• 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.

Thoughts on Enneagram Variants

Urchin

New member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
139
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Maybe I'm not understanding the system properly, but I think that most of the descriptions of the Enneagram Varients (Sexual, Social, Self-Preservation) are ill-conceived.

Many descriptions I have seen descrive the SP varient as focused on maintaining material security as far as safety and earthly needs goes. I feel that a person who is self-absorbed (disregard negative connotation) isn't necessarily materially-focused. Personally, I see myself as constantly introspective and sometimes egotistical, but I have little concern for material security. If I have the very basic necessities, I'm fine. I don't think about it very much. I don't pay attention to earthly things very well, as I am caught up in my thoughts a lot of the time. And yet, I feel that I'm a nearly even mix of SX and SP.

Also, SX doesn't fit the model well. I see SP as "self-focused" and SO as "others-focused," at a bare bones level. What does that make SX? From my understanding, it's a sort of "transcendentally-focused?" Looking for something elusive? I don't feel like this is based well in Enneagram literature. I'm toying with my own definitions.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
From my understanding, SP is about survival, SO is about social awareness, and SX is about investing significant energy into something, or someone specifically over a long period of time.

I can't really describe it well, SX is my weakest instinct.
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Maybe I'm not understanding the system properly, but I think that most of the descriptions of the Enneagram Varients (Sexual, Social, Self-Preservation) are ill-conceived.

Many descriptions I have seen descrive the SP varient as focused on maintaining material security as far as safety and earthly needs goes. I feel that a person who is self-absorbed (disregard negative connotation) isn't necessarily materially-focused. Personally, I see myself as constantly introspective and sometimes egotistical, but I have little concern for material security. If I have the very basic necessities, I'm fine. I don't think about it very much. I don't pay attention to earthly things very well, as I am caught up in my thoughts a lot of the time. And yet, I feel that I'm a nearly even mix of SX and SP.

Also, SX doesn't fit the model well. I see SP as "self-focused" and SO as "others-focused," at a bare bones level. What does that make SX? From my understanding, it's a sort of "transcendentally-focused?" Looking for something elusive? I don't feel like this is based well in Enneagram literature. I'm toying with my own definitions.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

I have to second Athenian that self-preservation is essentially a drve for survival. The descriptions are not always about material possessio, many of them are also about trying to be tough or secure.

The social instinct is about acceptance and admiration amongs the social sphere, so I think it's appropriately named.

Now, the sexual instinct is very poorly named. I think it should be called the Intimate instincts, and that's what I usually call it.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
...Now, the sexual instinct is very poorly named. I think it should be called the Intimate instincts, and that's what I usually call it.

Ditto.

The social runs wide and broad, like a web of resources... the focus is being part of a community, sharing resources across the web, strength in numbers.

SX runs infinitely deep with individuals... right to the mysterious molten core. The goal is intimacy, knowing everything, being able to taste the other... almost like joining.

And SP in a sense is about focusing on oneself, finding security within one's own walls, without needing others.

So actually the variants are supposed to describe the relational focus of the individual.


...I can't really describe it well, SX is my weakest instinct.

It's my strongest, followed by having to have lots of SP focus to survive my life this far.

It's SO I really don't grasp as well.
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Everyone makes good points, espeically Athenian. However I am baffled by something Urchin, since your sig seems to imply that you are SX first and foremost. If that is the case, then even an E5 will have a flavor different from the core of that type. Does this resonnate with you:
This subtype has a lot in common with the self-pres/sexual instinctual stacking. They experience many of the same internal conflicts surrounding relationships, the need for independence and emotional expression. The sexual/self-pres subtype differs however in being more intense, more counterphobic. They entertain more dark nihilistic ideas, ideas that most others don’t want to consider.

With this subtype, a lot of energy revolves around the issue of boundaries. Sexual/self-pres Fives tend to forge strong connections quickly and deeply, but if they feel betrayed, begin to feel overwhelmed, or if they feel that the connection doesn’t serve their true needs, can seem to cut the connection precipitously and “go cold.” They have high standards for significant others. They must feel that they can share their emotions with a significant other without being judged. This is their private world that they share. Relationships can be difficult, because individuals of this subtype will still want their own space and alone time, while at other times will want intense connection. Because the social instinct is least developed, this subtype is not very concerned with how others perceive them (except their intimates). This subtype is deceptive in that they may not seem to be especially intense - until they are engaged in a conversation they find interesting. Then the intensity and emotion become apparent. The internal struggle for this subtype is similar to that of the self-pres/sexual, but more energized and volatile, and getting to know this subtype means getting to know that.

When unhealthy, the energy of the sexual instinct can combine with the dominant type Five fixation to create a very impulsive Eight-like anger. The strength of their convictions can then come out quite forcefully.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Ditto.

The social runs wide and broad, like a web of resources... the focus is being part of a community, sharing resources across the web, strength in numbers.

SX runs infinitely deep with individuals... right to the mysterious molten core. The goal is intimacy, knowing everything, being able to taste the other... almost like joining.

And SP in a sense is about focusing on oneself, finding security within one's own walls, without needing others.

So actually the variants are supposed to describe the relational focus of the individual.

Is it somewhat obvious to your way of seeing things that I'm mostly SO, but tend to behave in a more SP way under even mild stress? That's how I see myself, usually.

It's my strongest, followed by having to have lots of SP focus to survive my life this far.

It's SO I really don't grasp as well.

I have trouble understanding people who seem to have SX stronger. It seems like they invest too much energy into very specific things that aren't considered that meaningful to most people, and they don't seem to know how to hold back enough of themselves to be able to pull out if they have to. Do you understand what I mean? How would you say my behavior looks from your perspective?
 

Urchin

New member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
139
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Everyone makes good points, espeically Athenian. However I am baffled by something Urchin, since your sig seems to imply that you are SX first and foremost. If that is the case, then even an E5 will have a flavor different from the core of that type. Does this resonnate with you:

I feel like SX and SP are both prominant in my relationships, and SO is very underdeveloped. The order of the SX/SP stacking for me could go either way. The SX/SP in my signature was a guess I made a while ago based on a test result.

I have a strong aversion to trust, and am almost always distant. I associate distance and self-sufficiency with strength, and have an obsession with eliminating need. That obsession is less intense now than it once was.

Whenever someone breaks through, though, or appears interesting to me, I bore into them intensely. Sometimes I go to far, get frightened, and cut the tie. My focus on anything is often very intense until I lose interest, when it drops to nothing. I'm either SX/SP or SP/SX, as neither SP nor SX alone fully describe me.

As far as my external appearance, I once was obviously neurotic and radiated internal conflict. Now, though, people say they have trouble reading me.
 

lbloom

New member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
83
MBTI Type
INTP
I have trouble understanding people who seem to have SX stronger. It seems like they invest too much energy into very specific things that aren't considered that meaningful to most people, and they don't seem to know how to hold back enough of themselves to be able to pull out if they have to. Do you understand what I mean?

I'm an sx, with low sp, and pretty negligible so.

Your assessment looks about right - from an outside perspective. If the sx is concerned with individual connection, "most people" are not high on the agenda. As an INTP, that is always true anyway, so it fits right in. I'm also naturally passionate, so I throw myself at something that promises to hold my interest. Conserving my energy isn't a priority, and it's hard for me to understand why it should be. I'm very laidback, working on a concept of infinite personal time and energy. Doing things that matter to me is much more important.

The "holding back" part is trickier. The INTP/5 means that detaching, observing, and processing is the chain of natural behavior. At the same time, the strong sx favors connection over excessive caution. It creates a bi-stable situation that fluctuates between the two states till one is decided upon. That can take quite some time, depending on which side is winning, which has a lot to do with the perceived quality of the connection. In my case, it creates a curious attachment style: intense, but secure.

Getting out can be quite painful, yes, but once my judgment has waved me past a certain point, I don't believe in holding back. I've never regretted it.

Similarly, I have trouble truly understanding strong sp-types. I don't quite get what they are so afraid of. They seem to be putting the better part of their lives into building endless layers of security into their lives, while forgetting to live. If that is combined with a particularly insecure type, it creates a situation where insane effort is put into a "survival" drive, making for a joyless life that is intrinsically stuck in a loop.

Objectively, of course, they are all equally odd.

There is a website somewhere that has a table for likely successful pairs. I think the order for sx types was so, followed by sx. I concur. A strong sx-sx pairing is likely to burn up, while a strong sx-sp pairing is a source of considerable friction. Weaker cases of either should be more amenable.
 

Urchin

New member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
139
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Getting out can be quite painful, yes, but once my judgment has waved me past a certain point, I don't believe in holding back. I've never regretted it.

This is extremely untrue for me. One should always maintain control, even if one never has to exert it, in my mind.
 

lbloom

New member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
83
MBTI Type
INTP
This is extremely untrue for me. One should always maintain control, even if one never has to exert it, in my mind.

That's your self-preservation instinct talking. I'm certainly not anywhere close to naturally trusting either, in general.

sx-types want to be able to trust one person - completely. Perhaps that's what makes us feel most secure.

To be fair, my conception of letting go is still deaf-mute territory for most people. It's largely non-verbal.
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
It seems like they invest too much energy into very specific things that aren't considered that meaningful to most people

Well, who gives a shit about what is meaningful to most people?

Generally anyway, I would not restrict the variants to describing interactions with other people, but to more abstract descriptions of interaction with every object we encounter in daily life. Which means that an sx first is more likely to get fixated in a particular field of interest that does not bear particular social relevance, for example (this in the case of an underdevloped so-last).

Personally, I have the most trouble interacting with so-first people, and tend to interact much better with sp-first. With sp-first, at least it can be seen that they are putting their (and ours, too, in the case they get attached) survival as a priority to deep connection. I can understand that. With so-first, I sense they are putting other people and their opinion as a priority, which is something I find completely unbearable. Also, being a so-second and sx-first, I tend to have a willingness to impact the social sphere too, even if to a lesser extent than firsters, which makes for huge blowouts.
 

Ezra

Luctor et emergo
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
534
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Maybe I'm not understanding the system properly, but I think that most of the descriptions of the Enneagram Varients (Sexual, Social, Self-Preservation) are ill-conceived.

Many descriptions I have seen descrive the SP varient as focused on maintaining material security as far as safety and earthly needs goes. I feel that a person who is self-absorbed (disregard negative connotation) isn't necessarily materially-focused. Personally, I see myself as constantly introspective and sometimes egotistical, but I have little concern for material security. If I have the very basic necessities, I'm fine. I don't think about it very much. I don't pay attention to earthly things very well, as I am caught up in my thoughts a lot of the time. And yet, I feel that I'm a nearly even mix of SX and SP.

Also, SX doesn't fit the model well. I see SP as "self-focused" and SO as "others-focused," at a bare bones level. What does that make SX? From my understanding, it's a sort of "transcendentally-focused?" Looking for something elusive? I don't feel like this is based well in Enneagram literature. I'm toying with my own definitions.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

Well, for starters, you feel a mix of sx and sp. Which means you will naturally not identify with a fair bit of the variant descriptions. Basically, if you think you're a mix, you won't jump at feeling right at home with an sp-first description. Secondly, you may be looking at the general variants instead of the specific variants of the Five. Study the Five's self-preservationism, and you might realise that a) you're not an sp-first after all, or b) you actually feel more affinity with sp-first now that you've looked at the Five's variants, not just the 'different Enneagram variants.
 

Ezra

Luctor et emergo
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
534
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well, who gives a shit about what is meaningful to most people?

Generally anyway, I would not restrict the variants to describing interactions with other people, but to more abstract descriptions of interaction with every object we encounter in daily life. Which means that an sx first is more likely to get fixated in a particular field of interest that does not bear particular social relevance, for example (this in the case of an underdevloped so-last).

Absolutely. Take self-preservationism. That's not an interaction with another person; it's with an object(s).
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
I think that for the most part, FDG and Ezra are correct, however self-preservation is not exclusively for objects although interaction with others may appear that way since the variant focuses on the basics of life. Based on your self-disclosure Urchin, you may be using that variant negatively. However since E5s naturally hoard (similar to E9s naturally merging with others or a group) the variants are confusing for me. Here are Riso & Hudson's take on the three variants:
Self Preservation Instinct
People who have this as their dominant instinct are preoccupied with the safety, comfort, health, energy, and well-being of the physical body. In a word, they are concerned with having enough resources to meet life's demands. Identification with the body is a fundamental focus for all humans, and we need our body to function well in order to be alive and active in the world. Most people in contemporary cultures are not faced life or death "survival" in the strictest sense; thus, Self-Preservation types tend to be concerned with food, money, housing, medical matters, and physical comfort. Moreover, those primarily focused on self-preservation, by extension, are usually interested in maintaining these resources for others as well. Their focus of attention naturally goes towards things related to these areas such as clothes, temperature, shopping, decorating, and the like, particularly if they are not satisfied in these areas or have a feeling of deficiency due to their childhoods. Self-Pres types tend to be more grounded, practical, serious, and introverted than the other two instinctual types. They might have active social lives and a satisfying intimate relationship, but if they feel that their self-preservation needs are not being met, still tend not to be happy or at ease. In their primary relationships, these people are "nesters"—they seek domestic tranquility and security with a stable, reliable partner.

Sexual (aka "Attraction") Instinct
Many people originally identify themselves as this type because they have learned that the Sexual types are interested in "one-on-one relationships." But all three instinctual types are interested in one-on-one relationships for different reasons, so this does not distinguish them. The key element in Sexual types is an intense drive for intimacy and a constant awareness of the "chemistry" between themselves and others. Sexual types are immediately aware of the attraction, or lack thereof, between themselves and other people. Further, while the basis of this instinct is related to sexuality, it is not necessarily about people engaging in the sexual act. There are many people that we are excited to be around for reasons of personal chemistry that we have no intention of "getting involved with." Nonetheless, we might be aware that we feel stimulated in certain people's company and less so in others. The sexual type is constantly moving toward that sense of intense stimulation and intimacy in their relationships and in their activities. They are the most "energized" of the three instinctual types, and tend to be more aggressive, competitive, charged, and emotionally intense than the Self-Pres or Social types. Sexual types need to have deep intimacy in their primary relationships or else they remain unsatisfied. They enjoy being intensely involved—even merged—with others, and can become disenchanted with partners who are unable to meet their need for intense energetic union. Losing yourself in a "fusion" of being is the ideal here, and Sexual types are always looking for this state with others and with stimulating objects in their world.

Social (aka "Adaptive") Instinct
Just as many people tend to misidentify themselves as Sexual types because they want one-on-one relationships, many people fail to recognize themselves as Social types because they get the (false) idea that this means always being involved in groups, meetings, and parties. If Self-Preservation types are interested in adjusting the environment to make themselves more secure and comfortable, Social types adapt themselves to serve the needs of the social situation they find themselves in. Thus, Social types are highly aware of other people, whether they are in intimate situations or in groups. They are also aware of how their actions and attitudes are affecting those around them. Moreover, Sexual types seek intimacy, Social types seek personal connection: they want to stay in long-term contact with people and to be involved in their world. Social types are the most concerned with doing things that will have some impact on their community, or even broader domains. They tend to be warmer, more open, engaging, and socially responsible than the other two types. In their primary relationships, they seek partners with whom they can share social activities, wanting their intimates to get involved in projects and events with them. Paradoxically, they actually tend to avoid long periods of exclusive intimacy and quiet solitude, seeing both as potentially limiting. Social types lose their sense of identity and meaning when they are not involved with others in activities that transcend their individual interests.
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I have trouble understanding people who seem to have SX stronger. It seems like they invest too much energy into very specific things that aren't considered that meaningful to most people, and they don't seem to know how to hold back enough of themselves to be able to pull out if they have to. Do you understand what I mean?

Well, in a sense, you are right. Romeo and Juliet tell a fantastic story of Intimacy

As someone who is Intimate and Asocial, the idea of forming a personal bond with people is extremely important. Not just anyone, though. There's a kind of specific personal magnetism that I can' really explain to anyone who hasn't felt it. I have to feel that draw to someone before I'm interested.
Once I am, the ideal goal is to ultimately breakdown every mental barrier and to fully trust and understand this person. There's an intent to intwine our two lives.
Of course, it rarely works out that way. That's why I called it the ideal.

I think, if there was some divine and undeniable prediction that I could never form an intimate bond with anyone, I'd just kill myself.

How would you say my behavior looks from your perspective?

Inhuman, like a robot.
That's how non-intimate people seem to me.
 
Last edited:

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What Magic said, as far as SX thinking goes.

Like a craving to crawl inside each other's skin, know each other inside and out and be "one" (even while still ourselves) with each other. There is no immersion that is too deep.

And people not interested in doing this seem "shallow" in the sense that I find difficulty connecting with them. The relationship inadvertently feels thin and on the surface to me, even if they seem totally happy with things.

For a long time I used to cause trouble by trying to force a deepness that wouldn't exist there; now I just change my expectations.

It can be a little obsessive when I find other people with SX tendencies... like two stones bound together hurled into the deepest trenches of the ocean.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Once I am, the ideal goal is to ultimately breakdown every mental barrier and to fully trust and understand this person. There's an intent to intwine our two lives.
Of course, it rarely works out that way. That's why I called it the ideal.

:horor: That's exactly what I never want happening to me. I would probably feel incredibly violated by such a thing. Wow, we're different, aren't we?

Inhuman, like a robot.
That's how non-intimate people seem to me.

Do you perceive my actual behavior here that way, or do you just assume my behavior should seem that way to you because that's how non-intimate people usually seem to you? Just curious.
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
:horor: That's exactly what I never want happening to me. I would probably feel incredibly violated by such a thing. Wow, we're different, aren't we?

Yes, apparently we are.
I don't usually do any match-making with type systems, but I do think the Instincts are very useful for gauging the viability of a relationship.

Do you actually perceive my behavior that way, or do you just assume my behavior would seem that way to you because that's how non-intimate people usually seem to you? Just curious.

I have to say... Yeah.
You are among the most matter-of-fact, elaborate, humorless, and unexpressive people that I've seen on this forum. You are also the most genderless, though I can't exactly explain how.

Only recently have you been getting a bit more comical, and it seems you've been breaking-out the emoticons a bit more.
 

lbloom

New member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
83
MBTI Type
INTP
Out of curiosity, athenian, do you know your SLOAN / big five type?
 

disregard

mrs
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
7,826
MBTI Type
INFP
Athenian, true intimacy feels good. I can understand if you've never met a person that evoked your desire to be intimate, but to never want it.... that's pretty out there. :D
 
Top