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

1. Help?

Behavior: anticipate > avoid > pursue
Emotional: turbulent > controlled = suppressed
Motive: preservational > social > intimate

So that means I'm either a 6>2>4 or a 6>4>2, right?

Edit 9/6: controlled > suppressed to controlled = suppressed.

2. Correct. 6/4/2 or 6/2/4 sp/so.

3. Cool. And it's accurate because a phobic 6 is much like a 4 and sometimes I test as a 2. Props to the creators!

4. I like how aleksei has taken my place in this thread

Oh, and to make my post not completely fluff: Thanks random ness!

5. Originally Posted by Evan
I like how aleksei has taken my place in this thread

Oh, and to make my post not completely fluff: Thanks random ness!
Hey there, stranger.

Anything happen here that enrages you as a violation of all that is right with this idea?

6. So the order of the original enneagram is arbitrary? I never really got that thing fully. I started learning about wings and then my friend was like: Blah, blah wings are pointless. So now I just don't know what to think anymore.

7. Originally Posted by Emmilou
So the order of the original enneagram is arbitrary? I never really got that thing fully. I started learning about wings and then my friend was like: Blah, blah wings are pointless. So now I just don't know what to think anymore.
To be clear, there's a little arbitration in everything. But the system elaborated here attempts to minimize arbitration and maximize deduction/inferrence from what was arbitrated. This can certainly not be said of the enneagram.

8. "I have stated several times before on this forum that I determined the original wing system to be baseless. The need for the wing type to be "adjacent" didn't make sense, since as my variable system indicates, the actual order of the numbers that the types were assigned is meaningless. There is no sensible reason that 7s should be next to 6s, for example. So, anything based off of that order, like the wings, needs to completely reformed."

This is wrong.

9. Originally Posted by Pablonuts25
"I have stated several times before on this forum that I determined the original wing system to be baseless. The need for the wing type to be "adjacent" didn't make sense, since as my variable system indicates, the actual order of the numbers that the types were assigned is meaningless. There is no sensible reason that 7s should be next to 6s, for example. So, anything based off of that order, like the wings, needs to completely reformed."

This is wrong.
You're not the first person to say that here, so why not take a look through the whole thead and see some of the discussion that took place about it?

10. LOL he created an account just to say that.

#### 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