User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8

  1. #1
    Senior Member NK258's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    288

    Default E2 - differentiating between SO & SX Dom.

    I'm having serious trouble figuring out if I'm an sx/so , or an so/sx. So I'm wondering, is there the possibility of both being equally dominant or 'balanced' ?

    When I read Claudio I relate more to the So Dom but on the other hand, I relate to the descriptions of the Sx Dom too. Maybe I just would prefer to be an So Dom (?) :p

    Seriously though, does anyone have any resources I might not have come across yet, or any thoughts on the subject to better differentiate between the two subtypes of E2 ?
    6w7 Sx/Sp (621 or 612. Same diff :p).

  2. #2
    Entertaining Cracker five sounds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    729 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEE Ne
    Posts
    5,634

    Default

    Check this out. It has breakdowns of the instinctual variant stackings like i'd never seen before.

    http://typewatchenneagram.blogspot.com/
    You hem me in -- behind and before;
    you have laid your hand upon me.
    Such knowledge is too wonderful for me,
    too lofty for me to attain.

  3. #3
    Senior Member NK258's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five sounds View Post
    Check this out. It has breakdowns of the instinctual variant stackings like i'd never seen before.

    http://typewatchenneagram.blogspot.com/
    Thank you
    6w7 Sx/Sp (621 or 612. Same diff :p).

  4. #4
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    I'm close between the two, too. This isn't type-specific, but the explanation helped clarify it for me:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://runningfather.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/rare-in-the-raw-enneagram-instinctual-variants-and-subtype-stackings-from-2008-rh-training-notes-by-lee/
    Note–I’m sharing here what I learned at the training, hopefully without distortion of Russ and Gayle’s teaching. I’m working from my notes and memory.

    At the training, Russ and Gayle spent a whole day on the variants. Russ said that work with the instincts has the potential to be most transformative. They are more fundamental than type. They relate to our animal soul, our creatureness. Taking an honest look at the variants requires courage, so he urged approaching them with kindness and clarity. Working on the instincts is hard, but brings the most liberation, Russ said. We have narcissism in not wanting to deal with the animal part of our nature. We can have rejection or shame regarding these basic human needs. Liberating the intelligence of the instincts helps one find balance in life.

    The instincts are intelligences of the body (the belly center). They help us to survive as an individual and as a species.

    The three instincts–self-preservation, sexual, social

    Self-pres is the first instinct to evolve. Bacteria have it. The organism finds the proper environment—how am I doing? Orientation to survival and comfort. Humans have a complex nervous system. Self-pres checks in with the body—not enough or too much? The body reports on self-pres needs. Animals will do what they need to do in the moment. They don’t have to stick to a schedule. They are attuned. Root brain. Oldest, deepest, instinct. “I must survive.” Humans are kind of distant from basic survival needs. That is, we have more sophistication, with a wider sphere of comfort, and complex regulation. Once survival is taken care of, we aim for comfort.

    Self-pres orients to practical concerns. Energy is conserved, out of a sense that there’s only a finite amount. Same with time. Gayle talked about aborigines—they don’t waste energy because they believe that each life has a finite amount—and when you use it up, you’re done for. In neurotic self-pres, there is fear of not having enough resources. This fear can distort the natural use of the instinct.

    The instincts affect how we show up in relationships. For self-pres, there’s a focus on nesting, domesticity, life partner, building a home with someone—that’s the fantasy, anyways.

    Sexual – is NOT one-on-one. One-on-one—romance—is a heart issue. This is sometimes mistaken for an instinctual choice. In Nature, sexual reproduction helps to genetically diversify the species—conduces to survival. Russ calls this instinct “attraction.” It’s aggressive, competitive, single-minded, on display, the animal finds smells, stimulation. Use of energy is intensely creative, fiery, go-get-it, a life-and-death matter. E.g. salmon swimming upstream to mate and die.

    We live in a sea of magnetism—attraction/repulsion—we don’t control this, or what we are drawn to. Most being-drawn doesn’t lead to the sexual act. We’re turned or not. It is what it is. You can’t fight mother nature. Attraction is smarter than social needs. Russ and Gayle gave the story of how someone has shown that arranged marriages conduce to a more stable society but one which is more susceptible to being wiped out by epidemics. Attraction has an unconscious intelligence. (pheremones).

    In relationship, there’s desire for endless engagement and fascination. One is captivated energetically by someone or something. Not after domestic simplicity. One can have the sexual instinct operating with friends—being in the heat. Stimulated, energized.

    All instincts play into sexuality. Self-pres is the body-to-body part—cuddling, autonomic regulation, sensuality. Sexual—waves of energy—riding the waves, force between the people. Doesn’t need to be actively physical. Social—sharing of energy. Affection, bridge between the primal instinct and emotional life. In good sex, all three instincts combine—warmth (self-pres), energy (sexual), affection (social).

    Social – is not the same as socializing. There’s concern about the well-being of the other, caretaking, adaptation. This instinct is aimed towards species survival and evolved with mammals and some insect species. Species where society is organized to protect the vulnerability of mother and child. Organisms with more complex nervous systems take longer to be viable. The social instinct provides a holding environment.

    Emphasis on cooperation and roles aimed at mutual survival. A need to be involved and contribute. A desire to be wanted and accepted. This is an instinct—hardwired. Need a group viability for a sense of well-being. Reciprocity. Attunement to hierarchy, political awareness. Ability to read people. A recognition of when behavior is damaging to group survival. Formation of unconscious clusters where mutual support is an issue. Can manipulate the environment. Has an understanding of what groups can accomplish.

    [...]

    I’ve said this before in other topics, but the way I see it, the variants represent your needs and priorities. The types are more like your internal issues. Your own problems. The internal problems you focus on (the conflict between ego, superego and id). The variants, by contrast, focus on the outside world. The outside problems you focus on.

    Therefore, the social type focuses on society as a whole, and… well… social problems. That is – your job, your school, whether you have homework to do, whether you don’t have homework to do, how well are you doing in life, how well are other people doing in life, how well are you doing in life compared to how other people are doing in life, your role, etc.

    It compells you to desire to interact with others, and focus on the interactions between you and others, as well as the interaction between you and… things even. It’s a thought that’s very… gear-like. Very… mechanic.

    There’s always movement. They are aware of also the interactions between others and others, and others and the environment as well as themselves and others and themselves and the environment. It’s being aware of interactions in general. How everything interacts with each other. That’s what makes it very gear-like. One gear affects another, and their aware of how they can harm and help this whole entire process (of interacting with others and stuff).

    When they lose someone, they feel that a gear was just lost. They can’t interact with it anymore, and it’s gone. That something’s missing (and they know what it is).

    Sx-firsts, on the other hand, aren’t as aware of the interactions between them and others and the environment, rather… their more aware of the chemistry. So while the so-firsts are more “mechanical”, the sx-firsts are more “chemical”.

    Focusing on sx-first issues involve: Am I close to my gf/bf? Am I close to my family? How much in common do we all have? Do I really like this thing? Am I attracted to it? Is that person attracted to that other person? etc.

    They’re more aware of the bonds and the chemistry between them and people, as well as environment, and other people and other people, as well as other people and the environment. They really like being close to their intimates, and are generally passionate about things.

    Likewise, they fear that those chemical bonds could be broken, and when they are, they are emotionally hurt. They feel literally separated, and ripped away from the other person or object.

    Finally, sp-first issues revolve around: Am I healthy? Do I look good? How are my financial issues? How is that person’s financial issues? Am I hungry? etc.

    In other words, sp-firsts worry more about fitness. Fitness in general, of course, not necessarily just body fitness. Therefore, they worry more about how fit they are in their environment, as well as how fit other people are in their environment. They want to be fit. I guess this represents more of… potential energy, rather than mechanical and chemical energy.

    When someone leaves them… I guess perhaps they feel more unfit, since I’m sure they may rely on others to keep them fit. Though, its still more important for they themselves to be fit on their own.

    Therefore… now… stackings:

    So/Sx- Mechanical energy -> Chemical energy (-> = then)
    Focus on the interaction of things, and how their “chemical energy” influences these interactions. They use their “chemical energy” to help them interact better. They seek a bond with everything they interact with.

    Sx/So- Chemical energy -> Mechanical energy
    Focus on the chemistry of things, and how their “mechanical energy” influences the chemistry between them and others. They may rely on interactions to help their “chemical bonds” remain stable (such as asking a friend for advice on the relationship, as well as interacting with the right objects to help the relationship remain stable).

    So/Sp- Mechanical energy -> Potential energy
    Focus on the interaction of things again, but then they also focus on their fitness, and how fit those interactions are. Use their fitness as a away of reinforcing the strength of the interactions as well (“I will do better at work if I am well-suited”).

    Sp/So- Potential energy -> Mechanical energy
    Focus on their fitness, while also focusing on the interaction of things. How those interactions affect their fitness. They may, for this reason, seem more business oriented. (“If I take that offer, it might help me more”).

    Sp/Sx- Potential energy -> Chemical energy
    Focus on their fitness, as well as the chemical bonds they’ve developed with people. They also focus on how those chemical bonds affect their fitness.

    Sx/Sp- Chemical energy -> Potential energy
    Focus on their chemical bonds, as well as fitness. Basically, the fitness of those chemical bonds, and what they can do to make them “fitter”.

  5. #5

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five sounds View Post
    Check this out. It has breakdowns of the instinctual variant stackings like i'd never seen before.

    http://typewatchenneagram.blogspot.com/
    Those aren't any good. Temp States accounts for all of those divisions. Stack range fluctuates too much in any one person to break down into separate types. That looks more like a concept meant to rationalize all the mistypings on the type list. The healthier a person is the more attention they give to their other two instincts. so essentially the theory suffers from too narrow a view of the health tangent in any one stack...The blogspot, as reflected in the speed-typing list, confuses the self-destructive pull of sp/sx for so/sx and sx/so, and in one part, claims the sx-instinct is based in attractiveness...the sx-instinct has nothing to do with how naturally attracted people are to you...nor with intimacy.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NK258 View Post
    I'm having serious trouble figuring out if I'm an sx/so , or an so/sx. So I'm wondering, is there the possibility of both being equally dominant or 'balanced' ?

    When I read Claudio I relate more to the So Dom but on the other hand, I relate to the descriptions of the Sx Dom too. Maybe I just would prefer to be an So Dom (?) :p

    Seriously though, does anyone have any resources I might not have come across yet, or any thoughts on the subject to better differentiate between the two subtypes of E2 ?
    Ocean's Moonshine wasn't bad, but there again they romanticized the sx-instinct...enneasite.com is pretty good.

    Offhand, I'd guess that you're so/sx...I've only read a few of your posts, but a couple times I picked up on so/sx bonding. Bonding pertains to the social instinct (intimacy pertains to the feeling center)...so/sx types have more social intelligence when it comes to 'damage control' in regards to social capital...sx/so types go thru periods of being so absorbed in their sx-drives they routinely just let their interests in the social sphere go to waste...even when they've got some status they're less diligent about keeping it...on the flipside being more comfortable with the disapproval doing so brings. sx/so 2s are aggressive in the area of seduction...approaching it with more of a hunter/predator instinct than so/sx 2.

  8. #8
    Senior Member NK258's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    288

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomb1 View Post
    Ocean's Moonshine wasn't bad, but there again they romanticized the sx-instinct...enneasite.com is pretty good.

    Offhand, I'd guess that you're so/sx...I've only read a few of your posts, but a couple times I picked up on so/sx bonding. Bonding pertains to the social instinct (intimacy pertains to the feeling center)...so/sx types have more social intelligence when it comes to 'damage control' in regards to social capital...sx/so types go thru periods of being so absorbed in their sx-drives they routinely just let their interests in the social sphere go to waste...even when they've got some status they're less diligent about keeping it...on the flipside being more comfortable with the disapproval doing so brings. sx/so 2s are aggressive in the area of seduction...approaching it with more of a hunter/predator instinct than so/sx 2.
    Yeah. I know. I was kind of looking for maybe something out there to use to justify the switch :p

    In other words, while I'm happy to be who I am, I'm not happy at the negative stigma (much as I was with my initial research on the enneagram type two). Lol!

    So yeah. I'm over it. I'm a two sx/so. :/
    6w7 Sx/Sp (621 or 612. Same diff :p).

Similar Threads

  1. [sx] Why are sx-doms so common in typology communities?
    By Octavarium in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 03-11-2015, 10:08 PM
  2. [Inst] What's a good way to type someone as an SP or SO or SX dom?
    By Evolving Transparency in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 04-05-2014, 04:00 PM
  3. [Inst] Differences between a sp/sx and sp/so type 7...?
    By funkadelik in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-13-2012, 02:47 PM
  4. [sx] Sx-doms...come to me ;)
    By Amargith in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 264
    Last Post: 11-06-2011, 09:16 AM
  5. [Inst] Is it possible to fluctuate between so/sx and sp/sx
    By FalseHeartDothKnow in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-09-2010, 07:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO