Multiple Enneagram Subtypes/Instincts Yet Another (!) Look at the Instincts

[Z Buck McFate]

These I liked. I relate to this sp description much better than the description in the previous thread. And the thing about compulsively finding chairs and mattresses that feel ‘just right’ actually hits home- that might be the first time a physical aspect of those descriptions resonates with me.

I expect biases towards physical vs. cerebral vs. emotional space, and health, are going to be contingent on how the individual identifies their self to begin with. If one identifies oneself as "I am my mind" their sp instinct could manifest as protecting that, whereas physical concerns are there, but secondary.

This is exactly what’s occurred to me before, about why sp variant might manifest slightly different in the head types. I was waiting for an NTP to come along and say it succinctly, so as to spare everyone the INFJ tome I would have otherwise posted.

 

[Tiltyred]

That verifies SP for me. I've definitely got the Princess and the Pea syndrome. I started to write "Although I can tolerate discomfort for a long time," but that's not true either. It just feels like a long time to me. I am not cautious about food, but I am hyper-aware of other aspects of safety, and I feel best when the cupboard is well stocked and I have a backup of any product I really like to use. (They discontinue things constantly!)

 

[OrangeAppled]

I often feel that the sp descriptions focus too much on physical security. I do tend under certain circumstances to worry about physical safety (and sometimes I notably worry more than others, I know), but I worry more about emotional safety.

But perhaps that's being sp/sx, the concern about emotional self-preservation while also very much wanting to make strong intimate connections? Although I have wondered too if I may be sp/so...

I'm also not particularly sensitive to things like food, temperature, etc. In fact, I tend to be more relaxed than average about those.

Some sp-first type 6 descriptions pinpoint the "emotional safety" thing and that strikes more of a chord with me.

I agree about the emotional safety part; I think this is why sp types are associated with independence, they want control over their own emotional state. As a 4 & INFP, I'm not quite as physically focused either (as Jock notes the influence of other personality aspects below). I also use stuff like "nesting" as a way to assert my "uniqueness". The 4 motivations & INFP thinking color my instincts (and vice versa).

I'm quite attuned to external physical discomforts, and yet I can be oblivious to my own hunger & pain at times. I've stubbed my toe & not realized it until I looked down & saw blood, but then cold air blowing on me is very distracting. The more comfortable I am emotionally, the more oblivious I may be to these physical comforts (which is much more common at home than in public). I'm so comfortable that I become absent-minded with physical things; I'm able to take them for granted because I DO feel in control. This imbalance is more common with me than over-indulgence.

edit: I just thought of how when I was a small child (like 3 yrs old), I would just go into other people's fridges & eat their food when I was hungry, without asking. With age, I learned you cannot do that, and I became increasingly aware of when I had control over my physical needs or not. I began to hate having to depend on others to ask for stuff, so I'd seek to be in control as much as possible (ie. keeping snacks in my purse).

So the less control I have over meeting my needs, the more aware I am of discomfort. The more control I have, the less I worry & the quicker it sinks to the back of my head to the point of neglect. At home, I can go 5 hours without eating & not be aware of it; I know the food is there when I want it though. But in someone else's home or in public, where I have far less control, it will occupy my mind more, because I may be contemplating how to get control or worrying I won't be able to get control to fill my needs.

 

[Lady_X]

i loved these descriptions... i must actually be sx/sp or sp/sx i related to both so much and the other very little...until it said that i may only divulge certain information to certain people...i do do that but it seems the other two take up much more of my mental energy....i was even probably one of those charmingly cute kids and i probably unknowingly did it for attention...i just remember getting so much attention for being so cute and funny or sweet or whatever...yes i know how that sounds but i'm hoping it's not that obnoxious since i'm introspecting on how i was when i was a kid haha and i'm extremely nurturing...i always want things to be perfect and lovely and for people to have everything they want...i splurge on myself too in the same way...i like everything in my place just so...but it's not about control or in a j way haha it's about comfort and cozy happy feelings.

wow that actually is still obnoxious...sorry bout that.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

Interesting article; these descriptions are excellent. By these descriptions, sp/so could be more of a fit for me, I should introspect on this matter.

Indeed. You are Sp/So.

 

[Lethe]

Here is an example of the value of reciprocity: When I have a good hunt and end up with more food than I can eat, I will share it with you in the expectation that when I come home empty-handed you will share a meal with me. But I must have mechanisms to ensure reciprocity, some guarantee that you will hold up your end of the bargain. I do this by keeping track of who acts reciprocally and who doesn’t. If I feed you today but you neglect to share with me later, you get crossed off my list of worthy recipients of my future largesse. Further, I am going to let the rest of the group know that you are a not to be trusted and I will compare notes with them on who else I should avoid.

[...]

It is a plethora of instincts that increase our chances of survival by improving our ability to remain an accepted member of the group and monitor the behavior of others in the group so we will know who to trust and improve our chances of being trusted by others. This trust ultimately ensures safety and, thus, survival.

Urgh, that's so much work. I'll do it if this is the most effective way to navigate the environment, but I'd prefer not to.

With my SP instinct last, I'm not jiving with the author's description of the social variant. I know that many social variants, particularly ones with a secondary SP preference, do agree with his description and have even written similar posts themselves, but I don't know if I could ever care to be that exacting and calculating with my social interactions.

... Or if I'd prefer spend my every waking moment thinking about "my" survival in a group, besides doing the barest minimum to avoid roadkill. I guess I think living for personal survival and safety are frankly boring objectives. Survival is fun only when it's about something greater than myself, and I have the chance to make that grow.

And secondly, I'm very selective about who I want reciprocity from. The more I expect from other people, the less I can 'live and let live', and enjoy/utilize the abundance that's already in front of me. Otherwise, it requires me to monitor myself in an awkward manner.

Maybe my Fi has something to do with it? I hear this approach a lot more from Fe (primary-tert) users with the social instinct. Hmmmm.

 

[Kasper]

Well damn it! I'm all comfy and settled in being sp/so, but I read this and I re-hee-ally identify with the So description and not so greatly with the Sp one. I often have to be told of discomfort before I notice it.

 

[Vizzy]

I often feel that the sp descriptions focus too much on physical security. I do tend under certain circumstances to worry about physical safety (and sometimes I notably worry more than others, I know), but I worry more about emotional safety.

But perhaps that's being sp/sx, the concern about emotional self-preservation while also very much wanting to make strong intimate connections? Although I have wondered too if I may be sp/so...

I'm also not particularly sensitive to things like food, temperature, etc. In fact, I tend to be more relaxed than average about those.

I totally agree...and I'm Sp/Sx too.
When it comes to physical comforts, I'm one of the most flexible and easy-going people around. I'm anything but high-maintenance. Put me on a hard wooden chair if you want. Heck, I can sit on the ground.
BUT if you're trying to get intimate with me, I will have a wall around me already to protect me.
I wish descriptions focused more on the non-physical aspect of self preservation because it IS so much more profound and revealing.

 

[skylights]

I know i've hit a sexual when we are both pushing and pulling so subtly I feel that only we would conceive what's happening... it's like a dance... a test... so secret only those with the right 'spirit' can recognise. This is my way of rubbing up against people... do they dance like me? can they dance with me?.

Very well put. I am glad to hear that there are others that 'dance' like this as well.

But I'm always on the look out for potential future mates, ' just in case'. This isn't conscious; I'm just always noticing. It's probably the main reason why I avoid socializing or working outside the home, to resist temptation and keep my marriage intact. So now I also tend to focus my infatuation on the completely unattainable (a particular famous musician). I know I need to figure out a better solution, but that's how it is for now.

How do other sx-doms who are in relationships deal with this?

Another question- are people with sx-second less likely to be tempted, more likely to be focused on the relationship they are in? Want the bond and be satisfied when they get it?

this is interesting.

i have a... "more-more-more" drive when it comes to relationships... like wanting to amp the intensity and closeness more and more and more... and i get antsy because i can't speed things up, can't cover 5 years in 2 months, can't press his body any closer into mine, etc... and i have a neurotic need to schedule a "next time we will meet again" (which may be more of a 6/7 thing than a sx thing)... that's what always plagues me, the frenetic energy of it which won't quiet unless i'm moving forward somehow... i have never been married, so i don't know what will happen when i hit the "top" / end of the line... it concerns me, a little... i guess i'll just keep pushing for anniversaries and whatnot...

i feel like there's an emphasis on "longing" with sx... longing in many different contexts

 

[Hopelandic]

This.
Several descriptions of the sp variant suggest a "princess and the pea" or Goldilocks approach. And that's fine, but it seems to dominate the descriptions while other forms of safety are given short shrift. Securing physical safety and personal space is a concern, and I am hypervigilant about health. Once those are taken care of, however, I'm not that ornery about other physical comforts. Mental and emotional space are the chief concerns then.

Sp firsts have noticably more emotional boundaries than other subtypes. There is a subtle warmth and softness of the sp/sx for example, but very few people are truly "let in" as opposed to sx and so firsts. Sp/s- tend to give a lot of space and desire it in interpersonal dealings. You cannot push yourself into an sp/sx's zone, and generally they wont do that to you. Probably more than any other subtype, sp/sx's know from the very beginning how far you will be permitted to go with them, as a result of how much they like you as a person. This is usually decided within minutes of meeting a person. Generally sp's are the -natural- (from the very beginning) lonewolfs of the enneagram. Typically sp firsts see theirselves as very separate individuals.

 

[Vizzy]

Sp firsts have noticably more emotional boundaries than other subtypes. There is a subtle warmth and softness of the sp/sx for example, but very few people are truly "let in" as opposed to sx and so firsts. Sp/s- tend to give a lot of space and desire it in interpersonal dealings. You cannot push yourself into an sp/sx's zone, and generally they wont do that to you. Probably more than any other subtype, sp/sx's know from the very beginning how far you will be permitted to go with them, as a result of how much they like you as a person. This is usually decided within minutes of meeting a person. Generally sp's are the -natural- (from the very beginning) lonewolfs of the enneagram. Typically sp firsts see theirselves as very separate individuals.

This is extremely accurate for me.

I'd be very interested to hear how, in your view, sp/sx and sp/so differs.

 

[Mal12345]

Sp firsts have noticably more emotional boundaries than other subtypes. There is a subtle warmth and softness of the sp/sx for example, but very few people are truly "let in" as opposed to sx and so firsts. Sp/s- tend to give a lot of space and desire it in interpersonal dealings. You cannot push yourself into an sp/sx's zone, and generally they wont do that to you. Probably more than any other subtype, sp/sx's know from the very beginning how far you will be permitted to go with them, as a result of how much they like you as a person. This is usually decided within minutes of meeting a person. Generally sp's are the -natural- (from the very beginning) lonewolfs of the enneagram. Typically sp firsts see theirselves as very separate individuals.

This of course has nothing to do with instinctuals, but with boundary theory of personality. You shouldn't confuse the two subjects.

 

[Mal12345]

For anybody who would like to research boundaries, here's the book for you:
http://books.google.com/books?id=NV6fAAAACAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=editions:ISBN0788198076

 

[pinkgraffiti]

I don't get it: I took the official exam and I got Sx/So, but that description.....I mean I prefer one on one interactions, flirt etc, but....doesn't everybody!? I'm not sure I'm Sex dom. How can I know for sure?

 

[Mal12345]

I don't get it: I took the official exam and I got Sx/So, but that description.....I mean I prefer one on one interactions, flirt etc, but....doesn't everybody!? I'm not sure I'm Sex dom. How can I know for sure?

By reading instinctual type descriptions. I have yet to find a trustworthy test on the subject of instinctuals.

Flirting, or even owning a pornography empire, etc., proves nothing about being Sx-dom.

Here is a link to an excellent page on instinctual stackings.
http://ocean-moonshine.net/e1428573...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=42&MMN_position=80:80

In the left-justified menu on that page, there are links specific to type. !Good luck!

 

[pinkgraffiti]

^thanks babe!

 

[Mr. Cat]

^thanks babe!

Sexual sheep. mal will have a good time.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

Sexual sheep. mal will have a good time.

ahah! i must be tired, it took me 5mins of analysis to understand your sentence. .....come heeere pussy pussy...

 

[Mr. Cat]

ahah! i must be tired, it took me 5mins of analysis to understand your sentence. .....come heeere pussy pussy...

It's clear I'm more sexier and intelligent than you on the animal weighing scale. You haven't got a chance.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

^lol hands down

So, Mr. Mal, I read all descriptions in your link and figured out I'm Sx dom. But both Sx/Sp and Sx/So descriptions for the 7 type seem to fit. Now I need help lol Pleeeeease! How can I be sure?
(Ps. is it possible the instinctual types are just wrong in general? Who decided humans are divided like this anyway?)