[Traditional Enneagram] Dumb question - Why are wings only of adjacent types?

[/DG/]

It seems arbitrary to me. (Then again, so do the rest of the types. )

 

[Brains]

There's a bit of a rhyme and reason to it: Adjacent types usually share issues or approaches: 8 and 7 and for example both feel they need something, the fundamental solution is to figure out if you can get it and and if so how, when a 5 or 1 in contrast will likely rationalize that they didn't want it after all. 4 and 5 are both highly introspective types, just in different areas. 8 and 9, likewise, feel that they are or are in danger of being overlooked, and face that with different strategies. Likewise all the image types all answer their own feeling of inadequacy by aspiring to embody or putting up an image that in their minds should get the recognition they need. You can kind of blend a type together from the adjacent wing-types.

 

[Bush]

There's a bit of a rhyme and reason to it: Adjacent types usually share issues or approaches: 8 and 7 and for example both feel they need something, the fundamental solution is to figure out if you can get it and and if so how, when a 5 or 1 in contrast will likely rationalize that they didn't want it after all. 4 and 5 are both highly introspective types, just in different areas. 8 and 9, likewise, feel that they are or are in danger of being overlooked, and face that with different strategies. Likewise all the image types all answer their own feeling of inadequacy by aspiring to embody or putting up an image that in their minds should get the recognition they need. You can kind of blend a type together from the adjacent wing-types.

This. It's characterized in Character and Neurosis as:

 

[Typh0n]

There's a bit of a rhyme and reason to it: Adjacent types usually share issues or approaches: 8 and 7 and for example both feel they need something, the fundamental solution is to figure out if you can get it and and if so how, when a 5 or 1 in contrast will likely rationalize that they didn't want it after all. 4 and 5 are both highly introspective types, just in different areas. 8 and 9, likewise, feel that they are or are in danger of being overlooked, and face that with different strategies. Likewise all the image types all answer their own feeling of inadequacy by aspiring to embody or putting up an image that in their minds should get the recognition they need. You can kind of blend a type together from the adjacent wing-types.

But the two types that are next to each other, while in some ways resemble each other, also oppose each other in others, so I do not understand this arguement (no offense).

Theres gotta be a structural reason for it.

 

[Pionart]

It's just... how it works. Like how in MBTI Ti pairs with either Ne or Se.

There would be a better reason, but I guess "it just is" will do for now lol

 

[Typh0n]

Theres gotta be reason. I'm not content with "thats just how it is".

Damn I need to read more actual books on the enneagram, not just websites.

 

[Pionart]

In my opinion, the trippiest bit of the enneagram is that weird 1758241 hexagonal figure thing

I've tried to find more about the "why" for the structure of the enneagram, but I've found nothing so far. Do let me know if you find anything.

I might have a go at trying to find a theory, but ehhh no promises of course

 

[Typh0n]

Yeah! And the 369 triangle.

I mostly have read website articles on the enneagram I did read The Ennegram Made Easy because a relative of mine lend it to me. But I did not find those kinds of answers. Maybe I'll look more to the early enneargram theories.

 

[Pionart]

Alright, I just figured it out. I'll type it out, give me a few minutes.

--

3, 6, and 9 are the Primary Types.

1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 are the Composite Types.

Composite types are formed by a Primary type followed by another Primary type.

1 = 63, 2 = 69, 4 = 96, 5 = 93, 7 = 39, 8 = 36

So it goes:

63 - 69 - 3 - 96 - 93 - 6 - 39 - 36 - 9 - 63 ...

As you can see, adjacent types (wings) do not share a Primary type in common IF if it is a Primary followed by a Composite, but they share the first type if it is Composite followed by Composite.

For the hexagonal figure, we can only explain this if we treat Type 9 as the "core type", so it goes:

63 - 39 | 93 - 36 - 69 | 96 - 63 - 39 | 93 ...


So: 9 is the core, then (3, 6, 9) is the next level up, then the full 9 is the third level.

[still a few things to explain, model is incomplete so far]

[so close, yet so far!!!]

(I'll finish it later some time, I'm stuck)

 

[small.wonder]

[MENTION=22833]Legion[/MENTION] This is hella cool, thanks for sharing! I'm honestly not one to really care too much about the why with something like Enneagram (because it has a large spiritual element) but I must say that this is really fascinating.

It makes total sense, even, what you've said about starting with 9 as the overall core because it is. 9 is often even called the "crown of the Enneagram" (I believe for that very reason). Even the Composite/Primary combonations you've listed make total sense from a characteristics standpoint-- I even have people of those composite types mistype (or at least consider) the primaries you've associated with them (that are listed above). For example, 9 and 6 are the most frequent types to mistype as a 4, and I've seen almost every Enneagram 1 that I know, consider both 6 and 3 before confirming as Reformers.

Of course, some of that could also be because 6, 3 and 9 are also the types most likely to mistype. We could say that, specifically they often mistype as the composite types that their core is "a part of", but I often wonder if that's why they look like Primary types to begin with-- because they are just the most likely to see themselves in everything. Each has it's own concrete reason for being this way, of course: 6 from a place of indecision and perhaps anxiety, 3 from a lack of self knowledge and long practice of donning masks, 9 from a place of "self forgetting" or being a blank slate.

Where did you find this stuff, out of curiosity? I feel like I read something similar years ago, but can't recall where.

 

[Pionart]

Ok, so the point is that once I get it down, what I will have down is simply converted the enneagram into a particular mathematical structure.

So the psyche is being represented by maths, in this case a certain kind of algebra.

Once the enneagram is represented in this way, then there will be a general formula for creating arbitrary numbers of personality systems each represented by a different algebraic formulation.

Key idea however: integration and disintegration.

My above posts are an example of me disintegrating.

 

[Pionart]

[MENTION=22833]Legion[/MENTION] This is hella cool, thanks for sharing! I'm honestly not one to really care too much about the why with something like Enneagram (because it has a large spiritual element) but I must say that this is really fascinating.

It makes total sense, even, what you've said about starting with 9 as the overall core because it is. 9 is often even called the "crown of the Enneagram" (I believe for that very reason). Even the Composite/Primary combonations you've listed make total sense from a characteristics standpoint-- I even have people of those composite types mistype (or at least consider) the primaries you've associated with them (that are listed above). For example, 9 and 6 are the most frequent types to mistype as a 4, and I've seen almost every Enneagram 1 that I know, consider both 6 and 3 before confirming as Reformers.

Of course, some of that could also be because 6, 3 and 9 are also the types most likely to mistype. We could say that, specifically they often mistype as the composite types that their core is "a part of", but I often wonder if that's why they look like Primary types to begin with-- because they are just the most likely to see themselves in everything. Each has it's own concrete reason for being this way, of course: 6 from a place of indecision and perhaps anxiety, 3 from a lack of self knowledge and long practice of donning masks, 9 from a place of "self forgetting" or being a blank slate.

Where did you find this stuff, out of curiosity? I feel like I read something similar years ago, but can't recall where.

I am glad that what I produced was of interest to you!

I've had to stop where I left it, as I sent myself into a kind of brain-freeze.

I did however learn some things, including some things about the relationship between MBTI and enneagram.

See, as one develops the lower functions, e.g. going from dominant to inferior, this correponds to disintegration in the enneagram.

As one returns from inferior to dominant, this correponds to integration in the enneagram.


My own type is INFJ

Ni-Fe|Ti-Se||Ne-Fi|Te-Si

My correponding enneagram loops are:

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

So my dominant function Ni correponds to 9w1 or 1w9, and my 8th function Si correponds to 6w5 or 5w6. In the middle are my 4th (inferior) and 5th functions which correpond to types 3 and 7.


As you can see, I have represented my psyche by 3, 6 or 8 functions (for 3 and 6, all but one are doubled up) and if I were to join the first and last in each case, it would form a complete circuit.

So we can represent the psyche presumably by any number of functions, and there will generally speaking be a first, middle, and last (3 functions would be adequate, then).


Also, putting them all in the one line it looks like this:


1/9 Ni 4 Fe 2/6/8 Ti 5 Se 3/7 Ne 1 Fi 4/9/2 Te 8 Si 6/5

Wonderful. Hopefully this isn't .. .. confusing

 

[Typh0n]

Alright, I just figured it out. I'll type it out, give me a few minutes.

--

3, 6, and 9 are the Primary Types.

1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 are the Composite Types.

Composite types are formed by a Primary type followed by another Primary type.

1 = 63, 2 = 69, 4 = 96, 5 = 93, 7 = 39, 8 = 36

So it goes:

63 - 69 - 3 - 96 - 93 - 6 - 39 - 36 - 9 - 63 ...

As you can see, adjacent types (wings) do not share a Primary type in common IF if it is a Primary followed by a Composite, but they share the first type if it is Composite followed by Composite.

For the hexagonal figure, we can only explain this if we treat Type 9 as the "core type", so it goes:

63 - 39 | 93 - 36 - 69 | 96 - 63 - 39 | 93 ...


So: 9 is the core, then (3, 6, 9) is the next level up, then the full 9 is the third level.

[still a few things to explain, model is incomplete so far]

[so close, yet so far!!!]

(I'll finish it later some time, I'm stuck)

Sorry buddy, but I don't follow you.

You say " 1 = 63, 2 = 69, 4 = 96, 5 = 93, 7 = 39, 8 = 36". How does 1 equal 63 for example? Or 2 equal 69? I'm just not following how do you go from 1 to 63?

 

[Pionart]

Sorry buddy, but I don't follow you.

You say " 1 = 63, 2 = 69, 4 = 96, 5 = 93, 7 = 39, 8 = 36". How does 1 equal 63 for example? Or 2 equal 69? I'm just not following how do you go from 1 to 63?

They're just similar to those types. (1 is like a 6 and somewhat like a 3)

Don't worry too much about it. I didn't get the full enneagram structure so it's not too relevant. (I was trying to do some maths on it)

I'm more interested in integration/disintegration now.

 

[Typh0n]

They're just similar to those types. (1 is like a 6 and somewhat like a 3)

Don't worry too much about it. I didn't get the full enneagram structure so it's not too relevant.

I'm more interested in integration/disintegration now.

Gotcha.

 

[Pionart]

1/9 Ni 4 Fe 2/6/8 Ti 5 Se 3/7 Ne 1 Fi 4/9/2 Te 8 Si 6/5

Ok, now I will split this into two components: the rational and irrational functions and the 3-type and 6-type rings, so it goes like:

9 Ni 6 Se 3 Ne 9 Si 6

and

1, 4, Fe, 2, 8, Ti, 5, 7, 1, Fi, 4, 2, Te, 8, 5

I combined the rational with the 6 ring and the irrational with the 3 ring because it worked better.

As I am an irrational (perception dominant) type then this means I am a 9w1.

Ok, so I am a 9w1.

I don't think we're any closer really to explaining why 9 is next to 1, but I now know my enneagram and that's gotta count for something, right?



- also changing my sub-type (sub-type changes depending on which function you are focusing on at the time) from Se to Ti, because that was an absurd amount of logical deduction and I'm a lot more detached right now than I was 6 hours ago. I'm also probably on the type 8 side of Ti now.

 

[Typh0n]

Congrats on finding your type, by a most unusual method, I might add.

 

[Pionart]

Congrats on finding your type, by a most unusual method, I might add.

Thanks.

However I think I broke the enneagram. Type 7 is an introverted type now. Shiiiiit!!!

 

[Typh0n]

Thanks.

However I think I broke the enneagram. Type 7 is an introverted type now. Shiiiiit!!!

If its broken, does that mean we can fix it and create something new out of it?

 

[Pionart]

If its broken, does that mean we can fix it and create something new out of it?

We can but Type 7 has to be introverted that's about it really.

Is everyone on board with changing Type 7 from ExxP to IxxP?

edit: Actually wait, Type 7 can also be ExxJ

But it isn't ExxP any more, that's the main thing.

So ExxPs can't be 7. Nope nope nope.