Thread: The new and improved Enneagram! From the sponge and evan.

1. Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
Yes, it is possible. 4 and 5 bond on avoidance, 4 and 8 bond on turbulence. You will find that a combination is possible if both of the wings you pick are adjacent to the core type on the grid map I presented.

This also means the type you are least like is the 2.
Suddenly, I've decided that I am more of Six than an Eight. So, I bond Four and Six on turbulence. I think I just wanted to see myself as an Eight more so than Six, which further confirms that I am a Four.

2. Originally Posted by ofugur
Suddenly, I've decided that I am more of Six than an Eight. So, I bond Four and Six on turbulence. I think I just wanted to see myself as an Eight more so than Six, which further confirms that I am a Four.
Well, that's possible, too. It would shift everything around though. That makes the 7 the type you are least like.

3. Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
That makes the 7 the type you are least like.
I think I am beginning to better understand the system now.

If I my preferences order is:

Avoiding | Anticipating | Pursuing
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

Four must be at the beginning and then Seven must be last, does that mean One would be somewhere near the middle? Potentially, I am 4|5|6|-----|7 SPI. How do I determine the remaining five?

4. There's no deterministic way to pick the rest of the types.

5. Originally Posted by Evan
There's no deterministic way to pick the rest of the types.
So, it's best to just use descriptions to determine what suits you best?

This system is very interesting, by the way. Thanks for investing the time to create it, as well as answering all my questions.

6. Originally Posted by ofugur
I think I am beginning to better understand the system now.

If I my preferences order is:

Avoiding | Anticipating | Pursuing
Turbulent | Suppressive | Controlling
Social | Preservational | Intimate

Four must be at the beginning and then Seven must be last, does that mean One would be somewhere near the middle? Potentially, I am 4|5|6|-----|7 SPI. How do I determine the remaining five?
Based on what you have written, this should be your order:

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

The reason for this, is that 5, being your primary wing, indicates that you are more likely to shift on mood than behavior. So your secondary type shifts one level on mood. Your tertiary type shifts one level on behavior. Your quadrinary type shifts one level on both. After that, there's one that stays on the first level of behavior, but shifts two levels on mood, then one that stays on the first level of mood, but shifts two levels on behavior.Then there's one that's one level down on behavior and two down on mood, then one that's one level down on mood and two down on behavior, and finally one that's two levels down on both.

It's pretty tedious, but I hope you can see the pattern. By deciding your first and second wing, you are determing if you would sooner shift on your mood, or on your behavior. There's only one debate here, as an aspect of the system I have not determined. Your order could arguably also go like this:

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

You see, the difference is, on one hand, we could have the one shift on both variables come first (type 1), or we could have the types that double shift on one variable and don't shift on the other at all, come first (9 and 8). I have never decided which is more accurate.

All of this is assuming that it should logicall fall in that order, too. Of course, the further you go down the line from your original point of determination, the less reliable the theory becomes. Just like with the lower level functions in the MBTI. Their perscription based on the high level functions is highly questionable. However, while I don't know what Evan (formerly dissonance) thinks, I do honestly believe that you can use the first three types to figure out what type a person is least like. That is to say, the type that is at the bottom, of sorts.

7. I was thinking you could do it that way, but it seems a little shaky. For example, if you were really really really turbulent, and just barely highest in avoiding, couldn't 8 come even before 1? (it could even come before 5 technically.)

8. Originally Posted by Evan
I was thinking you could do it that way, but it seems a little shaky. For example, if you were really really really turbulent, and just barely highest in avoiding, couldn't 8 come even before 1? (it could even come before 5 technically.)
As you can see, I did propose two possiblities, one in which 8 did come before 1. What is interesting though, is your suggestion about 8 coming before 5. This would be the idea that someone so extremely leans on one variable, and so mildly on the other, that they would sooner drop two levels on the mild one than even one level on the extreme one.

Well, when you're right, you're right. That is entirely possible, though also a very fascinating case study. We have here two kinds of people. One who is so set in his/her mood that behavior will be flexed in whatever direction necessary at the behest of their dominant mood, and similarly, another person who is so set in one mode of behavior as to maintain no matter how far his/her mood gets pushed around. I dare say such people might be maladapters. Never the less, they would still exist, and need to be acounted for.

Indeed, such a possiblity would have to be accounted for no matter the system is approached. If it is simply a list of type based on similarity to those types, or a schematic for actual shifts in personality, or whatever... those who lean extremely toward mood or behavior still present a problem.

9. Where do I fit, Magic? O.o *confused*

10. Originally Posted by PinkPiranha
Where do I fit, Magic? O.o *confused*
Hmm, hard to say, miss googily-eyes. Your core type is 2, right?

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