User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 10

  1. #1
    Kawaii Red Memories's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    MBTI
    xxFP
    Enneagram
    12x sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    5,851

    Default what really is enneagram 1?

    So many people vary on what makes a 1, a 1. And this discrepancy can explain why many feel 1s differently. E1 is seen as a perfectionistic rule follower. On other notes, especially with Sx 1, they are viewed as moral crusaders fighting for what they feel is right. 1 is inherently a compliance type though, so I would say Sx and 1 are a strange combo that makes the E1 look different than usual.

    Nevertheless, how do you define an E1 when you see one? What makes someone an E1 truly?

  2. #2
    Kawaii Red Memories's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    MBTI
    xxFP
    Enneagram
    12x sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    5,851

    Default

    @MovinOut @RadicalDoubt you like the leading post and no one has commented cmon debate me :P the E1 meme jk

  3. #3
    Ultra Hyper Mega Member Vendrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    MBTI
    ANFP
    Enneagram
    592
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Hmmm, should we just copy and paste descriptions?

    Best I can do is to try to explain what is the difference of type 1 morality and some types of morality that are not type 1 - highly moral/ethical people, regardless of being hypocrite, are usually attracted to this type because it is the only one that has something linked to morals.

  4. #4
    Kawaii Red Memories's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    MBTI
    xxFP
    Enneagram
    12x sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    5,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vendrah View Post
    Hmmm, should we just copy and paste descriptions?

    Best I can do is to try to explain what is the difference of type 1 morality and some types of morality that are not type 1 - highly moral/ethical people, regardless of being hypocrite, are usually attracted to this type because it is the only one that has something linked to morals.
    that would probably be very beneficial to explain that morality aspect. XD

  5. #5
    Kawaii Red Memories's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    MBTI
    xxFP
    Enneagram
    12x sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    5,851

    Default

    For note, these excerpts will be taken from Wisdom of the Enneagram.

    "We have named personality type One the Reformer because Ones have a sense of mission that leads them to want to improve the world in various ways, using whatever degree of influence they have. They strive to overcome adversity—particularly moral adversity—so that the human spirit can shine through and make a difference. They strive after higher values, even at the cost of great personal sacrifice."

    "Ones are people of practical action—they wish to be useful in the best sense of the word. On some level of consciousness, they feel that they “have a mission” to fulfill in life, if only to try their best to reduce the disorder they see in their environment."

    "Although Ones have a strong sense of purpose, they also typically feel that they have to justify their actions to themselves and often to others as well. This orientation causes Ones to spend a lot of time thinking about the consequences of their actions, as well as about how to keep from acting contrary to their convictions. Because of this, Ones often persuade themselves that they are “head” types, rationalists who proceed only on logic and objective truth. But the real picture is some¬ what different: Ones are actually activists who are searching for an acceptable rationale for what they feel they must do. They are people of instinct and passion who use convictions and judgments to control and direct themselves and their actions."

    "In the effort to stay true to their principles, Ones resist being affected by their instinctual drives, consciously not giving in to them or expressing them too freely. The result is a personality type that has problems with repression, resistance, and aggression. They are usually seen by others as highly self-controlled, even rigid, although this is not how Ones experience themselves. It seems to them that they are sitting on a cauldron of passions and desires and that they had better “keep the lid on” lest they and everyone else around them regret it."

    "Ones believe that being strict with themselves (and eventually becoming “perfect”) will justify themselves in their own eyes and in the eyes of others. But by attempting to create their own brand of perfection, they often create their own personal hell. Instead of agreeing with the statement in Genesis that God saw what He had created “and it was good,” Ones intensely feel, “It wasn’t—there obviously have been some mistakes here!” This orientation makes it difficult for them to trust their inner guidance—indeed, to trust life—so Ones come to rely heavily on their superego, a learned voice from their childhood, to guide them toward the greater good that they so passionately seek. When Ones have gotten completely entranced in their personality, there is little distinction between them and this severe, unforgiving voice. Separating from it and seeing its genuine strengths and limitations is what growth for Ones is about."

    "In effect, the child says, “I will give myself guidelines. I will become my own father-figure and be my own moral guide. I will police myself so no one else will police me; I will punish myself so no one else will punish me." Ones try to surpass what is expected of them by adhering to the rules so rigorously that no one will be able to catch them in error, thus earning independence."

    "THE ONE WITH A NINE-WING: THE IDEALIST
    Healthy People of this subtype are highly discerning, wise, and civilized. They can be scholarly and erudite, maintaining a dispassion¬ ate philosophical stance that focuses on long-range concerns—the “big” picture. They can have an introverted, reclusive quality about them, seeking relief from “the maddenihg crowd,” often in quiet, natural settings. They are emotionally reserved but generous, kind, and considerate, generally loving nature, aninials, and innocence wherever they find it. They wish to improve tiling^ but with a gentler, more detached touch than other Ones.
    Average Idealistic and less likely to engage in the politics and “dirty work” necessary to bring about the reforms they believe in, average people of this subtype would rather explain their ideals than personally persuade others of their correctness. The anger seen in Ones is harder to detect in this subtype than in the other, tending to express itself in stiffness, impatience, and sarcasm. People of this subtype prefer to be alone and look for situations where they can work by themselves in order to avoid dealing with the disappointing messiness of human relationships. They can be more remote, otherworldly, and impersonal than the other subtype, potentially disdainful, elitist, and condescending to their fellow humans"

    "THE ONE WITH A TWO-WING: THE ADVOCATE
    Healthy People of this subtype blend their quest for ideals and higher principles with empathy and compassion for others. Less purely idealistic than the other subtype, they are genuinely interested in improving the lot of mankind and more willing to get into the trenches to bring about the changes they advocate. They are also more overtly passionate and interpersonal, enjoying the give-and-take of “political” involvement. People of this subtype are persuasive and go out of their way to get others to care about the causes and beliefs they espouse.
    Average Highly active and outgoing, average people of this sub- type can be fairly aggressive and forceful in the pursuit of the ideals and reforms they seek. While they are comfortable being alone and need a good deal of “down time” to recharge and think, they are also energized by engaging with others, particularly debating and refining their, ideas. This makes them naturally good at politics on whatever scale they engage in it. The needs of others are the focus for their altruism, so long as they feel they are making a difference. They can become critical and irritable and highly vocal about their discontents when they are frustrated. They are also more fiery and action-oriented than the other subtype, and so the possibility of being frustrated by people and events is higher."

    "THE SELF-PRESERVATION INSTINCT IN THE ONE
    Self-Control. In the average range, Self-Preservation Ones tend to worry about their material well-being, both in terms of finances and health, and they often castigate themselves for not working hard enough (like average Sixes). The Self-Preservation instinct also gives them strong drives for gratification, but their Type One superego can be severe in countering those drives. The resulting inner conflict is the source of continual stress, physical tension, and an all-or-nothing attitude with regard to their pleasures and desires. They may either indulge themselves and their desires, or go through periods of asceticism, during which their desires are suppressed as much as possible.
    As they become more identified with their superego dictates, they become very fearful about making mistakes that seem like catastrophes to them. They feel that any wrong action could result in the undoing of their well-being. They can be quite picky and fastidious about their environment. (Picture Felix Unger in The Odd Couple.) They value cleanliness, order, hygiene, and aesthetics, and they are often preoccupied with health and diet, religiously subscribing to beliefs about vitamins, macrobiotics, homeopathic remedies, and so forth. With others, they tend to be overprotective about the things that they worry about in themselves. If they are worried about getting sick, they scold others about not taking care of their health. If they have money concerns, they exhort others to save. In the lower Levels, the harshness of their superego causes them to feel undeserving of any kind of comfort or reward.
    In the unhealthy range, Self-Preservation Ones begin to oscillate between periods of strict restraint of their appetites and periods of excess and debauch. They often become obsessed with health matters, especially with regard to food. They often attempt to justify or undo their violations of their own dietary or health requirements. They may binge on sweets, or drink excessively, then go on a crash diet. Milkshakes and fries are followed by handfuls of vitamins. Self-Preservation Ones are prone to eating disorders and extreme practices to curb their instinctual impulses, including asceticism, excessive fasting, bingeing and purging, and so forth."

    "THE SOCIAL INSTINCT IN THE ONE
    The Crusader. In the average range, Social Ones believe that they represent objective values, social standards, and that they speak for others. Teaching, advocating, and moralizing can be part of the picture, but mostly about social issues and about rules and procedures. They are often interested in politics, current affairs, and journalism and are adept at uncovering the “dirt,” exposing wrongdoing and speaking out against injustices. On the other hand, they will work patiently to bring about the reforms they see as necessary—improving the local schools, getting their co-op involved with recycling, and so forth.
    Social Ones derive a vivid sense of themselves by holding strong opinions and convictions and arguing for their perspective. They value these qual¬ ities in others as well, although when more fixated, they expect others always to agree with them. This can lead to rigidity both in their thinking and in their behavior. Their views can become a boundary, an armor against die world. And since Ones apply the rules most rigorously to themselves, they fear ever being caught contradicting their own stated beliefs and opinions.
    Although Social Ones insist that others should not take their criticisms and views personally, they take things personally, often reacting to public policies as if they were personal affronts or triumphs.
    In the unhealthy range, Social Ones hold unrealistic standards and expectations for themselves, others, and society at large. They may be¬ come involved in extreme political views or strict religious dogmas (libertarianism is the only solution to the country’s ills; no sexual activity in marriage unless it can lead directly to conception). In the lower Levels, they can engage in rants and tirades, constantly feeling outrage at the imperfections of humanity."

    "THE SEXUAL INSTINCT IN THE ONE
    Shared Standards. . In the average range, Sexual Ones want a flawless relationship with an idealized partner. They long for the perfect mate, an unwavering source of stability in their lives. In this respect, they can be mistaken for Fours. They have high expectations of their partner, their family, and their close friends and want to believe that the other person in the relationship holds the same standards. (“We share these ideals, don’t we?”) Sexual Ones fear that the other will fall short, thus destroying the harmony and perfection of the relationship. This can lead to feeling that they must push loved ones to meet their standards. They also may have trouble finding someone who meets their standards, trying one relationship after another but always feeling disappointed.
    Sexual Ones place a great emphasis on fidelity. (“Love is forever.”) Although they do not appear needy, they often suffer from well-hidden fears of abandonment and a chronic sense of loneliness. The mix of high expectations with abandonment issues can result in a critical, controlling attitude toward the partner. (“Don’t ever let me down. Don’t ever deceive me.”) At lower Levels, they may constantly need to “check in” on the other’s activities and whereabouts. Sexual Ones feel that they have earned a good relationship, earned their pleasure, and feel threatened at the possible loss of one of their few areas of reward. Criticism and control may be used to keep the other off balance, to undermine confidence, thus postponing potential abandonment.
    In the unhealthy range, the Sexual variant endows them with strong desires and appetites, but this is difficult to justify to the One’s superego. Sexual Ones may experience intense desire alternating with a need to reject that desire. This may lead to both sexual compulsivity and repression. (“I don’t want to be attracted to him.”) At the same time, they may believe that the other is the source of their obsessions and want to control the other so that the balance of the relationship can be restored. Less healthy Sexual Ones are prey to bouts of intense jealousy. Their fears are such that they constantly question and grill the other. In extreme cases, they may punish the self or others to purge themselves of their desires."

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Morality for the 1 depends on their source of morality. An evangelical 1w2, for example, could be a "righteous mission" against the LGBT community for instance, and think punishing LGBT people for their "sin" is a good act.
    Likes Vendrah liked this post

  7. #7
    Kawaii Red Memories's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    MBTI
    xxFP
    Enneagram
    12x sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    5,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtCobain View Post
    Morality for the 1 depends on their source of morality. An evangelical 1w2, for example, could be a "righteous mission" against the LGBT community for instance, and think punishing LGBT people for their "sin" is a good act.
    this sounds a little more like Fe + So 1. Other one subtypes are gonna be a little "less" crusadery. XD But that is fair, their mission can be based on that morality. But certainly not every E1 is doing that specifically. I feel like part of my moral mission is to tell LGBT+ people that them being themselves and meeting their needs really is not against the will of God. XD

  8. #8
    Ultra Hyper Mega Member Vendrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    MBTI
    ANFP
    Enneagram
    592
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Ok, my time to explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtCobain View Post
    Morality for the 1 depends on their source of morality. An evangelical 1w2, for example, could be a "righteous mission" against the LGBT community for instance, and think punishing LGBT people for their "sin" is a good act.
    That's right! Perhaps it is good that I use your post as example and starting point.
    The first thing to note here is that the notion that 1 is a gut type - and the notion that they are an 'instinct type' - comes as after Frauve came up with the notion of head, heart and gut divisions - these divisions does not belong to the original enneagram and they come from 'studies' that are only mentioned by Frauve and are not even shown on her website in any accessible way - and so far I had found no source from Google Scholar referring to Frauve. And the bridges between enneagram and other typing systems, specially MBTI->Jung Typology does suggest that her division is NOT actually proper or right. So I will ignore any affirmations that 1 is an 'instinct type', specially because of the inconsistencies that comes with it (saying that a type is instinctual and them saying that it is rational it is sort of a inconsistency) (fixing it with 'they deny instinct' but are an instinct type does not help much - to try to picture the absurd imagine if I said that INFP is a thinker type because they deny Te).

    So, Type 1 main characteristics:
    - Idealistic
    - Rational
    - Principled
    - Purposeful
    - Self-Controlled
    - Perfectionist
    - Conscientious (High Conscientious -> Very likely J on MBTI dichotomy)

    Some other complementary characteristics:
    - Organized/orderly
    - Sense of practical action
    - Rigid

    This set of characteristics is the one which links to Jung Te and they are anti-Ne, but anyway, the first thing to note here is that Fi has a different set of characteristics and yet has some kind of principles - like INFP/ISFP not ones are principled too and can be moralistic as well - looking for the right thing, but on a completely different way. This way is Moral Sentimentalism - this is perhaps the most antagonistic kind of morals to type 1.

    Moral sense theory - Wikipedia

    "Moral sense theory (also known as moral sentimentalism) is a theory in moral epistemology and meta-ethics concerning the discovery of moral truths. Moral sense theory typically holds that distinctions between morality and immorality are discovered by emotional responses to experience. Some take it to be primarily a view about the nature of moral facts or moral beliefs (a primarily metaphysical view)—this form of the view more often goes by the name "sentimentalism". Others take the view to be primarily about the nature of justifying moral beliefs (a primarily epistemological view)—this form of the view more often goes by the name "moral sense theory". However, some theorists take the view to be one which claims that both moral facts and how one comes to be justified in believing them are necessarily bound up with human emotions." - Basically, it is the 'I feel something is good or bad' kind of moralism, that concept was born before Jung conceptualized Fi (it is sort of old). However, this kind of moralism does lack the objectivity that is supposed to be tied to type 1 and it is not rational at all and it does hits indirect aspects of Self-Controlling and Conscientious and there is not really much of a perfectionism notion on it most of the time - so it is a kind of moralism that it is uncovered by enneagram and it is one kind of moralism, that might even bring some sort of activism, that is not at all type 1 because it is against multiple type 1 main traits.

    The enneagram definitions of what 'principles and morals' means to type 1 is a lot vague, which makes some of the 'enneagram defenders' not want to admit that there are morals that do not fit type 1 (because that would imply that the enneagram does not cover all types and that additional types, like a type 10 or type 11, could be created independently from enneagram types). But there are set of traits that narrows the kind of morality ones have. The perfectionism united with the "rational-objectivism" that type 1 have need a very specific code or set of codes - this is where the rigidity comes from. If they do not have that code, they lose the objectivity and rationality - it either becomes too subjective (as moral sentimentalism is) and irrational (as moral sentimentalism is mostly, since for Jung it is still rational), which changes the set of characteristics and starts to go against type 1 waayy too hard. The morality from type 1 is of a normative nature, in a lot of times will be a Deontological set of ethics and morals ("In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek: δέον, 'obligation, duty' + λόγος, 'study') is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.[1] It is sometimes described as duty-, obligation-, or rule-based ethics.[2][3] Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism,[4] virtue ethics, and pragmatic ethics."), it needs some sort of set of prescriptions (that is why it fits Te and SJ - it has an intellectual formula underneath). These are characteristics that not all ethics and morals have, moral sentimentalism being the best example, but some other that might develop in a different way might be Moral Universalism and the ones that are commonly contrasted to deontological ethics.

    So, basically, the source of their morality is the deontological code of morality - which can be viewed as a Jung intellectual formula - so what it is considered principled, right or wrong, but as Jung covered also what is the truth, what is real and what is false, is according to what the set of prescribed rules says, which in the evangelical example that is to punish LGBT people because they are sinners (they are sinners for being against their set of code). That is how the 1 become rigid, dogmatic, intolerant, inflexible.

    Not all 1s are these way, only most of them; A 'quality of a type 1' in other kinds of ethics depends a lot on which code they are really adopting and how good or bad the code is. In terms of D&D, 1s are lawful in nature - even though they are not necessarily conformists because their code can be quite unpopular or popular. But they are not necessarily good, they can be evil (think of them following a Sith Code, for example). Some 1s might grow (and in one of the enneagram theories, their path of grow is towards type 7) more spontaneous and flexible - they might 'hear that inner voice' and makes them complement their morality, becoming a sort of less rigid and a morality of higher quality - but if they get deep on that way too much, that loses the conscientious, perfectionism, etc... characteristics.

    I am not really an expert in the philosophy of moral and ethics, but I guess my limited knowledge with consulting does do it. So, that is my explanation of 1s kind of morality and my mentions of kinds of morality that are not type 1s. Some people might be a lot moralistic/ethical, yet they end up belonging to other enneagram types because 1 type of morality is not for them. That actually does expose a flaw on enneagram, because not necessarily you are a 1 if you want to be right and nor for having integrity, but also some 1s might falsify evidence or material in the name of their own code, which does not make them corrupt on their point of view (since that is for the code) but makes them corrupt in the very basic ethics for falsifying information that contradicts reality and deceiving in the name of the code. These kinds of things can also trigger wars, 1s that have clashing doctrines tends to be in conflict with each other.

  9. #9
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    14,045

    Default

    It's been a long time since the first few years of this forum, and a lot changed from then and may no longer be applicable, but I remember some observations I accumulated about how people discussed different types. Back then an absurdly large percentage of people self-typed as either E4 or E5. Perhaps all of the people would really be classified as such types by some perfectly objective typing instrument, and this forum just had a way of attracting those types at the time, but I really doubt it. I think the types were simply over-assigned. There was some element to the culture, either on this forum, or with Enneagram in general, or maybe even society at large (maybe all combined!) that made people inclined to think of themselves as those types. Then there were some second tier types, like E6, E7, E9. E8 was a little rarer than those. But the conspicuously rare were 1, 2, and 3 (conveniently enough). Hardly anyone typed as those back then, and I noticed, seemingly in accord with that, people had the most cartoonish concept of what those types were like. It seemed to me that while 4s and 5s were understood to show a reasonably human variation in personality, 1s, 2s, and 4s were held to unreasonably narrow standards and thus few "qualified". They were more like types that only ever existed elsewhere, in theory, never here in person.

    In my case, I think just the fact that I'm an atheist utilitarian pretty much ruled out E1 for a lot of people. Wouldn't you know, there's a post right above saying 1s are deontologists. So I guess I guess correct.

    To actually answer the question, instead of meta-answering, I don't actually have a lot to add onto the Riso quotes. They mostly work, and the Enneagram is not science or math, is not anything beyond what the literature says. I will say, in my background, I derived the greater part of my Enneagram understanding from Helen Palmer, not Riso. Her way of putting it was very simple: That festering beneath all of a 1s motives (shallowly or deeply) is the fear that one is not lovable if not perfect, so mistakes are not okay, mistakes are not lovable. Now, if we take that as our only premise (eschewing the many pages of material she wrote in detail about 1s), we can see the potential for a lot of variation. There's never just one way to deal with a motive like that. It grows out like a fractal.

    For instance, a 1's fear of being seen in their flaws could on one hand make them blustery posers, basically trying to push ahead with demonstrations of their goodness, but the other hand they could decide that discretion is the better part of valor and become afraid to try anything at all because an attempt means a chance of failure. Perhaps the most fundamental variations in a 1 relate to their estimation of where their worth is at and where it is going. That alone would give us at least three possible modes. You can have a 1 who is ashamed of their imperfections but believes them to be curable and thus works industriously at some notion of self-improvement. You can have a 1 who has resigned to the realization they can never be perfect but has not shaken off the fear that this makes them unlovable and accordingly despairs in a socially avoidant way. Lastly, you can have a 1 that has managed to convince themselves of their achieved perfection and feels entitled to being recognized for it.

    The point being, a simple premise like "I must be perfect to be loved" can turn into some very different looking things. Those three different imagined people have the same core premise, so they do have something important in common, but that does not keep them from adopting behaviors externally different enough to perhaps come across as unrelated to the outside observer.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right
    Likes Red Memories, Powehi liked this post

  10. #10
    Complex paradigm Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNTJ
    Posts
    14,422

    Default

    The problem is that "perfect" or "moral" is something that is quite culturally defined. Therefore e1 can have quite a diversity in itself.
    Similar as e3 or e6. What is probably because all those 3 types represent "the system" and therefore they look quite differently from system to system.
    Likes Red Memories liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. What is Enneagram type even.
    By Ayuhime in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-08-2017, 08:12 PM
  2. What type is Shadow the Hedgehog (Sonic Adventure 2 Battle)
    By Athenian200 in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-29-2016, 05:04 PM
  3. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-11-2014, 08:47 PM

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