[Type 1] what really is enneagram 1?

[yeghor]

@Vendrah , thanks for weighing in. You are most insightful, as usual.

The first approach is this one:

So, to restate it: 8-9-1 is ACTIVE, UNCONSCIOSNESS (to inner Self) and IGNORANCE.

8 = Uninhibited primal impulses = Active
9 = Unaware primal impulses = Passive
1 = Suppressed/Denied primal impulses = Disowned, rather than ignorance

Just to have a reference: this is Intuition in MBTI, as per Keirsey:
iNtuition = Introspective
(I know this is not the mainstream view, but this is my position on the matter, according to the following, from the notes of "Please Understand Me II")

Introspection = "the examination or observation of one's own mental and emotional processes"

How does one observe one's mental process (T) or emotional process (F) using the same processes (T or F)? One cannot observe one's eye without a reflective surface.

Hence, Introspection/Intuition = Self reflection, which requires an internal sounding board.

With this definitions, I hardly see any of the 8-9-1 types and N being compatible.
8-9-1 is Unconsciousness to the inside, no introspection
N is Introspection per definition, listening to the inner voice, IN-tuition.

See above discussion.

Or, for example, you can read the PDB debate about typing Maximus from Gladiator - a character we all know well - a very clear E1 (>90%) and a clear TJ, but split into half between ENTJ and ISTx.

https://www.personality-database.com/profile/8884/maximus-decimus-meridius-gladiator-2000-mbti-personality-type

A cursory look will show you how it's really a matter of definitions.

This still doesn't change the fact members of personality database typed E1s predominantly as IxxJs and and mostly as INxJs. Why did they do that? Why isn't that any more valid than the correlation table you rely on?

Moreover please note that they typed him as tritype 162, which according to my understanding is Ni-Te-Fe = xNTJ.

 

[mancino]

This still doesn't change the fact members of personality database typed E1s predominantly as IxxJs and and mostly as INxJs. Why did they do that? Why isn't that any more valid than the correlation table you rely on?

It's valid, of course, as valid as any other approach. It just happens to be incompatible with what I presented in my last post, let's call it the Nananjo-Keirsey Enneagram-MBTI combo.

To put it in another way: there is no right or wrong, just different, incompatible views on the subject (messed up because they use the same terms, although to mean different things).
It's like talking about "God", in different religions. They use the same word but mean different things.
Same problem here. And, since there's no way to prove any of this, it becomes a religious war, or debate. A matter of faith.

Do you trust Naranjo or PDB? Choose your side, because they state different things.

INFJ? What do you mean? According to which source?

Even something as basic as Intuition. We apparently disagree, and there's no way to have "proof". It's a semantics debate.

I don't berate your view, on the contrary. I acknowledge it, and respect it. I'm just saying that this becomes easily pointless, because, to go back to the OP...

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?

The answer is: different sources define it quite differently...difficult to say. Why do you ask?
Because if it's just for knowledge's sake, the answer is that you have to pick your source otherwise it becomes contradictory.

However, with most sources, you have a usable platform if you want to, say, follow a spiritual path toward better psychological health, for example. Be prepared, though, to even have different suggestions and different types depending on which school of thought you eventually decide to follow.

To come back with the religious analogy (which I hope doesn't offend anyone): everybody wants to go to paradise, but they don't agree about what "paradise" is or means nor what you should be doing to go there. Some "schools" seem to talk about the same things, although they preach different approaches; some advice is common across the board (don't kill, don't steal) but the precepts become very, very different the more you go into the details.

I'm not suggesting we turn this into a religious debate. I've just come to the conclusion that "typology" as such is too inconsistent to allow a coherent approach.

 

[mancino]

Moreover please note that they typed him as tritype 162, which according to my understanding is Ni-Te-Fe = xNTJ.

Four Letter
286 Votes
ENTJ(141)
ISTJ(110)
ISTP(13)

As I said, E1 is clear in PDB; ENTJ is not, at all.
Even here, you have to pick sides. Some users have pretty strong arguments for him being IST rather than ENTJ.
So, not even PDB is definitive on even one character; imagine "The Enneagram" on E1... it simply doesn't exist.
As @Vendrah pointed out, there are at least two flavors of E1. When you say somebody is an E1, what do you mean?

 

[yeghor]

As I said, E1 is clear in PDB; ENTJ is not, at all.
Even here, you have to pick sides. Some users have pretty strong arguments for him being IST rather than ENTJ.
So, not even PDB is definitive on even one character; imagine "The Enneagram" on E1... it simply doesn't exist.
As @Vendrah pointed out, there are at least two flavors of E1. When you say somebody is an E1, what do you mean?

E1 = optimization of the mind/psyche

Optimization = "an act, process, or methodology of making something (such as a design, system, or decision) as fully perfect, functional, or effective as possible specifically"

Mental optimization requires constant measuring of your mental performance/output in an impartial manner.

In E1, this connects to being right/truthful such that the efficiency of the performance needs to be measured based on how efficient the mind is in identifying right from wrong, truth from falsities.

You cannot do that impartial assessment using the same thinking function that you used to arrive at a conclusion about what is right/wrong. Because to T, its conclusions are right by default, otherwise the conclusion would not have been reached. Same goes for F-based value assessments.

You need something else that you can use as a referee to assess the veracity of T/F assessments/consclusions.

 

[mancino]

@yeghor , this is your definition, a mapping of one definition of Cognitive Functions onto one definition of E1, both of which come from your own internal analysis, i.e. your own internal framework.

As I said, I don't disagree. I don't have any solid evidence to prove or falsify your position. I just emphasize that your view is inconsistent with some very respectable sources, although compatible with some others.

BTW, your line of reasoning about the subject at hand sounds pretty much Ti E5 to me, if you don't mind me saying that. Internal framework of subjective logic to find final truth. Yep, pretty much Ti E5.

 

[yeghor]

@yeghor , this is your definition, a mapping of one definition of Cognitive Functions onto one definition of E1, both of which come from your own internal analysis, i.e. your own internal framework.

As I said, I don't disagree. I don't have any solid evidence to prove or falsify your position. I just emphasize that your view is inconsistent with some very respectable sources, although compatible with some others.

BTW, your line of reasoning about the subject at hand sounds pretty much Ti E5 to me, if you don't mind me saying that. Internal framework of subjective logic to find final truth. Yep, pretty much Ti E5.

Who's gonna verify the Ti-result?

 

[mancino]

Who's gonna verify the Ti-result?

(Going along with CogFun-speak) In theory, some E function; in my hypothetical INTP case, Ne.

However...

Auxiliary Ne (INTP & INFP):

Since Ti and Fi prioritize personal interests and preferences, the extraverted auxiliary Ne function should be used to make sure that you don’t do it at the expense of exploring new possibilities for growth. Since Ti and Fi are judging functions, they are quick to draw conclusions and quick to dismiss outside influence, therefore, the perceiving Ne function should be used to entertain a wider range of possibilities in order to ensure that one’s judgment is open-minded and not too myopic or self-centered.

Immature INTPs don’t want to face their small-mindedness; Immature INFPs don’t want to face disappointment - auxiliary Ne development tends to trigger these issues. Being a higher function in the stack, the auxiliary function has a significant influence on cognition despite efforts to resist its development, usually in the form of “advice” about how one should address dominant dysfunction. When a person resists Ne development and refuses its “advice”, its presence can still be easily seen through behaviors that signal active avoidance of Ne in favor of sticking to dominant comfort zones, e.g.:

• withdrawn, self-absorbed, inattentive to worldly concerns
• lack of substance and creativity when generating ideas
• interests/preferences are too narrow, protected, confining
• blind to new possibilities or potential for improvement
• afraid to dream; afraid to hope for something better

When a person feels a strong psychological pull to develop auxiliary Ne but has difficulty learning how to use it well, they are likely to overindulge the function and display some extremes as they struggle. Developing a function means that you gradually incorporate it into your sense of self and slowly become more conscious of using it properly; however, struggling with this process makes the function more susceptible to being taken over by unconscious activity, especially when stressed (somewhat similar to inferior grip but not nearly as serious), e.g.:

• uses fantasy to escape from practical concerns
• plays around with ideas but can’t bring them to life
• wastes time on unproductive ideas and interests
• tries to make progress but for the wrong reasons
• hopes and dreams are tainted by desperation

When a person has been lucky in encountering support for auxiliary Ne development and/or they have put concerted effort into developing it, Ne expression should be healthy most of the time:

• optimistic and resourceful attitude
• knows how to bring good ideas to fruition
• personal interests align with good moral beliefs/values
• connects personal progress to making the world better
• inspires and encourages positive change

And also...

People aren’t usually very aware of grip behavior, so it might be necessary to ask others what you are like when you’re at your lowest points or the times when you “aren’t yourself” at all. If submitting a type assessment to me, provide representative examples from your life of the following:

Signs of dominant Ti extremes:

• emotionally unavailable
• critical or antagonistic
• selfish and stingy attitude
• very shallow relationships
• doesn’t recognize social obligations

Loss of normal and healthy dominant Ti functioning:

• I feel strangely confused or can’t think straight.
• I am unable to make sense of the problem(s) facing me.
• I don’t know why I am doing the negative/obnoxious things I do.

Examples of out of character inferior Fe grip tendencies:

• I am uncool, awkward, unconfident, “not myself”.
• I can’t help feeling strangely guilty, ashamed, unsure, inadequate.
• I am more inclined to seek affirmation, approval, agreement.
• I can’t brush off things that I usually don’t think/care about.
• I am saddened/startled by how inept I am at caring for others.
• I am suddenly very bothered about feeling alienated.
• I go out of my way to provoke/get attention from a particular person.
• I suddenly escalate arguments or get caught up in drama.
• I irrationally suspect/accuse people of trying to manipulate/control me.
• see also: how inferior Fe works in depth / #inferior Fe / #Fe grip

So, to answer your question: Ti can easily skip Ne and prefer the comforts of Si, or an unconscious Fe agenda.

We're all been there: I'm myself a master of inferior grip!

 

[yeghor]

(Going along with CogFun-speak) In theory, some E function; in my hypothetical INTP case, Ne.

However...

And also...

So, to answer your question: Ti can easily skip Ne and prefer the comforts of Si, or an unconscious Fe agenda.

We're all been there: I'm myself a master of inferior grip!

What if Ti is not in the dominant position?

 

[mancino]

What if Ti is not in the dominant position?

Auxiliary Ti, then.

It doesn't change much in my argument: in theory, balanced Ne-Ti. (keeping N>S as in the previous example)

However, plenty of opportunities to screw the balance:
Ti isolation of INTP becomes Ti overindulgence of ENTP
Si tertiary temptation of INTP becomes Si grip of ENTP
Fe grip of INTP becomes Fe tertiary temptation of ENTP

Not the same thing at all, and yet, with proper unbalance, pretty much open to the same problem: a subjective theoretical framework that's not grounded in reality. They're both NT after all.

Getting out of CogFun speak (actually, not my preferred view): all NT and/or all Thinking types in the Enneagram are prone to overcomplicating abstract matters, becoming "airheads" (© Richard Rohr), either overcomplicating matters (E6) or scattering their train of thought all over the place (E7) or getting lost in the depths of their theory and disconnecting from reality (E5). INTP maybe a bit more, ENTJ a bit less, but then, ENTJ probably get it wrong more often than the rest (not that they care, usually, compared with the other NTs I mean).

The "airhead" phenomenon describes quite nicely a stereotypical problem of all NTs: theoretical skepticism run amok (guilty of charge!)
Reason and the scientific method are quite nice, but if you don't trust your instincts (SP) nor authority and tradition (SJ) nor the intuition of the heart (NF), well, you're stuck with data and analysis and experimenting and theorizing and verifying. It works... up to when it doesn't.
Use the scientific method during a soccer/football game on the field, or for red tape paperwork, or for consoling a suffering soul... wrong tool.

This is why, not to derail this further and to come back to the OP, I asked @Red Memories: why do you ask about E1? Because it's easy to get lost in technicalities and semantics which kind of miss the point.

 

[yeghor]

Auxiliary Ti, then.

It doesn't change much in my argument: in theory, balanced Ne-Ti. (keeping N>S as in the previous example)

However, plenty of opportunities to screw the balance:
Ti isolation of INTP becomes Ti overindulgence of ENTP
Si tertiary temptation of INTP becomes Si grip of ENTP
Fe grip of INTP becomes Fe tertiary temptation of ENTP

Not the same thing at all, and yet, with proper unbalance, pretty much open to the same problem: a subjective theoretical framework that's not grounded in reality. They're both NT after all.

Getting out of CogFun speak (actually, not my preferred view): all NT and/or all Thinking types in the Enneagram are prone to overcomplicating abstract matters, becoming "airheads" (© Richard Rohr), either overcomplicating matters (E6) or scattering their train of thought all over the place (E7) or getting lost in the depths of their theory and disconnecting from reality (E5). INTP maybe a bit more, ENTJ a bit less, but then, ENTJ probably get it wrong more often than the rest (not that they care, usually, compared with the other NTs I mean).

The "airhead" phenomenon describes quite nicely a stereotypical problem of all NTs: theoretical skepticism run amok (guilty of charge!)
Reason and the scientific method are quite nice, but if you don't trust your instincts (SP) nor authority and tradition (SJ) nor the intuition of the heart (NF), well, you're stuck with data and analysis and experimenting and theorizing and verifying. It works... up to when it doesn't.
Use the scientific method during a soccer/football game on the field, or for red tape paperwork, or for consoling a suffering soul... wrong tool.

This is why, not to derail this further and to come back to the OP, I asked @Red Memories: why do you ask about E1? Because it's easy to get lost in technicalities and semantics which kind of miss the point.

How about Ti of an INFJ? or Te of INTJ?

And what kind of impact does their inferior-Se have on their analysis or framework of understanding?

 

[mancino]

INFJ would probably have a clearer Fe agenda... or maybe be stuck in an endless Ni-Ti loop, for example not to face reality (Se).
INTJ could be showing demonstrative Ti but actually have a more malleable Ni framework, driven by a need for Te closure (it's a J after all). But could also be following capricious Fi preferences, again not to face reality (Se).

Any N and any T and especially NTs but also INs and NPs are prone to endless, sterile theorizing.

BTW, this is why I don't like Cog Fun for typing or any assessment anymore: you can twist and tweak them to explain and contradict everything, multiple times.

Also, I don't see how this line of inquiry is relevant to the OP.

 

[yeghor]

INFJ would probably have a clearer Fe agenda... or maybe be stuck in an endless Ni-Ti loop, for example not to face reality (Se).
INTJ could be showing demonstrative Ti but actually have a more malleable Ni framework, driven by a need for Te closure (it's a J after all). But could also be following capricious Fi preferences, again not to face reality (Se).

Any N and any T and especially NTs but also INs and NPs are prone to endless, sterile theorizing.

BTW, this is why I don't like Cog Fun for typing or any assessment anymore: you can twist and tweak them to explain and contradict everything, multiple times.

Also, I don't see how this line of inquiry is relevant to the OP.

Both the thinking and feeling function of IxxJs are weaker than their dominant function, meaning their T and F are subject to the dictates or requirements of their Si or Ni, respectively.

If Si is simply traditions for personal code of good conduct internalized from the host culture/environment and Ni is fundamental truths (patterns) extracted and internalized from the external world, Si/Ni will be imposed internally on T, F and S dictates, hence, any T-based and F-based reasoning will be scrutinized and tempered with respect to the Si/Ni dictates, or they will feed into the dominant Si/Ni-based framework of reasoning to decide on right or wrong.

Which is what I meant by optimization of mind/psyche before:

E1 = optimization of the mind/psyche

Optimization = "an act, process, or methodology of making something (such as a design, system, or decision) as fully perfect, functional, or effective as possible specifically"

Mental optimization requires constant measuring of your mental performance/output in an impartial manner.

In E1, this connects to being right/truthful such that the efficiency of the performance needs to be measured based on how efficient the mind is in identifying right from wrong, truth from falsities.

You cannot do that impartial assessment using the same thinking function that you used to arrive at a conclusion about what is right/wrong. Because to T, its conclusions are right by default, otherwise the conclusion would not have been reached. Same goes for F-based value assessments.

You need something else that you can use as a referee to assess the veracity of T/F assessments/consclusions.

You likened it to E5 Ti, and I am trying to show you that it is a structure different and stronger than Ti, that does the optimization. Couple this with the fact that PDB associates IxxJs with E1 mostly, it is possible that E1's MBTI equivalent is either Si-dom or Ni-dom.

 

[mancino]

If Si is simply traditions for personal code of good conduct internalized from the host culture/environment and Ni is fundamental truths (patterns) extracted and internalized from the external world, Si/Ni will be imposed internally on T, F and S dictates, hence, any T-based and F-based reasoning will be scrutinized and tempered with respect to the Si/Ni dictates, or they will feed into the dominant Si/Ni-based framework of reasoning to decide on right or wrong.

Yeah, you're right... if the person is balanced, well-developed and healthy.
Lots of Pi-dom can overindulge in their Je-aux and overdo it. INTJ can be stereotypically harsh and abrasive like a Te-dom, and INFJ can be people-pleasers to a fault, both losing sight of their Ni agenda.
And both are prone to loops, as being an IN is quite complex IRL, so it's easy to find flimsy moral reasons (Fi in INTJ) or comfortable rationalizations (Ti in INFJ) to avoid dealing with the outside world and stick in their comfort zone (not picking on INJs, all types have this problem, one way or the other)

You likened it to E5 Ti, and I am trying to show you that it is a structure different and stronger than Ti, that does the optimization. Couple this with the fact that PDB associates IxxJs with E1 mostly, it is possible that E1's MBTI equivalent is either Si-dom or Ni-dom.

Si-dom, absolutely!
Since the beginning I spoke about STJs in general. In my view, E/I is the least discriminating dichotomy here.

Ni-dom, however... as I argued previously, I see it very, very unlikely.
My view is that an E1 INTJ should at least double-check the combo: either try ISJ for size, or consider being in the 5-6 territory.
And an E1 INFJ should at least double-check the combo as well: either try ISJ for size, or consider some E-type with a 4 or 6 component, or anything in the 2-3-4 Triad.
The link between the SJ Temperament and the E1 E-type is so strong that one has to at least try for size the combo if s/he relates strongly with one of them.

I'm not quoting anymore, but INTJ are ruthless entertaining any idea worth considering, testing them and only keeping what works; E1 don't do this at all, they just know and are a lot more action oriented and more close minded. R&H even suggest "entertaining the opposing view of what you believe" as an exercise for opening the mind of an E1.
And INFJ are a lot more considerate of other's feelings, very diplomatic and unassuming and not so much direct in their actions compared to the E1 archetype.

Again: not saying anything is impossible here, just more or less likely.

 

[Vendrah]

What if they are a healthy one? After all, one cannot find what is right or wrong or what is true and what is not without keeping an open mind and double checking their conclusions all the time.

In general, Openness has nothing to do with mental health.
However, for the specific case, it does.
I think maybe a healthy one is not so low on Openness, you are probably right on that that High O can work for healthy ones and more Openness can make an E1 healthy (even though that is not true for most of other types).
So you're probably right.

Yep. I've double-checked my Enneagram sources and you are right. Naranjo is my source for the OCPD E1, with Low Openness and no trace of Honesty or Fi.

Riso&Hudson (The Enneagram Institute) are more diffuse, including honesty and other things, with a much more positive description.
I can see why people can associate E1 with Fi or Ni for that matter, following R&H.

However, I believe it is mainly due to the positive spin most sources have around the Enneagram. In Naranjo's words, most teachers flatter their audience by turning compulsive fixations into positive description (the infamous Forer effect).

Maybe, because there is some normally confusion with Conscientiousness and Honesty, the Enneagram is not actually the only system that does mix, people have this illusion at times.

With this definitions, I hardly see any of the 8-9-1 types and N being compatible.

Well, if people used the core Jung as it was and the core Enneagram with a Naranjo-Ichazo, PDB and the tables would look somewhat different and probably there wouldn't be much E8-E9-E1 intuitives, but that's not the case.

To put it in another way: there is no right or wrong, just different, incompatible views on the subject (messed up because they use the same terms, although to mean different things).
It's like talking about "God", in different religions. They use the same word but mean different things.
Same problem here. And, since there's no way to prove any of this, it becomes a religious war, or debate. A matter of faith.

Deep down, that's not true, and although arrogant it may sound, I know the frame that is getting closer to what things indeed are.
The best definition for E1 statistically is to bridge it to the rCOaN type that appears on studies at time with the name "Reserved" with no actual relationship with Honesty-Humility, rather than the moralist crusader one. But the moralist crusader one is much cooler.

The answer is: different sources define it quite differently...difficult to say. Why do you ask?

@Red Memories [OP] is no longer participating on the forum anymore, don't expect her to answer anything at all anymore.

E1 = optimization of the mind/psyche

Optimization = "an act, process, or methodology of making something (such as a design, system, or decision) as fully perfect, functional, or effective as possible specifically"

Mental optimization requires constant measuring of your mental performance/output in an impartial manner.

In E1, this connects to being right/truthful such that the efficiency of the performance needs to be measured based on how efficient the mind is in identifying right from wrong, truth from falsities.

I agree with @mancino that what you describe is more E5 than E1.
However, there is a small part of E1 descriptions that describe E1 as rational, even though that is quite minor, but it is there that relies the relationship with E1 with Thinking over Feeling. And E5 is Rational as well. So it could be "optimization of the mind/psyche" could be E5 or E1 at least - because deep down, any type can be optimal after all, they say (I disagree with that lol).

 

[yeghor]

I agree with @mancino that what you describe is more E5 than E1.
However, there is a small part of E1 descriptions that describe E1 as rational, even though that is quite minor, but it is there that relies the relationship with E1 with Thinking over Feeling. And E5 is Rational as well. So it could be "optimization of the mind/psyche" could be E5 or E1 at least - because deep down, any type can be optimal after all, they say (I disagree with that lol).

https://www.truity.com/enneagram/personality-type-1-perfectionist



http://www.enneagram-monthly.com/reflections-of-a-type-one.html

 

[yeghor]

https://www.truity.com/enneagram/personality-type-1-perfectionist

http://www.enneagram-monthly.com/reflections-of-a-type-one.html

 

[mancino]

@Red Memories [OP] is no longer participating on the forum anymore, don't expect her to answer anything at all anymore.

Too bad!

The best definition for E1 statistically is to bridge it to the rCOaN type that appears on studies at time with the name "Reserved" with no actual relationship with Honesty-Humility, rather than the moralist crusader one. But the moralist crusader one is much cooler.

"Cool" is the anathema word in typology: it's too easy to pick a profile because it's flattering.

However, there is a small part of E1 descriptions that describe E1 as rational, even though that is quite minor, but it is there that relies the relationship with E1 with Thinking over Feeling. And E5 is Rational as well. So it could be "optimization of the mind/psyche" could be E5 or E1 at least - because deep down, any type can be optimal after all, they say (I disagree with that lol).

This is R&H on the subject: I wanted to post it earlier but thought I'd already quoted more than enough.

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 somewhat 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.

"Thinking" is another tricky word. The above quote is the best explanation I know for why E1 is Gut-Heart-Head in that order in the Enneagram. It's also another check to see whether a specific person relates with this or not.

I think maybe a healthy one is not so low on Openness

As an example, ISTJ and their relationship with Ne.

Maybe, because there is some normally confusion with Conscientiousness and Honesty, the Enneagram is not actually the only system that does mix, people have this illusion at times.

Big5 has "Compliance" as a facet of Agreeableness according to Costa-McRae.
In the IPIP by Personality Assessor, Agreeableness has a facet called "Morality", defined as such: "Sticking to the rules and treating everyone fairly is of very high value to you.".
I know quite a bunch of Ps IRL who would say are very "Dutiful" and "Compliant" and "Respect the rules".

As usual, the alleged orthogonality is not there at all: all dimension are interconnected, some more than others. @Vendrah, maybe you have some recycled stuff about the NP-SJ axes and correlation? Can be relevant here as well.
For those who aren't aware: in a nutshell, N is quite correlated to P and S to J. I don't have the data with me, but we all know that, in among Ss, Js outnumber Ps, while among Ns, Ps outnumber Js. This partially explains the clustering @Vendrah was talking about.

 

[yeghor]

"Thinking" is another tricky word. The above quote is the best explanation I know for why E1 is Gut-Heart-Head in that order in the Enneagram. It's also another check to see whether a specific person relates with this or not.

As an example, ISTJ and their relationship with Ne.

Ni-doms can use Ne too,even earlier and in greater capacity than Si-doms.

 

[yeghor]

Something weird happened just now.

A coupe car suddenly stopped in the middle of the road in the front of my apartment complex and the driver, a muscled guy with a tattoo on most of his left arm darted out of the driver seat and opened the door to the back seat and started yelling loudly at the passenger, probably threatening to harm them.

I first recorded 30-40 secs of the incident and then called the Police emergency line to report the incident. 2-3 minutes later, before the police could arrive they got back in the car and drove off. I called the emergency line again to update them that they were gone.

The curious thing is my father who was next to me the whole time kept yelling and cussing at me to deter me from calling the police, saying that other people around were not calling the police and neither should I, and that they would be gone anyway before the police arrived, and insuniated that it was wrong of me to do that and police might question why I called them unnecessarily, and in summary he tried to make me feel bad about myself.

 

[Vendrah]

https://www.truity.com/enneagram/personality-type-1-perfectionist
View attachment 26687


http://www.enneagram-monthly.com/reflections-of-a-type-one.html
View attachment 26688

https://www.truity.com/enneagram/personality-type-1-perfectionist

http://www.enneagram-monthly.com/reflections-of-a-type-one.html

Yep, its present in E1 and E5 at least, if not on head types also as well, and also E9 on another way...
So it is not that of a good argument for a type.

. @Vendrah, maybe you have some recycled stuff about the NP-SJ axes and correlation? Can be relevant here as well.
For those who aren't aware: in a nutshell, N is quite correlated to P and S to J. I don't have the data with me, but we all know that, in among Ss, Js outnumber Ps, while among Ns, Ps outnumber Js. This partially explains the clustering @Vendrah was talking about.

Well, I am not Reckful to have recycled stuff and post them all the time.
For E1, on the Conscientious route there's no XNXP 1 for sure... While for the moral crusader route there is barely any relationship with SJ-NP. So a XNXP E1 voted on PDB is pretty much inside the moral crusader... When they don't get mad enough to vote ENFP/ENTP E1.