Social factors, the place where you were born, family environment etc, are innate characterist.
Personality is aqcuired characteristc.
Social factors aren't innate characteristics, they're external to the person, and are the source (together with personality, which is indeed acquired, and other factors: biological and so on...) of people's approach to sex, society and sp. There's no such thing as instinctual stackings causing these behaviours; they depend on lots of different things, and fluctuate according to personal circumstances (as opposed to personality, which remains stable).
Sexual and social needs only arise once the person has satisfied his/her most basic needs (food, drink, shelter); only then they become their primary interest.
You are basically on the side of naive holism, like if we were all conditioned by our social environment, without any differences possible, it's wrong.
I've never said such thing. If you don't know how to interpret other people's ideas is your problem.
Prove it. The only one speculating here is you. And it's ackward and pathetic.
Prove it, prove it, prove it...
That's your answer for everything, but you haven't proved anything from your side yet; you've just rambled about how much do you know Lady Gaga, and how stupid is everybody except you. You're the only one who speculates here, and the most pathetic for sure.
It is not separated since there's the notion of stacking. Elsewhere, there's thousands of instincts, but scientist have analysed it and judged that it could be concentrated in three big sector of life that we have gradually to deal during the childhood development. If you think you know better than them while you've never studied the subject, you are laughable.
Which scientists?
All instincts are the result of evolution, all of them serve the purpose of survival. In this way, all instincts are self-preservational. You're separating sexual and social instincts from sp. I don't care if you later stack them or not, you have separated them on the first place; that's arbitrary.
If you're unable to see that, then I give up. It's not my fault that your head is made of bricks
Were you aware that we are not talking about individual personality but about types of personality? Every characteristic of a person can give clues to find the type, and ty type allow a global understanding of their personality.Enneagram has never been supposed to explain every behaviors and characteristics of a person, but only the problematic behavior which arises when they are entranced and in autopilot. You're off-topic.
I haven't doubted the validity of enneatypes. Don't distort my words.
Theses parameters are not put aside, but took in account to find the type. There can also be behavior which has not anything especially to do with the personality type. It does'nt matter, the type and the instinctual variant are dignosis, it has never been supposed to describe every characteristics of a person, such system is impossible to buld and would be totalitarian, that does'nt make theses dignosis less accurate and arbirtrary.
Exactly, and since you can't measure each and every parameter, what's the point of measuring sex, social and sp inclinations? Either you analyze every possible subgroup, parameter and characteristic, or you just leave the general groups as they are. Enneatype and wing are enough to describe personality, and help people to see their fixations and surpass them.
Instinctual stackings are just describing particular behaviours, which change over time depending on lots of factors; knowing that somebody is more interested in sex than in social interactions is not more important than knowing if that person is more or less inclined to religion. It says nothing about their personality, it helps nobody.
I don't take it as personal offense, I simply don't have patience with idiots.
Don't make me laugh, sonny. You've taken this personally from the very begining. And you're the only idiot here, a blind follower of a system, totally unable to examine even the slightest criticism. You've proved several times in this thread how little rationality you have, answering both me and other posters with dogmatic sentences, insults and without logical argumentations.
But well, I'll leave you in peace with your beliefs. There's no point in continuing this discussion. It's like discussing evolutionist theories with christian fundamentalists. We're not going to reach any conclusion with this.
And above all, I haven't started this thread and the theme they wanted to discuss here is not this one.
Have a nice day.
