Ontological basis of the Enneagram? Insight needed.

**EmotionallyTonedGeometry** · 02-02-2010 10:30 AM

I’ve been doing a bit of research on the Enneagram but I have still gotten nowhere with what it really represents. One of my greatest hang-ups now is how it is organized. Why must the wings be adjacent to the type? Why is a 2w4 impossible. On a similar note, when moving towards excellence or stress, why does the 6 move towards either 9 and 3. Why cannot a 6 move more towards 1?

The answers to these seem to deal with the structure of the psyche and I have not been able to reduce this to anything intuitive. If anyone has any insight into the matter, I am eager for you to share it with me.

**dude10000** · 02-02-2010 10:37 AM

If anyone has any insight into the matter, I am eager for you to share it with me.

No, your instincts are correct. Systems like MBTI and the enneagram are bullshit. Fun bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless. Don't confuse concepts with realities.

**EmotionallyTonedGeometry** · 02-02-2010 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by JHBowden

No, your instincts are correct. Systems like MBTI and the enneagram are bullshit. Fun bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless. Don't confuse concepts with realities.

MBTI, I can take for what it is; 4 unrelated categories of information processing. This, to me, is intuitive as it asks the user to accept little or nothing. But the enneagram just bugs. This system does make very specific claims about how different functions of consciousness relate. If this is the case, there must be a why.

**starri** · 02-02-2010 10:41 AM

The Enneagram Blogspot: Scientific Proof for the Enneagram

I found this to be somewhat intriguing when I too was searching for scientific proof of the enneagram. The one thing I noticed in the variation between the three neurotransmitters is that each type and it's adjacent type only have one level in common.

example:

Type 7: high high high
Type 8: low low high
Type 9: high low low

It's still unfinished analysis, but I thought I would share.

**EmotionallyTonedGeometry** · 02-02-2010 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by alizée

The Enneagram Blogspot: Scientific Proof for the Enneagram

I found this to be somewhat intriguing when I too was searching for scientific proof of the enneagram. The one thing I noticed in the variation between the three neurotransmitters is that each type and it's adjacent type only have one level in common.

example:

Type 7: high high high
Type 8: low low high
Type 9: high low low

It's still unfinished analysis, but I thought I would share.

That's very interesting. Not what I was expecting, but it does give me some leads. Thanks!

**dude10000** · 02-02-2010 11:07 AM

This, to me, is intuitive as it asks the user to accept little or nothing.

I'm not sold on this. Consider analysis, synthesis, or synposis-- decomposing a given into elements, or combining two unrelated ideas, or seeing the total view. Imagination. Hypothesis. Inductive and deductive reasoning. Wholes and Parts. Apprehension of properties, relations. Remembering. Association. Seeing probabilities, possibilities, necessities. Conceptual innovation. Definition. Verification. Introspection.

Are these intuition? Thinking? Or both? One thing is for sure-- MBTI as a psychological instrument is conceptually imprecise. Enneagram is in even worse shape-- at least Jung was influenced by Schopenhauer, Kant, and other thinkers.

**Liontiger** · 02-02-2010 11:09 AM

The enneagram has been criticized for having roots in numerology and other such pseudosciences. Honestly, if you can get some help out of it, who cares whether it's true or not?

**EmotionallyTonedGeometry** · 02-02-2010 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by Liontiger

The enneagram has been criticized for having roots in numerology and other such pseudosciences. Honestly, if you can get some help out of it, who cares whether it's true or not?

Let me let you into my mind for a moment...

-ETG opens a magical portal into the inner recesses of his noodle-

Why!? Why?! Why do I relate the way I do to my family? Why do familial relationships exist at all? Are they learned, are they genetic? How can I understand this better? Why do I want to understand this better? Will I be able to understand this better? Who has done work to make this more understandable? What systems exist that help us understand our minds? Can a mind reflexively understand itself? Can a mind reasonably understand itself at all? What are the Enneagrams? Why do they function? How do they function? They seem useful, but why? What do they say about consciousness? Are they a means to better understanding the mind or are they just pragmatic and Liontiger suggests? How thoroughly dissatisfying! If they represent reality, there must be a reality that represents them. Introversion and extroversion spell out opposite poles of a phenomenolgical landscape, this makes sense, but what on earth are the Enneagrams and why are they set up the way they are? They are so specific, so unique! Why? Can I pull back the event horizon of my own knowledge and expand it to what lies beyond? I must! I will! There has to be a reason and I will find it! Why are there limitations and constraints placed on how personality functions in the enneagrams? These constraints must mean something. If not, they are arbitrary and thus garbage. What is this something? What is the shadow that sustains the system? What is the space that defines shape? To see only one side of this is horribly frustrating. I have to figure this out! How? I must do this? But how? Who knows? Read more! Think more! You can do it! Don't stop!

This is normally what my internal chatter sounds like on a good day. I can not imagine a more dissatisfying answer than "just because." That is my nature. If I cannot find the why, I will reject the system. But, my intuition tells me there is something there worth investigating. Thus, my current state of inquiry. I am an INTP and a 6w5. I seem destined to the systematic analysis of just about everything.

**Liontiger** · 02-02-2010 12:02 PM

Perhaps an aspect of growth for you, then, might be accepting that there are some things in life that are beyond our ability to explain, and that we must often operate without knowing the "why's." To always be skeptical about everything is draining and impossible if one wants to maintain some semblance of sanity.