Questioning the Enneagram

[sleepless]

I don't get the Enneagram. What is is based on? As it seems: nothing. I mean, there are nine types, which are not at all human constructs (??) but supposedly "natural", in the sense that everyone *is* a certain type, even if you score equal among four different types, only one of them is your REAL type, the others are...? A friend of mine took it yesterday and scored as 4, but also close to 2, 6 and 9. The 2 could be explained as being the stress point of 4, but then? How much does it actually tell you about yourself? Would it be impossible to come up with a similar system consisting of 8, 10 or 12 types?

And then there are the wings, the stress-/security points, the triads and whatever more. How do they motivate all that?? What if a person has a wing somewhere far away from itself, or if one's stress point isn't where it "should" be, or if you're 7 but strongly Feeling, or... again, seemingly, they don't motivate it. And if someone doesn't fit into it, then it's something they've misunderstood, and everything will be clear in time.

Compare this to MBTI, and everything is quite logical: E vs I, S vs, N, F vs T and P vs J, divided into eight functions divided into sixteen function pairs/personalities, and well... you know all this. The Enneagram just seems soo arbitrary.

Not to mention how the Enneagram, in the way it's structured, seems so "cosmically ordered", like something you would have come up with in Ancient Greece or in Medieval Europe... one wonders whether the purpose really is to understand human beings, or to create a sophisticated system to be amazed at?

The worst part of all this, though, is that I fit into it as hell
I'm a self-preservational, feeling, shameful 4 with a strong 5-wing, my security point is 1, stress point 2 and I have yet to develop my 3-wing... *sigh*



Edit: Whew. That's what I call an INFJ Ti-outburst.

 

[Delphyne]

It´s an INFJ Te-outburst. Ti would prompt you to look at the inner structure of the enneagram and unterstand it from the inside and not waste your time with the outer structure or your test scores.

 

[sleepless]

But that's just what I'm trying to do, looking at it's inner structure, to understand it, but it doesn't have any! It's arbitrary, completely made up, based on nothing!

Aaargh! :steam: *second outburst*

 

[Delphyne]

An INFJ friend of mine also thinks he´s using Ti when he´s actually in the grip of his tertiary Te and looks for outer guiding structures. If he´s in that state he won´t accept any holistic perspectives, only precise categories. He thinks he has an open mind, but he is using Te in a defensive way.

At first it´s best to look at the basis types. If you try to see what´s your wing, your security points and so on, it´s likely that you get lost in the complexity of the enneagram.

 

[miked277]

for me, enneagram is very useful. it's both accurate in describing my current behavior and in mapping out where i'm headed. that's one of the differences from mbti that i find appealing, enneagram is much more specific on the development of one's type.

 

[Totenkindly]

The Enneagram doesn't derive its nine archetypes from some Ti process, it simply assumes the archetypes are true.

Now, there is a Ti-discernable structure built on TOP of those nine archetypes, especially when we start discussing directions of (dis)integration as well as the impact of the wings and variants.

But the initial complaint, that the nine types can't be derived exclusively from reality, is correct. You either accept it or you do not. We can see some people who conform to the archetypes; others do not; and we have no real idea if the nine types are exclusively true and encompass all of human nature.

Ni can find it useful because it sees it merely as one system/viewpoint and doesn't need it to be directly derived from reality nor exclusive.

Function typology, meanwhile proposes it does cover all of human beings, if it focuses on the binaries. You are either T or F, S or N, E or I, or some gray inside each grouping... but you can't be Z (for example) on the T/F spectrum, Z doesn't exist except for Z = some combination of T/F.

MBTI then builds sixteen archetypes off the binary pairings.

 

[sleepless]

Delphyne,

The INFJ tertiary is Ti, not Te, and I dare say I recognize when I use it. But whatever, you can have your opinion. Case closed.


Jennifer,

thank you for making things clear. "Take it or leave it" is probably a good approach, that is, if we find it useful as a means of understanding ourselves then we use it, and otherwise we don't, as simple as that...

Ni can find it useful because it sees it merely as one system/viewpoint and doesn't need it to be directly derived from reality nor exclusive.

I suppose what irritates me is that you get the feeling that it actually claims to be exclusive; I haven't read it anywhere as an outright statement, but that's sometimes my impression, as they only care to explain how, not why (I have mostly read here: Enneagram Institute: Enneagram Testing & Training). I have been going with it for some time, but suddenly I just felt I was fooling myself, not being skeptical enough about it. We'll see, maybe I can give it a second chance..

Oh, and actually, I found a new way of looking at my own type. The truth is that my stress point can sometimes be 7 instead of 2, and I think it's becoming increasingly so. Suppose that 2 goes away altogether, then I could think of myself as some 4/5 crossbreed, like this:

7 (stress) ------ 5-4 ------ 1 (growth)

Now how's that for a change? 1 is supposed to go to 7, but here it's ultimately the opposite!
God, I'm so smart (and special)

 

[redacted]

It´s an INFJ Te-outburst. Ti would prompt you to look at the inner structure of the enneagram and unterstand it from the inside and not waste your time with the outer structure or your test scores.

uh, no. that's blatantly a Ti outburst. the internal consistency of the system is being questioned, not the application.

i have these same thoughts all the time about both enneagram and MBTI. a Te user would be comfortable just using the system and considering the effects. (whoa, i just explained my questioning of the validity of MBTI by using MBTI terms, lol)

 

[mlittrell]

The enneagram is wonderful for understanding human motives. For example, it seems to me that there are 3 different types of ENTJ's. I have a best friend, a girlfriend, and a father that are all ENTJ's, but they are all different enneagram types. MBTI is wonderful for understanding a person, but not for understanding their actions or motive neccessarily. Is it based on anything...nope lol not really at all. At least not that I know of, if it is, I would like to know.

Another thing with the enneagram...there can be something like 6 different types of ENFP's whereas, most of the time you don't see more then two INTJ's.

 

[Totenkindly]

i have these same thoughts all the time about both enneagram and MBTI. a Te user would be comfortable just using the system and considering the effects.

And often the system gets justified or abandoned based on the effects and usefulness of the system, rather than any internal (in)consistencies.

(whoa, i just explained my questioning of the validity of MBTI by using MBTI terms, lol)

We're gonna have to smack your hands if you keep that up!

I suppose what irritates me is that you get the feeling that it actually claims to be exclusive; I haven't read it anywhere as an outright statement, but that's sometimes my impression, as they only care to explain how, not why...

True, they assume it to be true and then preach how it works. But that tends to be typical of any system where you're just discussing application and not validation.

I've noticed more New Age and religious influences in the promoters of Enneagram as well, whereas MBTI tends to be approached more from the psychology angle or with psychological (rather than religious) language.

 

[ygolo]

I am n00b when it comes to enneagram, but I just wanted to make a comment on categories in general.

ALL categories/types/whatever are essentially arbritrary. This is true in any field. There are constraints on how you can make a categorical system where things are mutually exclusice. But it seems like MBTI and enneagram are both fuzzy on the boundaries they use.

Categories are conceptions of the human mind. They ALWAYS are. It is a question of whether or not the categorization is usable or not as way of describing reality.

 

[redacted]

I am n00b when it comes to enneagram, but I just wanted to make a comment on categories in general.

ALL categories/types/whatever are essentially arbritrary. This is true in any field. There are constraints on how you can make a categorical system where things are mutually exclusice. But it seems like MBTI and enneagram are both fuzzy on the boundaries they use.

Categories are conceptions of the human mind. They ALWAYS are. It is a question of whether or not the categorization is usable or not as way of describing reality.

jungian functions are much less fuzzy than enneagram types, though.

the good thing about the jung function approach is that it takes the concept of cognition, and divides by two three times, each time with a distinct boundary of division that can be added back together to go a level back up.

the real fuzziness of MBTI is when you try to type by dichotomies... which is why i gave up that approach a long time ago.

i've inferred that there is a similar way of breaking down enneagram types, but i have no idea what that is...

 

[Totenkindly]

jungian functions are much less fuzzy than enneagram types, though.

Yeah, that is what I was trying to say above when I mentioned how the binary-pair approach makes sure all ground is covered, whereas the enneagram 9 distinct foundational archetype approach does not ensure that there aren't cracks between the archetypes that people could fall into.

 

[mlittrell]

jungian functions are much less fuzzy than enneagram types, though.

the good thing about the jung function approach is that it takes the concept of cognition, and divides by two three times, each time with a distinct boundary of division that can be added back together to go a level back up.

the real fuzziness of MBTI is when you try to type by dichotomies... which is why i gave up that approach a long time ago.

i've inferred that there is a similar way of breaking down enneagram types, but i have no idea what that is...

good call

thats my approach

though the enneagram is extremely useful if you want to narrow people down within the types

 

[Magic Poriferan]

If anyone wants to see how I have broken the Enneagram down into specific variables, I can tell you all.

The Enneagram isn't really much simpler than the MBTI, it's just dressed up to look simpler, to simulate purity. It's an aesthetic ploy, in other words.

 

[redacted]

If anyone wants to see how I have broken the Enneagram down into specific variables, I can tell you all.

The Enneagram isn't really much simpler than the MBTI, it's just dressed up to look simpler, to simulate purity. It's an aesthetic ploy, in other words.

it has something to do with two categories that have three options each, yeah?

i want to hear your breakdown, if you're willing to give it.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

it has something to do with two categories that have three options each, yeah?

i want to hear your breakdown, if you're willing to give it.

Okay. The one I'm going to give is a bit scrappy, so don't get too picky with it. As you know, if a personality trait is described in only a few words, there are often things that seem confusing or unsatisfying. I might expound on this in more detail later.

As you said, there are two variables, each with three values. 3 x 3 = 9, so that's the number of types right there.

The first variable is sort of the behavioral variable. This is the one that really decides how a person approaches challenges is life. to put it vaguely. The best single words I've found for these types so far is pursuing, avoiding, and anticipating.

So, pursuing types have targets that they very pro-actively pursue. It could be that they seek pleasure, or they aim to pre-emptively tackle problems, the actual target of their pursuits is determined by other variable. They are impatient, impetuous people. They also tend to over-estimate the benefit end of cost-benefit analyses, which is one of the things that make them aggressive. They expect to profit from adventures. These types are 3, 7, and 8.

So then we have avoidant types. They generally over-estimate the cost end of cost-benefit analyses. These people tend to spend more time on avoiding what they don't like than they do on seeking what they do like. When they can't avoid stress, they often fall into an almost fatalistic state of passivity. Throwing weight around is something these types seem to have particular distaste for. These types are 4, 5, and 9.

So, the anticipating types do not pursue nor avoid these highlights of life. They stand and deal with them whenever they come. They handle life like a tetris player. These people have a more balanced view of cost-benefit analysis, but perhaps too balanced sometimes. These people don't like making dramatic decisions the same way the other two can, which can make for missed opportunites. These types are 1, 2, and 6.

The second variable is one that regards emotional states and responses. They can be turbulent, supressive, or controling, for lack of better words.

The turbulent ones are the people that do not hinder their emotions at all. They let their moods tempestually flare with every feeling as it is set off. Their emotions run wild. They often seem to tilt toward being more negative than positive, but I think this is largely just because there are more negative emotions than positive ones, not because these types particularly want to dwell on negativity. These types are 4, 6, and 8.

The suppressive types try to keep their emotions from speaking up. They tend to believe that they can work best when they are not hearing thier emotions much or at all. By defualt they are well composed people. But when they fail to successfully supress their emotions, it often results in awkward displays. These types are 1, 3, and 5.

The controlling types are the ones that try to manipulate the flow of their own feelings to their advantage. These are the people that try to think positive. They make an effort to both display desirable emotions to others, and to also frequently reassure themselves of such good feelings. Most usually pick feelings like confidence, happiness, or love to project, but they may develop whatever feeling is appealing to them. They are also prone to suffering from denial, and usually take it very hard if their self-assurances can be completely disproven. These types are 2, 7, and 9.

So, to summarize the types:
Pursuing/Turbulent = 8. Avoiding/Turbulent = 4. Anticipating/Turbulent = 6. Pursuing/Suppressive = 3. Avoiding/Suppressive = 5. Anticipating/Suppressive = 1. Pursuing/Controlling = 7. Avoiding/Controlling = 9. Anticipating/Controlling = 2.

That's my explanation for now. I think it's pretty crappy, to be honest. If you are particularly interested, Dissonance, then I can surely do a better job actually discussing my theories directly.

 

[redacted]

dude, that description was awesome. it's a great start for me to build a framework of enneagram types.

thank you.

(and i'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOO 9)

also, i can totally see why you throw away the wing theory. i'd call myself a 9w5 from that perspective.

p.s. i think you may be an INFJ.

 

[dnivera]

The enneagram's origins are mysterious, probably from Sufi Mysticism (according to Don Riso's book). Hence all the numerology and sacred geometry and all that; it's a product of ancient spiritual traditions and thinking and influences from the ancient world (classical philosophy, gnosticism, islam, etc). It's an artifact of that world.

Jungian type theory is much, much younger, and essentially a product of the modern era. Perhaps that's why it makes more intuitive sense to us and we "get" it more easily - it's based on logic, and easy to follow. I don't see any potential hidden corners of insight that I can get from Jungian theory (and so it's one-dimensional in many ways to me), whereas with enneagram, the hidden interconnections between each number are huge and have immense potential. I get those "wow, so that's why...." moments much more with enneagram than Jung.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

dude, that description was awesome. it's a great start for me to build a framework of enneagram types.

thank you.

(and i'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOO 9)

also, i can totally see why you throw away the wing theory. i'd call myself a 9w5 from that perspective.

That was a better reaction than I would have expected. Thank you.

EDIT: Indeed, the lack of wings of adjacent wings becomes rather clear. I have some ideas about how types actually relate to each other. I also noticed how when formed in this way, it becomes apparent that the Instinctual variant system is a perfect fit. It is also a three value variable, and covers a factor which the other two do not.

p.s. i think you may be an INFJ.

No! I'm an INTP, and if anything else, I'm more like an INFP. I am not an INFJ.
When will it end?