1,9,8-2,3,4-5,6,7), the Hornevian groups (withdrawn, assertive, compliant) form a triad (5,4,9-7,8,3-1,2,6), the coping styles (reactive, positive outlook, competency) form a triad (4,6,8-9,7,2-1,3,5), and the expressive style (out of touch with, underexpressive of, overexpressive of...primary intelligcene center) form a triad (3,6,9-5,2,8-1,4,7). These four triads arrange the types in all possible configurations, explaining one key quality that each type has in common with two other types.

The arrangment in order along the enneagram symbol results from the intelligence center triad being the most primary triad...it's the one that's most inborn, ingrained, it has more to do with the way your brain is wired. From here, the next traid in the heirarchy is how one responds to the intelligence center. One can either overexpress, underexpress, or be out of touch with one's primary intelligece center. The grouping of these two most fundamental traids account for type ordering along the symbol, explaining why wings must be adjacent to core type. If you arrange the traids differently, making, say, the coping styles most primary, then you really mix things up because the intelligence centers are most primary and coping styles derive ultimately from that...if you arrange wings by coping style then you are arranging them by something more derivative and less fundamental...they woudln't even really be a wing, be definition, anymore. If you arrange wings randomly, stating that any type can have any wing, then you are ignoring the fundamental dynamics of the system as just explained, and it would not longer matter that a fixation starts from the fundamental aspect of intelligence center, then one's reaction to it, then how one copes with it, etc.
 
Top