[Traditional Enneagram] What is REALLY, at the core of a 9?

[Dreamer]

So this thread comes from a self reflection and after reading more into this E type, may find more in relation to it than I had initially thought. Currently my tritype stands between a 729 or 279, but I may find myself down the road considering 9 as my core or fix once I dig deeper into this type.

But, this isn't a type me thread, though, feel free to drop your inclinations as to where 9 may fall within my tritype, but my question comes from gaining the general understanding that 9s do not like confrontation, and as one method they commonly avoid confrontation, aside from leaving the scene altogether, is to basically placate the aggressor and always choosing the path of least resistance as it pertains to maintaining this internal emotional "nirvana", this balance that is so sought after by the 9. But this has me thinking, that's fine and all, but to me, that doesn't seem as a true "core" in itself. It seems to me, that what the 9 pivots their decisions on, is instead a reaction to their real core fear. Avoidance is a maneuver, as with the 7, I find it rather lacking to define a type's core motivation off a reaction, as I understand it.

I am a relative novice when it comes to Enneagram, so please, if anyone has some true incite into 9s,hopefully some 9s can chime in, but is conflict avoidance really the core?? It seems there should be something much deeper than this.

Side note, the reason I'm currently leaning towards a more prominent 9 in my tritype is because I feel that is what everyone typically sees in interactions with me, on the forum and why I can be so approachable to members. That chill and laid back Dreamer is really just after maintaining his inner emotional balance, and that means protecting it from any potential aggressors as much as possible. Just some thoughts

 

[Lady Lazarus]

The core fear is of separation. Creating irreparable rifts between the self and the other. 9w1 is more proximate and 9w8 more ultimate in what they think will cause that.

Therefore, yes, what you identified as a possible core is actually only a symptom of the core fear.

Re: your maybe down the road, I don't think 9 is your core from the way you speak about your conflict avoidance.

 

[Dreamer]

The core fear is of separation. Creating irreparable rifts between the self and the other. 9w1 is more proximate and 9w8 more ultimate in what they think will cause that.

Therefore, yes, what you identified as a possible core is actually only a symptom of the core fear.

Re: your maybe down the road, I don't think 9 is your core from the way you speak about your conflict avoidance.

Ahh I see. Thanks for the help on this! I had a feeling something in my understanding was missing but I didn't know what. Since you're a 9, what would you say is at play within my interactions if 9 is not my core? Would you suggest my avoidance vibes differently? No pressure on the input. You've just piqued my curiosity now

 

[Lady Lazarus]

Would you suggest my avoidance vibes differently? No pressure on the input. You've just piqued my curiosity now

What was different was the way you speak about your conflict avoidance. In other words, the way you're framing it. A nine who speaks about their conflict avoidance won't embellish it to sound positive like you have here.

I think this is relevant to that last part of my statement:

This is not 9:
"dependents are notably self-effacing, obsequious, ever-agreeable, docile and ingratiating … They deny their individuality, subordinate their desires, and hide what vestiges they possess as identities apart from others...dependent personality disorder is essentially that of our phobic (self-preservation subtype of ennea-type VI)."

This is 9:
“Their outward demeanor is harmonious, inconspicuous, giving an impression of pleasing repose, or of sympathetic response, with no desire to affect others, to impress, influence, or change them in any way … Although there is a constant readiness for peaceful and harmonious coexistence, strangers are shown no touch of amiability, no gleam of responsive warmth, but are met with apparent indifference … Faced with anything that might carry her away or arouse enthusiasm, this type observes a benevolent though critical neutrality … Arty stormy emotion, however, will be struck down with a murderous coldness”

 

[Dreamer]

What was different was the way you speak about your conflict avoidance. In other words, the way you're framing it. A nine who speaks about their conflict avoidance won't embellish it to sound positive like you have here.

I think this is relevant to that last part of my statement:

Mmm interesting

Admittedly, I sort of just accepted having a 9 in my tritype since most members suggested it, and since I didn't know anything about the 9, I took their word for it. I watched a few videos on YouTube of the type and many things did resonate with me, but all this shows is that I still have a ways to go in understanding the Enneagram. Ohh... a new interest for me to get into!

 

[PeaceBaby]

Read this: personlitytype9 - upatel8

 

[OrangeAppled]

[MENTION=22089]ESFJ[/MENTION]
That second excerpt is from Jung's Introverted Feeling type in Psychological Types. Although the word arty is not in any translation I've seen.
Basically, that will apply to IxFPs regardless of enneagram, and xxFPs in general might relate to it in some ways.

 

[Lady Lazarus]

[MENTION=22089]ESFJ[/MENTION]
That second excerpt is from Jung's Introverted Feeling type in Psychological Types. Although the word arty is not in any translation I've seen.
Basically, that will apply to IxFPs regardless of enneagram, and xxFPs in general might relate to it in some ways.

I know.

I'm referring to it in the context of Naranjo stating it as one of the approximations to e9 in Character and Neurosis. I thought it would be a good analogy given that he's more familiar with MBTI. I suppose I could have been clearer.

As for "arty", perhaps this isn't the most reliable version:
[Enneagram Type 9] Naranjo's 'Character & Neurosis': Ennea-Type IX

 

[Dreamer]

Read this: personlitytype9 - upatel8

Awesome! Thanks PeaceBaby. I just read snippets of the link and browsed through what I could, but will return to it once I get a chance. I think this will help clear up much mystery for me concerning 9s

 

[GavinElster]

I think the way I've come to see enneagram, there are 9 common themes, but the way types play out in individuals can look different. There are actually pretty recognizable varieties of each enneatype (sometimes not neatly categorized within so/sx/sp or wings).

As with many mystical traditions, the idea of the subject/external duality plays a role in enneagram, in that we have a sense of a separate existence from the rest of reality that is used to define the ego - at its extremes, this leads to enneatypes 4/5's isolation.
Enneagram seems to declare that this tension/separation is philosophically what grounds our patterns of motivation and how we rationalize them. There are instinctual, head-oriented, emotion/heart-oriented ways of doing so predominantly, and we could loosely say that the first represses the sense of separation most, and in a sense is the most practical view of the subject-external dynamics, given that the way the subject interfaces with the external is in deciding how to act in the broadest sense. At the heart end, the separation might play out via the question of "what is the subject's place in the external" -- hence questions of significance come up, since the external is seemingly impersonal, the subject feels anything but, and to fill the gap, it must acquire some kind of objective significance.
At the head end, the external is increasingly viewed as foreign and intrusive as we move towards 5, hence this triad deals with anxiety.

With this background, you could say 8 represents a repression of the anxiety/inhibitory instinct of the head end, hence its vigorous fixation called lust; 9 denies the separation to the largest degree, hence if there's one thing 9s are prone to do, it's forgetting their sense of self -- there are some more rugged/rebellious 9s who still display a kind of numbing psychology (not unrelated to 8's repression of fear/inhibition) and loose sense of self, and some more "traditional" soft and compliant 9s. There is a sense in which this forgetting the sense of self is both symbolic of the fundamental problem and solution of the enneagram, because on the one hand, the dissolution of the separation is the aim, but the means ought not (so the theory goes) be repression of it. This lies exactly parallel to Jung's theory of needing to differentiate and then individuate -- neither deny the superior/inferior function dynamics nor deny the need to transcend them.

This will be familiar to many, but since you're new, that's just a bit of a summary of perspective.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Have you taken Rouskyrie's updated tritype test? It's very, very good, imo. He's also very talented at helping others navigate through this process, when he has the time

 

[Dreamer]

Have you taken Rouskyrie's updated tritype test? It's very, very good, imo. He's also very talented at helping others navigate through this process, when he has the time

Thanks for the tip! I haven't taken that test yet, no. Whenever I've taken the test in the past, 7 actually came out the clear winner for me, but I don't feel I vibe the same way as the other ENFP 7s on the forum. Could an Sx vs So dominance play that much of a role in presenting the type so drastically? There are of course other factors that aren't laid out by various personality systems, but that's the biggest reason I've been second guessing my enneagram. Cognitively, I really can't think of anything other than an NFP typing for myself that even comes close, so I'm hoping to find some answers through Enneagram and my instinctual stacking.

 

[Agent Washington]

I think the way I've come to see enneagram, there are 9 common themes, but the way types play out in individuals can look different. There are actually pretty recognizable varieties of each enneatype (sometimes not neatly categorized within so/sx/sp or wings).

As with many mystical traditions, the idea of the subject/external duality plays a role in enneagram, in that we have a sense of a separate existence from the rest of reality that is used to define the ego - at its extremes, this leads to enneatypes 4/5's isolation.
Enneagram seems to declare that this tension/separation is philosophically what grounds our patterns of motivation and how we rationalize them. There are instinctual, head-oriented, emotion/heart-oriented ways of doing so predominantly, and we could loosely say that the first represses the sense of separation most, and in a sense is the most practical view of the subject-external dynamics, given that the way the subject interfaces with the external is in deciding how to act in the broadest sense. At the heart end, the separation might play out via the question of "what is the subject's place in the external" -- hence questions of significance come up, since the external is seemingly impersonal, the subject feels anything but, and to fill the gap, it must acquire some kind of objective significance.
At the head end, the external is increasingly viewed as foreign and intrusive as we move towards 5, hence this triad deals with anxiety.

With this background, you could say 8 represents a repression of the anxiety/inhibitory instinct of the head end, hence its vigorous fixation called lust; 9 denies the separation to the largest degree, hence if there's one thing 9s are prone to do, it's forgetting their sense of self -- there are some more rugged/rebellious 9s who still display a kind of numbing psychology (not unrelated to 8's repression of fear/inhibition) and loose sense of self, and some more "traditional" soft and compliant 9s. There is a sense in which this forgetting the sense of self is both symbolic of the fundamental problem and solution of the enneagram, because on the one hand, the dissolution of the separation is the aim, but the means ought not (so the theory goes) be repression of it. This lies exactly parallel to Jung's theory of needing to differentiate and then individuate -- neither deny the superior/inferior function dynamics nor deny the need to transcend them.

This will be familiar to many, but since you're new, that's just a bit of a summary of perspective.

This is fascinating. Could you possibly say anything about 7, or point me to a source that can be easily understood by beginners? Cheers

 

[GavinElster]

You can have a look at Naranjo's Character and Neurosis -- he's the guy who originally brought enneagram to the US/framed it close to the form we know today. Of course I recommend looking at a wide variety of authors!

The gist of 7 seems to be best expressed by explaining the meaning of how 2/7 both stand in relation to the 891s. Where 8 and 1 essentially seem to ensure the issues of the neighboring triad are obliterated (by ensuring everything is perfected, my significance/value cannot possibly be under question; by being vigorously lusty and repressing inhibition/vulnerability, there's no question of the head triad rearing its head ), it seems to me 7 and 2 take a softer approach, where they acknowledge the neighboring triad's themes, but simply deny being lacking in that area. So for instance, it's not that 7 seems somewhat immune to the pleasure-pain dynamic, it's more that it errs so far on the pleasure side that the question of pain is repressed.
Some 7s are more aware of negative outcomes being possible, but they tend to still manage to escape by creating pleasing situations by strategizing to essentially rule out pain.
Or, they may resort to controlling their perspectives and exploit rationalization instead of controlling circumstances/strategizing

 

[Agent Washington]

You can have a look at Naranjo's Character and Neurosis -- he's the guy who originally brought enneagram to the US/framed it close to the form we know today. Of course I recommend looking at a wide variety of authors!

The gist of 7 seems to be best expressed by explaining the meaning of how 2/7 both stand in relation to the 891s. Where 8 and 1 essentially seem to ensure the issues of the neighboring triad are obliterated (by ensuring everything is perfected, my significance/value cannot possibly be under question; by being vigorously lusty and repressing inhibition/vulnerability, there's no question of the head triad rearing its head ), it seems to me 7 and 2 take a softer approach, where they acknowledge the neighboring triad's themes, but simply deny being lacking in that area. So for instance, it's not that 7 seems somewhat immune to the pleasure-pain dynamic, it's more that it errs so far on the pleasure side that the question of pain is repressed.
Some 7s are more aware of negative outcomes being possible, but they tend to still manage to escape by creating pleasing situations by strategizing to essentially rule out pain.
Or, they may resort to controlling their perspectives and exploit rationalization instead of controlling circumstances/strategizing

Thanks for your answer! I'll try and scrape up the $$ eventually to buy that book haha

In the meantime, thank you for sharing your knowlege. It has been immensely helpful. I've always kinda been wondering about being 7 because while it does seem to be my core fear, I can't really say I'm like most E7 descriptions, behaviourally I'm more like 4,5,6.

About the last sentence:
Or, they may resort to controlling their perspectives and exploit rationalization instead of controlling circumstances/strategizing

Is it possibly for personality traits and outward expression to therefore alter?

 

[GavinElster]

because while it does seem to be my core fear, I can't really say I'm like most E7 descriptions, behaviourally I'm more like 4,5,6.

In what sense are both so (meaning, why do you think your core fear is 7/why behaviorally like those other three)?
Might see something relevant if you happen to feel like providing a little more info!

Is it possibly for personality traits and outward expression to therefore alter?

I don't think personality is entirely static, and there's quite a lot of evidence against that idea; the overall point of having a core personality is it should be those things which probably are more or less stable, and must be so to be "defining features" of you.
So I'd just think of core personality as a subset of all your personality, the subset which remains stable and is most defining of you.

 

[Agent Washington]

In what sense are both so (meaning, why do you think your core fear is 7/why behaviorally like those other three)?
Might see something relevant if you happen to feel like providing a little more info!


I don't think personality is entirely static, and there's quite a lot of evidence against that idea; the overall point of having a core personality is it should be those things which probably are more or less stable, and must be so to be "defining features" of you.
So I'd just think of core personality as a subset of all your personality, the subset which remains stable and is most defining of you.

I don't think there's such a thing as a defining feature of any given individual, much less myself. But I'll suspend disbelief because I want to understand this model more.

Okay back to the first part - errr basically I don't talk a lot unless I'm really comfortable with someone, and even then I sometimes won't talk a lot. E7 descriptions describe E7 as this sort of sanguine individuals. I'm pretty much shaped by clinical depression, so I don't really have that zest for life. I think I behave more like 456 because their descriptions seem to be more quiet and restrained. However, I'm also pretty certain that my life is shaped by pain avoidance rather than any of those other fears.

 

[GavinElster]

I don't think there's such a thing as a defining feature of any given individual, much less myself. But I'll suspend disbelief because I want to understand this model more.

I'm not sure if you're emphasizing the singular "feature" vs "features" or if you're emphasizing you don't think there's anything among personality characteristics that helps define what the person is. The latter claim would basically be that there is no such thing as the person's overall range of personality -- that is, there's only fleeting traits that vanish every second and no more general, abstract pattern which the person satisfies.

Now, if you believe the latter there's no way you can assign anyone a type of any kind in any system!

If you just are saying there's no ONE thing which defines who a person is, that is obviously fine to say, and that's why I used "features" in the plural. But basically, if you can't define someone's personality, it is amorphous and we then can't really talk about it in a consistent way.

Personally I find the claim that there's nothing somewhat stable that you can call a defining feature of someone's personality pretty radical. I think the view that there are things which change and at least some things which are stable enough that the person isn't just wildly changing personality every second seems to be much more balanced.

Still, I'm open to radical claims, I just would need to have a sense of why someone would think it.

 

[GavinElster]

Let me address the other thread now in another post:

and even then I sometimes won't talk a lot. E7 descriptions describe E7 as this sort of sanguine individuals. I'm pretty much shaped by clinical depression, so I don't really have that zest for life. I think I behave more like 456 because their descriptions seem to be more quiet and restrained. However, I'm also pretty certain that my life is shaped by pain avoidance rather than any of those other fears.

I think this is a very good question, and one I ponder, too. We're both placing 6 as a wing, for one thing, and that brings up an issue: is 7 about gluttony or aversion to pain? After all, someone can be intensely averse to pain, like you say, without this sort of zest-for-life.
Personally, I think the most nervous energy in terms of pain-aversion/pleasure-orientation might be located between 6 and 7 rather than in either one. After all, part of the nervous energy is having stuff to lose/being nervous to truly stake oneself on something. I tend to think a type 6 in the purest sense will be more about seeking some kind of assurance than about the pleasure-pain dynamic, where the problem is in knowing how one can achieve that assurance/not be plagued by doubt.
With 7, there's a greater fear of being denied pleasure. If one is fine in an arid, zest-less security-oriented lifestyle that does damage control, that isn't the kind of pain-aversion we're talking with 7, because it seems too disconnected from being denied something. That is, if the pain isn't a corollary of being denied pleasure, and is more just a matter of a threat-avoidance, it does not have as much to do with type 7.

 

[Agent Washington]

Let me address the other thread now in another post:



I think this is a very good question, and one I ponder, too. We're both placing 6 as a wing, for one thing, and that brings up an issue: is 7 about gluttony or aversion to pain? After all, someone can be intensely averse to pain, like you say, without this sort of zest-for-life.
Personally, I think the most nervous energy in terms of pain-aversion/pleasure-orientation might be located between 6 and 7 rather than in either one. After all, part of the nervous energy is having stuff to lose/being nervous to truly stake oneself on something. I tend to think a type 6 in the purest sense will be more about seeking some kind of assurance than about the pleasure-pain dynamic, where the problem is in knowing how one can achieve that assurance/not be plagued by doubt.
With 7, there's a greater fear of being denied pleasure. If one is fine in an arid, zest-less security-oriented lifestyle that does damage control, that isn't the kind of pain-aversion we're talking with 7, because it seems too disconnected from being denied something. That is, if the pain isn't a corollary of being denied pleasure, and is more just a matter of a threat-avoidance, it does not have as much to do with type 7.

It's not just threat-avoidance, but also fear of denied pleasure. Put it this way: Being rejected is pain, so there's pain avoidance. Being denied pleasure is pain, so it's also about not seeking something that one can't get. At some point, there's the cost/benefit analysis of pain/pleasure dichotomy, with pain of rejection and denied pleasure as pain, and pleasure as... well, benefits. The costs of seeking outweigh the possible benefits of seeking, so one does not seek, and instead modifies one's perspective to keep attaining smaller pleasures instead.

For me, pain is inavertantly tied to pleasure, and sometimes there's even a sort of a masochistic impulse for certain pain. I definitely wonder if I'm not pure type 6, but type 6 is about seeking support and reassurance, and I also have this impulse towards independence and towards defying authority, which seems more 7 or 4. But I'm also not Type 4 because I don't actually care about having no significance or identity - I do care on some level (hence the tri-type; though I id more as a 5 in that case), but it's not a basic fear that acts as a subconscious limitation on everything I do.

So we're looking, essentially, at a distinction between 5, 6 and 7 as a core, with possibly wing influences.

Btw thank you so much for engaging me this has been very useful.