• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Multiple Enneagram Subtypes/Instincts Subtype Knowledge According to Claudio Naranjo by Beatrice Chestnut

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Social fours were overly whiny and weepy. They complained too much without doing anything about it. Sexual fours came in with this competitive attitude of 'Just try to help me, I know you can't.' Most of them had good things to say about self pres fours, actually, that they were articulate and self disciplined so they accomplished a lot in therapy. They liked that they didn't complain which I thought was a little wild- don't therapists want their patients to share their problems?

This is interesting, because there are times I've considered therapy, but I kind of thought it would be pointless because of the sp & sx reasons. The "I know you couldn't help me" aspect would be an arrogance that I've considered all solutions & angles already & deemed it hopeless (the world & me are just incompatible). I could see myself getting argumentative, as I can be a bit of a know-it-all.

I've mainly never done it because I've had the idea that the worst thing for me is to be "diagnosed", because what I really need to learn is that there is nothing wrong with me (and therapists don't tend to take that angle, from what I gather).

I also think I'd either just whine & want to be heard or have a hard time opening up at all because I find such things very humiliating (I used to really fear crying in front of other people). I have a tendency to be like "I'm fine, I'm fine, I'm fine - SIGH!".

I think therapy only works for someone if they're ready to do work, and the sp 4 is likely to not even do it UNTIL they are ready, whereas sx & so may for the wrong reasons (attention, sympathy...). In other words, I don't think sp 4s are automatically more inclined to self-improvement.... it's just that they're being martyrs in isolation instead of seeking a willing ear in the meantime.
[MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] - you seem very contained. What has led you to settle on so/sp and not sp/so?
 

SD45T-2

Senior Jr.
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
4,229
MBTI Type
ESTJ
Enneagram
1w2
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
:shock: That's so spot on it's ridiculous. While I know my sister is a Sx-first, I've even struggled to work out whether she's a 8 or 1 - and this description even addresses that. Also, "being more of a reformer than a perfectionist" fits so well and explains things too.
I'd say Lydia Adams (Regina King) on Southland is a 1w2 sx/so.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
Pretty much.

Social fours were overly whiny and weepy. They complained too much without doing anything about it. Sexual fours came in with this competitive attitude of 'Just try to help me, I know you can't.' Most of them had good things to say about self pres fours, actually, that they were articulate and self disciplined so they accomplished a lot in therapy. They liked that they didn't complain which I thought was a little wild- don't therapists want their patients to share their problems?
Yeah, that is strange. I've never done therapy but I kinda thought the point was to be a little whiny. :shrug:

However, I have believed 4s would be difficult therapy patients. I thought it would be because we are too self-aware and too knowledgeable about our problems (though not necessarily the "Envy" issue), that it would make it almost impossible to give real insight and inspire changes.

For fives, I don't remember anything instinct specific, but basically it was about how it was impossible to get anything out of them and that they were so frustrating because they refused to take any concrete action to change, they were just so in their heads.
Sounds about right.

It was a wild read because it was these uncensored comments of psychotherapists tearing certain 'types' apart and praising others. It was like sneaking into a private meeting, which intrigued me, but it also left a pretty bad taste in my mouth, mainly because it would seem that therapists should be more open-minded and not play favorites and something about them grouping people into types vs considering them as individuals bothered me. It made me think of teachers congregating in a teachers' lounge bitching about certain cliques of students. That said, I liked having the opportunity to read it. It was like being a fly on the wall.
That was my thoughts too - I'm also a little ambivalent about it.

I know. I really like them too. I find it interesting because when I first encountered enneagram I thought for sure my husband was a 7 but he's not flaky and changeable like sevens are often portrayed (just extremely enthusiastic and constantly planning his next activity of fun), so I considered 6, 3, 9, 2, but there was always something off about it. Thinking of him as the 'countertype' (I always figured he was a social dom regardless of etype) for seven totally makes sense.
Don't you love it when that happens? :)

I don't get why people wouldn't want to be social first, but there definitely does seem to be a bias against social- I guess it's the prevalence of bad descriptions. I've never equated bonding with sexual though. They are definitely different energies. Sexual is like being possessed by the devil while social strikes me as being gentle and considerate.
The descriptions are not great for the Social instinct and it has instilled all these prejudices against it. People see the type as rather bland (they're neither intense or tragic) or like a bunch of superficial, cliquey, ass-kissing, social-climbers. You have to contend with that every time you try to persuade someone that they could be one. It's not their fault; they just don't know the full picture.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
This is interesting, because there are times I've considered therapy, but I kind of thought it would be pointless because of the sp & sx reasons. The "I know you couldn't help me" aspect would be an arrogance that I've considered all solutions & angles already & deemed it hopeless (the world & me are just incompatible). I could see myself getting argumentative, as I can be a bit of a know-it-all.
Yeah, I would do a little of that too - in between being "whiny".

I also think I'd either just whine & want to be heard or have a hard time opening up at all because I find such things very humiliating (I used to really fear crying in front of other people). I have a tendency to be like "I'm fine, I'm fine, I'm fine - SIGH!".
Yeah. From my perspective, I don't want to open up to someone who isn't going to properly get me and will try to fix me in stupid ways. I also hate crying in front of people - show no weakness! :D

Southern Kross - you seem very contained. What has led you to settle on so/sp and not sp/so?
Yeah, it is a bit hard to see at first - I even went with sp/so in the beginning. The strong Five wing makes it difficult because it gives a decidedly Sp vibe, however, it didn't really gel with other aspects of myself. I read a couple of good descriptions of 4s and the Social instinct which it really seemed to click with me and encapsulate things.

I think the main thing was that So-first 4s were these conflicted social animals. On one hand they want to be part of things and on the other they're extremely anti-social - that's me to a tee. It's a a bizarre quality: even though I'm an intensely shy and reserved introvert, I have an extroverted streak. It's not something that would be noticeable online, I imagine. IRL I can be quite talkative and friendly in social situations, even while I'm terrified (and/or miserable) inside. This made it difficult at times when doing MBTI questionnaires because it was so contradictory: "yes, I am rather talkative"; "no, I avoid people like the plague". :huh: Also I think So 4s can seem open, even though they aren't (which fits with me), whereas Sp 4s are plainly not open.

On top of that the whole 4 So shame aspect makes sense - I feel embarrassment over my failings keenly. Also the fact that they're social, cultural, political commentators fits with me too. I think it's because we have one foot in the social circle and one foot out; this affords both awareness and the distance from which to make insights and analyse them clearly. It also means I'm never fully here nor there, which is probably confusing for the people around me.

I'd say Lydia Adams (Regina King) on Southland is a 1w2 sx/so.
Unfortunately I haven't seen that show. I'm trying to think of some others...

Isn't Meryl Streep a 1w2 Sx?
 

Z Buck McFate

Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
6,048
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
When I'm healthier I have a difficult time seeing myself in the Naranjo descriptions. I always have to remember- what am I like when I've lost my shit? And then it becomes pretty stinking obvious that sexual four is where it's at.

OrangeAppled, I was reading Naranjo's Enneatypes in Psychotherapy at a bookstore last night. An interesting read, for sure. It's essentially the notes from a meeting of psychotherapists discussing how it is working with different enneatypes and their subtypes, including their biases against particular types (wow did a lot of them hate working with fours and fives, maybe that's part of why I've always had such a shitty time with therapists/psychiatrists). Also, all of the therapists of the same subtypes got together and highlighted what they considered to be the core issues of those particular subtypes. You might want to try to get a copy.

That is really interesting. I can't wait to read this, thanks for posting about it. Therapists have never been much help to me either (if that's what you meant by 'shitty time', lol). It doesn't especially surprise me. I suspect 4 and 5 are averse to that kind of direction, scrutinizing it more than other types (though I'd have guessed this would be problematic for 6 as well).
 

the state i am in

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,475
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The descriptions are not great for the Social instinct and it has instilled all these prejudices against it. People see the type as rather bland (they're neither intense or tragic) or like a bunch of superficial, cliquey, ass-kissing, social-climbers. You have to contend with that every time you try to persuade someone that they could be one. It's not their fault; they just don't know the full picture.

i generally think of so types as the pleasers. they like to please other people. they are inclusive in their decision-making processes. with so/sps, i think they accept that all things in life require negotiation and commit to a process of negotiating in their interactions with others. committing to community is the upside of "cliquey," whereas "objectifying" is the downside of sx only desiring and focusing on exactly what it wants and nothing more (just as "aloof" is the downside of sp disengagement and insularity).

so cliquey, aloof, and objectifying? or community-oriented, earthy, and passionate? it just depends on which direction the arrows are coming from. and it's also part of the family roles we grew into and that exist beyond us too, at least until we grow into the whole of ourselves.

i used to demonize it, and it's still difficult for me to predict or understand the process so types go through in real-time, but i'm starting to see why it's so important, necessary, and valuable. some better descriptions don't just portray so/sp types as status-driven social climbers. they instead focus on the way that they truly care about competency and contribution to the group (and the values that are used to assess that: fairness, reciprocity, loyalty, consistency, delivering on promises, and integrity). most of the ones i know work really hard! and while they may identify with concrete symbolizations of those underlying values, so do we all. theirs are just generally more organizationally/role driven, rather than sx prizes which are more about being as resource intensive as possible (when not just image-based focuses on total change potential), or sp comforts which are more about creating as much ease and ergonomicness as possible.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION], [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION]

My issues tend to be that, first of all, I do a ton of introspection and then I research the hell out of anything that interests me so I go in there equipped with all of this information and things I've considered and so when a therapist slowly explains things to me I already know, all I can think about is how pointless it is. Or even worse, when I mention something and they don't know what I'm talking about. So yes, there's an arrogance. (like you say, Southern Kross, fours' self awareness can leave a therapist with little to do at times and hence their frustration, I imagine.)

Secondly, if I don't feel a connection to someone I just go into withdrawn mode. I had a therapist (who I really didn't like) constantly go on and on about how enigmatic and mysterious I was. Obviously I liked that, so that didn't really help her get more words out of me.

Then there is the therapist model of constantly telling you how normal your problems are and how there are others who have it far worse, which I guess makes most people feel better? I hear that and I just shut down because obviously this person doesn't have a single clue about me. Hearing I'm 'just like everybody else' makes me want to die.

(I would like to add, by the way, that I don't go to a therapist. I go to a psychiatrist because I have to in order to get my medication that I'm supposed to take for the rest of my life, so when I say therapist I actually mean psychiatrist. If I didn't have to go to get a refill I wouldn't bother with any of it.)
 
B

brainheart

Guest
i generally think of so types as the pleasers. they like to please other people. they are inclusive in their decision-making processes. with so/sps, i think they accept that all things in life require negotiation and commit to a process of negotiating in their interactions with others. committing to community is the upside of "cliquey," whereas "objectifying" is the downside of sx only desiring and focusing on exactly what it wants and nothing more (just as "aloof" is the downside of sp disengagement and insularity).

so cliquey, aloof, and objectifying? or community-oriented, earthy, and passionate? it just depends on which direction the arrows are coming from. and it's also part of the family roles we grew into and that exist beyond us too, at least until we grow into the whole of ourselves.

I would think many unhealthy social types would be better described as antisocial or misanthropic rather than cliquey. Perhaps they perceive others as cliquey or are disgusted by cliques or group people together but I think many unhealthy social doms see themselves as separate from the group, and feel like the group is against them- me vs group/ group vs me. For that reason I think an unhealthy social type could seem rather aloof, especially if they have a four or five element to them.

This isn't to say that there are plenty of unhealthy social cliquey people, I agree with you on that, just as I agree with you that unhealthy sexual engages in a sort of objectification- "I need this/I need you NOW, I don't care who my desires upset or that you don't want me. My desires MUST be made manifest..."
 

small.wonder

So she did.
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
965
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I can absolutely see myself in each of the 4 descriptions, but mostly the sx and sp (very validating because I just finally settled on those instinctual variants). Haha, I can absolutely see why Therapists have a tough time w/ 4, 5 and 6-- I am a bit embarrassed of majority of my therapy experiences in the past (most as a very hurt and unhealthy teenager). I was so defensive and mean, poor Therapists! Oh, well.

My issues tend to be that, first of all, I do a ton of introspection and then I research the hell out of anything that interests me so I go in there equipped with all of this information and things I've considered and so when a therapist slowly explains things to me I already know, all I can think about is how pointless it is. Or even worse, when I mention something and they don't know what I'm talking about. So yes, there's an arrogance. (like you say, Southern Kross, fours' self awareness can leave a therapist with little to do at times and hence their frustration, I imagine.)

I can completely relate to that! I have felt that way with Therapists and Neurologists (I'm Narcoleptic). There's nothing I hate more than when they assume I know and have experienced nothing! I have gotten a kick out of curtly bursting that bubble though (oops). -^_^-

...Until 5 minutes later when I feel the need to *face palm* for letting my frustration get the best of me. Le sigh.

Yes to therapy being potentially pointless anyway.
 

Burger King

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
338
Yeah, I would do a little of that too - in between being "whiny".

I hate to see the whiny thing be exclusively associated with so 4. I've seen sp 4s do whiny too. It may not appear that way outwardly, but it's still there, just indirectly expressed, and when you get close to them you'll see it. Behold, the sp 4: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xx...lon-grace-coddington-part-1_news#.UR8W-jSPWHc

Damn, it's not the whole clip, but you can sort of get it here. I knew a sp 4w5 girl back in high school. She reminds me a lot of Grace in terms of her vibe and expression. Indirect expression of frustrations, always alluding to something that went "wrong". Had a stoic presence and a bit fragile, but had a tough/snarky attitude also.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
^ All 4s do whiny (and so do some other types... 6 martyrs, for instance), but supposedly so-dom have a special pathetic brand of it.
SP are "wry" I guess. Pretty sure I complain still, anyhow, but it's more sx ranting than whining, usually. And Grace Coddington is :wubbie: .
 
B

brainheart

Guest
I found this today, might be a good addition: http://blog.theenneagraminbusiness.com/2010/07/claudio-naranjos-subtypes-program-part.html

I found this part particularly interesting:

Do We Have Only One Subtype?
Claudio would say yes and no. What he actually said is that one of the three subtypes is generally dormant throughout our life (that is, it is the instinctual area in which we hardly pay attention to our needs), and two of them are more activated (although the subtype behavior is a neurotic way of getting our needs met in these areas). With the two activated subtypes, one is dominant, although when we were younger, the other activated subtype may have been more dominant than the one we manifest as we get older.


And here, from the same blog, although I notice she refers to the self pres four as reckless/dauntless while I'm pretty sure Naranjo has since changed it to tenacious (http://blog.theenneagraminbusiness.com/2013/02/music-environment-and-creation-of.html):

The Self-Preserving Subtypes
Ones: “Worry” | Twos: “Me First/Privilege” | Threes: “Security” | Fours: “Reckless/Dauntless” | Fives: “Castle” | Sixes: “Warmth” | Sevens: “Keepers of the Castle” | Eights: “Survival” | Nines: “Appetite”

Naranjo says that all self-preserving subtypes are less trusting and more guarded than the other two subtypes of their type. This can be read in the names for each self-preserving subtype, names handed down from Oscar Ichazo, originally in Spanish and now in English. Their concern (valence/attachment) with trust and self-protection is reflected in the names, even Fours who are reckless about security issues.

The Social Subtypes
Ones: “Non-adaptability” | Twos: “Ambition” | Threes: “Prestige” | Fours: “Shame” | Fives: “Totem” | Sixes: “Duty” | Sevens: “Sacrifice” | Eights: “Solidarity” | Nines: “Participation”

Naranjo says that the social subtypes of all subtypes are the most intellectual versions of that type. The social subtypes also all have energy flowing toward or away from social groups. Or, they may show a great deal of ambivalence about groups, but there is lots of energy in this ambivalence.

The One-to-One Subtypes
Ones: “Zeal” | Twos: “Aggression/Seduction” | Threes: “Masculinity/Femininity” | Fours: “Competition” | Fives: “Confidence” | Sixes: “Strength/Beauty” | Sevens: “Suggestibility” | Eights: “Possession” | Nines: “Fusion”

The one-to-one subtypes like (love) to engage intensely with one other person, and Naranjo describes them as the most emotional of the three subtypes.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
i generally think of so types as the pleasers. they like to please other people. they are inclusive in their decision-making processes. with so/sps, i think they accept that all things in life require negotiation and commit to a process of negotiating in their interactions with others. committing to community is the upside of "cliquey," whereas "objectifying" is the downside of sx only desiring and focusing on exactly what it wants and nothing more (just as "aloof" is the downside of sp disengagement and insularity).

so cliquey, aloof, and objectifying? or community-oriented, earthy, and passionate? it just depends on which direction the arrows are coming from. and it's also part of the family roles we grew into and that exist beyond us too, at least until we grow into the whole of ourselves.
I'm a bit uncertain about all this. You may be right about So-first being pleasers - I really couldn't say for sure either way. I don't really think of it that way but it may be subconscious. I'm also not sure if I would say "cliquey-ness" is associated with So in general. People are herd animals. They want to fit in and assert their place in the world by being part of something; sometimes excluding others out of personal insecurity. I don't think this sort of behaviour could be simply put down to the Social instinct (not that you're necessarily saying that). It's also a flaw I don't identify much with - whether I'm in a healthy or unhealthy state.

It's hard to pick a single flaw to characterise the Social instinct, because it's a strangely contradictory instinct. It's about being one of the herd and at the same time values those that stand out. But then perhaps all three instincts have a contradictory quality to them. If anything, the problem with it is putting too much stock in others - perhaps more specifically, in needing the approval of others, I dare say.

i used to demonize it, and it's still difficult for me to predict or understand the process so types go through in real-time, but i'm starting to see why it's so important, necessary, and valuable. some better descriptions don't just portray so/sp types as status-driven social climbers. they instead focus on the way that they truly care about competency and contribution to the group (and the values that are used to assess that: fairness, reciprocity, loyalty, consistency, delivering on promises, and integrity). most of the ones i know work really hard! and while they may identify with concrete symbolizations of those underlying values, so do we all. theirs are just generally more organizationally/role driven, rather than sx prizes which are more about being as resource intensive as possible (when not just image-based focuses on total change potential), or sp comforts which are more about creating as much ease and ergonomicness as possible.
Again I'm uncertain about this. You do pay a complement but I'm not sure if it's an entirely accurate one. Perhaps some So/Sp types are like this but not all. I do believe in those values but I wouldn't say that I apply them exactly in the way you're implying. If I work hard it is usually more for my own sake rather than a sense of duty or obligation to others. I can obsess over getting something right to the point where no one else even notices or cares about what I think needs to be improved, and people are telling me to stop and let it go.

I think you are right about competency and contribution to the group being important - for me it's more specifically about the desire to be valued.

My issues tend to be that, first of all, I do a ton of introspection and then I research the hell out of anything that interests me so I go in there equipped with all of this information and things I've considered and so when a therapist slowly explains things to me I already know, all I can think about is how pointless it is. Or even worse, when I mention something and they don't know what I'm talking about. So yes, there's an arrogance. (like you say, Southern Kross, fours' self awareness can leave a therapist with little to do at times and hence their frustration, I imagine.)
Such a 4w5. :laugh:

I totally know what you mean - I do the same thing. Whenever I go to the doctor it's only as a last resort because if I can diagnose it and solve the problem myself I bloody well will. If I do go, I basically tell the doctor what I think is the possible diagnosis(es) is/are. :doh: I can only imagine how impossible I'd be with a therapist. I consider myself an expert in my own feelings and within 5 minutes would be talking like I knew more than someone with an lengthy education in that area. :laugh:

Then there is the therapist model of constantly telling you how normal your problems are and how there are others who have it far worse, which I guess makes most people feel better? I hear that and I just shut down because obviously this person doesn't have a single clue about me. Hearing I'm 'just like everybody else' makes me want to die.
I would be the same. Obviously this is something 4s have to get past, but that's no way to remedy it. I just wouldn't want to hear that.

I hate to see the whiny thing be exclusively associated with so 4. I've seen sp 4s do whiny too. It may not appear that way outwardly, but it's still there, just indirectly expressed, and when you get close to them you'll see it.
TBH I don't really consider myself all that outwardly whiny really, and think the whole whiny 4 stereotype is exaggerated. I totally admit to being so on the inside, but I usually keep that to myself partly because I couldn't bear to be thought of as that. But if you set up a situation like therapy where a 4 is meant to be open about themselves and they express their whiny, interior thoughts and then you judge them for it - that's f-ed up.

The Social Subtypes
Ones: “Non-adaptability” | Twos: “Ambition” | Threes: “Prestige” | Fours: “Shame” | Fives: “Totem” | Sixes: “Duty” | Sevens: “Sacrifice” | Eights: “Solidarity” | Nines: “Participation”

Naranjo says that the social subtypes of all subtypes are the most intellectual versions of that type. The social subtypes also all have energy flowing toward or away from social groups. Or, they may show a great deal of ambivalence about groups, but there is lots of energy in this ambivalence.
I approve so much of this description - especially the part about being the most intellectual type. :laugh:
 
B

brainheart

Guest
The social subtypes also all have energy flowing toward or away from social groups. Or, they may show a great deal of ambivalence about groups, but there is lots of energy in this ambivalence.

I know I posted this quote yesterday but I can't emphasize it enough. This is exactly how I feel. After I felt like puking about it, I couldn't help but accept that social seems to be dominant for me. My sexual is just really strong so it can be hard to tell at times. The fact that I'd rather be sx/so than so/sx strikes me as the icing on the cake that I'm so/sx. I'm really ashamed about being a social dom, which isn't because I hate social doms or look down on them- I'm married to one- but because it's where my deepest insecurities reside/ the things I dislike most about myself.

I have such a love/hate/ambivalent relationship with society, people, groups. I think as a 4w5 it can feel especially conflicting because here I am, a very Bohemian/iconoclastic type, and yet I find myself always considering the greater group/ how my actions affect others. It's weird swinging between sexual and social, too. One part of me is very brazen and shameless while one part of me can barely talk to the cashier at the grocery store.

A long while ago I read some instinct descriptions (I think it was Helen Palmer) and the social fit me remarkably well but I dismissed it because I didn't relate to any of the non etype specific social descriptions, like they were the furthest thing from me. I've also heard that social fours typically don't see themselves as social types initially and they typically identify equally with self pres and sexual instead. It's even been said that if, as a four, you don't immediately identify with self pres or sexual you are probably a social four. (I, for one, thought for sure I must be sx/sp or sp/sx and constantly oscillated between the two, then I started flirting with the possibility of the social instinct but it seemed... ridiculous.)

I'm a bit uncertain about all this. You may be right about So-first being pleasers - I really couldn't say for sure either way. I don't really think of it that way but it may be subconscious. I'm also not sure if I would say "cliquey-ness" is associated with So in general. People are herd animals. They want to fit in and assert their place in the world by being part of something; sometimes excluding others out of personal insecurity. I don't think this sort of behaviour could be simply put down to the Social instinct (not that you're necessarily saying that). It's also a flaw I don't identify much with - whether I'm in a healthy or unhealthy state.

I have never been a cliquey person, never ever ever. I hate categorizing and grouping people, it's abhorrent to me. I see people as individuals, that is unless I'm really irritated about say, the trash in the creek that goes by our house. Then I find myself ranting about how much people suck. I tend to have a lot of misanthropic internal rants when I'm walking around by myself. I will also read something in the paper and yell out to no one in particular, "Why do people do things like this? Why don't they do it like this (and then I'll make a suggestion) instead?" And then my daughter will say, "Mom, you should be in charge of everything." And then I'll say, "I know. I should be." But then of course I don't follow up and do anything. (I think this is pretty classic so/sx four. Social criticism plus arrogance plus flaky.) I feel extremely separate from 'people', yet inextricably connected at the same time.

Am I a pleaser? I think I can seem a little nine-ish in that I'm fairly accommodating and adaptable. I tend to sacrifice certain things that matter to me for the sake of family harmony, and then feel a little resentful about it. I think I can really seem kind of nine/two/six-ish at times even though I am very much a four. I can be a bit of a martyr, because suffering is what I do.

It's hard to pick a single flaw to characterise the Social instinct, because it's a strangely contradictory instinct. It's about being one of the herd and at the same time values those that stand out. But then perhaps all three instincts have a contradictory quality to them. If anything, the problem with it is putting too much stock in others - perhaps more specifically, in needing the approval of others, I dare say.

I don't feel the need for approval so much as... I just don't want to upset/hurt people/harm the planet. I want to be an honorable person. But at the same time I want to be unflinchingly honest in my art. So that's my constant internal conflict. How do I be my honest, authentic, dark self and share it with the world as I feel compelled to and not hurt people who matter to me? (By people I mean loved ones, not strangers.) So I don't share and I feel unfulfilled. (I have considered a pen name. Anonymity takes all those self conscious feelings away.) I also have my very sexual instinct moments where I am totally shameless and then I feel so ashamed afterwards. The swing between shameless to shameful can be paralyzing.


TBH I don't really consider myself all that outwardly whiny really, and think the whole whiny 4 stereotype is exaggerated. I totally admit to being so on the inside, but I usually keep that to myself partly because I couldn't bear to be thought of as that. But if you set up a situation like therapy where a 4 is meant to be open about themselves and they express their whiny, interior thoughts and then you judge them for it - that's f-ed up.

I doubt most people would call me whiny, either. If anything they would probably say I don't share enough. If anything, I think the better exemplar of my social fourness is my self defeating/self sabotaging nature or the idea of "what's wrong with you is you think there's something wrong with you" (although I also have the sexual four- 'you are so damn amazing' thoughts as well). I also like when descriptions mention how social fours feel intense shame about not meeting their ideal vision of their self. That's me in spades.

I approve so much of this description - especially the part about being the most intellectual type. :laugh:

I actually think I'm more emotional than intellectual, but I can see how I use my head to consider how my actions affect others, the planet, etc.


EDIT: yeah, Helen Palmer. Here: http://www.enneagramworldwide.com/explore-the-enneagram/instinctual-subtypes/instinctual-subtypes-4.php

Social: Shame/counter-shame

In the social domain you easily can feel shame for not measuring up or being a “misfit.” You feel that your protective cover is removed and that your deficiencies or shortcomings will be exposed publicly. You mitigate your envy through shame. You want to hide your defects and deficiencies, keep your fatal flaws from being detected and avoid disgrace. Your shame also helps you feel or keep a connection to others: “They’ll notice me and my deficiencies, and I’ll matter.” This makes you feel special in the eyes of others. Shame also motivates you to do better – create an elegant image, produce pride of elitism, look unique and special, in short to develop counter-shame and a sense of honor for your integrity and what you do for the group. You may become an emotional truth-teller in the group. At your worst, shame can lead to retraction into self-absorption, depression or despair.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
I know I posted this quote yesterday but I can't emphasize it enough. This is exactly how I feel. After I felt like puking about it, I couldn't help but accept that social seems to be dominant for me. My sexual is just really strong so it can be hard to tell at times. The fact that I'd rather be sx/so than so/sx strikes me as the icing on the cake that I'm so/sx. I'm really ashamed about being a social dom, which isn't because I hate social doms or look down on them- I'm married to one- but because it's where my deepest insecurities reside/ the things I dislike most about myself.

I have such a love/hate/ambivalent relationship with society, people, groups. I think as a 4w5 it can feel especially conflicting because here I am, a very Bohemian/iconoclastic type, and yet I find myself always considering the greater group/ how my actions affect others. It's weird swinging between sexual and social, too. One part of me is very brazen and shameless while one part of me can barely talk to the cashier at the grocery store.

A long while ago I read some instinct descriptions (I think it was Helen Palmer) and the social fit me remarkably well but I dismissed it because I didn't relate to any of the non etype specific social descriptions, like they were the furthest thing from me. I've also heard that social fours typically don't see themselves as social types initially and they typically identify equally with self pres and sexual instead. It's even been said that if, as a four, you don't immediately identify with self pres or sexual you are probably a social four. (I, for one, thought for sure I must be sx/sp or sp/sx and constantly oscillated between the two, then I started flirting with the possibility of the social instinct but it seemed... ridiculous.)
Oh, I didn't know you were thinking of jumping ship on Sx. Like I said there's a lot a shitty So descriptions out there, and then you read something and it all makes sense. :) Perhaps you did the same thing I did and identified with the secondary instinct before recognising the primary one.

Have you read this one? This one really helped me:

Social Fours: "Shame"
Shame, as we use it here, means embarrassment, humiliation, and lack of self-respect.

  • I feel ashamed of not measuring up to my vision of the ideal: not being bright or creative enough, not contributing to humanity, or not having a fulfilling relationship.
  • I die over each mistake or faux pas I make.
  • I often feel inadequate socially and either try to pour on charm and confidence or blend into the woodwork.
  • I'm always analyzing myself: Did I make myself understood? Did I sound stupid? Was I too aggressive? Was I too conciliatory?
  • I have dreams of achieving tremendous status and recognition in order to get revenge on those who have put me down or laughed at me.
  • I am very sensitive to being shamed or slighted. It devastates me to be excluded from a gathering or event that acquaintances or friends are attending.
  • Sometimes I say things against myself to try to deflect envy.
  • I feel less awkward when I fill a definite position in the group by demonstrating that I'm an authority on something or by making a strong statement about who I am by the way I dress.
When I read that I went :shock:. Again, it's not 100% accurate, but the points that are accurate are very insightful.

I have never been a cliquey person, never ever ever. I hate categorizing and grouping people, it's abhorrent to me.
I've never been a cliquey person either. Why would I? I've always been shut out of them.

I will also read something in the paper and yell out to no one in particular, "Why do people do things like this? Why don't they do it like this (and then I'll make a suggestion) instead?" And then my daughter will say, "Mom, you should be in charge of everything." And then I'll say, "I know. I should be." But then of course I don't follow up and do anything. (I think this is pretty classic so/sx four. Social criticism plus arrogance plus flaky.) I feel extremely separate from 'people', yet inextricably connected at the same time.
Yep, that sounds like the social critic/commentator aspect.

Am I a pleaser? I think I can seem a little nine-ish in that I'm fairly accommodating and adaptable. I tend to sacrifice certain things that matter to me for the sake of family harmony, and then feel a little resentful about it. I think I can really seem kind of nine/two/six-ish at times even though I am very much a four. I can be a bit of a martyr, because suffering is what I do.
Yes, the Social instinct is about accommodation and adaptability in many ways. But what you're saying about being a martyr could be 4 disintegrating to 2.

I don't feel the need for approval so much as... I just don't want to upset/hurt people/harm the planet. I want to be an honorable person. But at the same time I want to be unflinchingly honest in my art. So that's my constant internal conflict. How do I be my honest, authentic, dark self and share it with the world as I feel compelled to and not hurt people who matter to me? (By people I mean loved ones, not strangers.) So I don't share and I feel unfulfilled. (I have considered a pen name. Anonymity takes all those self conscious feelings away.) I also have my very sexual instinct moments where I am totally shameless and then I feel so ashamed afterwards. The swing between shameless to shameful can be paralyzing.
:yes: I have a bit of that in me, without the Sx shamelessness. I meant "need for approval" in the broadest possible sense - it can be avoiding disapproval, or sometimes needing others to agree that something's OK/appropriate/approved of before proceeding.

I've read that one before and it's a pretty great description. The part about "emotional truth teller" is very accurate - this is what I feel like I'm good at. I think the worst thing for me is that I don't fit in but I don't feel like I'm misfit-y enough to gain the cool outsider status. I'm stuck trying to play both parts and inevitably do it poorly.

Anyway I think we're getting off topic here. We should talk about some of the other subtypes too.
 

Venus Rose

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
324
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The SO Four is emotionally sensitive and feels things deeply. They lament frequently and tend to take on the victim role. In contrast to the 1-1 Four, the SO Four is not competitive, though they often compare themselves to others and find themselves lacking. For the SO Four, there is a need for self-abasement and self-recrimination. It’s as if you want to ask them, “What’s wrong with you that you think there’s something wrong with you?” (This is me).

The 1-1 Four is more assertive than the SO Four. (I don't know? I think sx doms in general tend to be more assertive than others of their same type) Whereas the SO Four feels a great deal of shame, the 1-1 Four is shameless. These Fours can be very outspoken with their anger, and they are very competitive. They express envious anger, an envy that manifests as competition. In addition, the 1-1 Four tends to be more vocal about expressing needs, (eh, kinda?) and they rebel against any shame they may feel is related to their desires.

I wonder if they need to re-think the idea that the "softness" ascribed to SO 4 really always stems from the Social instinct, or there are other factors at play here. My tritype is 496, I have a decent 9 influence, and am also Se-PoLR. Which is why I would fit the SO 4 description here. And I don't even think it's because my SO is "strong" per se, compared to SX. I don't think I value SO as much as I value SX and in that I don't think they are close together.

By this description I would fit the SO 4, because in fact, I am not an angry person for the most part. And even if I do get angry, it's not as bad as they make it sound (8-like, vengeful, wants to make others suffer, etc.)
 
Top