# Sp-Lasts: How Carnal or "In your Body" are you? How Physical are you?



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

Animal said:


> Thank you =) Very good points and interesting angle. I'm definitely SX-first, so it's not a surprise my questions had that slant. I am leaning toward Sx/So but I've typed at Sx/Sp for a long time… so all of this info is helpful; I have strong cases for both as a secondary instinct, but no case at all for SX not being first.


If you are having difficulties thinking up which side that you are on, as SO or SP last then just call yourself a SX type then without any secondary qualifications. Both of which seem (un)important enough that they are both in the same position.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Reality Hazer said:


> If you are having difficulties thinking up which side that you are on, as SO or SP last then just call yourself a SX type then without any secondary qualifications. Both of which seem (un)important enough that they are both in the same position.


Yeah that's what I've been doing for a while. I think the most important thing with enneagram is the core type and the first instinct. That is what helps me most with growth. The secondary instinct or wing, has more importance to some and less to others. Tritype can even feel extraneous at times once the core type is understood. For me personally, 4SX is enough to help me understand myself more and grow…. but I am still interested in figuring my second stack more for theoretical reasons. For instance I want to formulate my own theory on what the second stack actually indicates, and use myself as an example in that model to provide deeper understanding.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> That is what I was figuring.
> 
> I was just checking because I am sure my first stack is SX, so I am looking for viable comparisons, although I realize two people can be different for a variety of reasons.. core, tritype, JCF etc. And that people can be mistyped. But it still helps to hear other people's experience. Also it's interesting to see how body-presence, or lack thereof, isn't necessarily related to core type. I've been wondering whether id types would have the "no body awareness" experience, for example. Especially 7s and 8s who are known to be "indulgent."
> 
> Some of this might even be beyond stack or enneagram????? Do you have any opinion on that?


Id is about the Freudian idea of id or in other words, energy. It says nothing about how that energy manifests just like sp at its heart has nothing to do with bodily concerns in itself. 

The character Rust Cohle from True Detective seems to be an INTJ 8w7 sx/sp with very poor body awareness and he even repulses the body and the physical despite being very carnal. He constantly talks about the body in a very negative and detached manner e.g. a piece of flesh. He does this likely because he is Ni dom, not because he is strongly id-oriented. Id is simply libido of desire. Says nothing about body.



Reality Hazer said:


> If you are having difficulties thinking up which side that you are on, as SO or SP last then just call yourself a SX type then without any secondary qualifications. Both of which seem (un)important enough that they are both in the same position.


Yes, doing the same. I have come to realize that while my overall logic and mannerisms probably fit the stereotype notion of sx/sp, I don't think neither sp nor so are of any particularly great concerns to me compared to sx. I can honestly see myself just as much sp last as I see so last. 

I honestly think the questions in the OP are a bit misguided and miss out on what sp actually is about which is about the personal need to preserve ego. Of course, we all try to preserve ego, but the sp instinct simply does this with the ego in itself in mind rather than doing it through social or sexual means.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> Id is about the Jungian idea of id or in other words, energy. It says nothing about how that energy manifests just like sp at its heart has nothing to do with bodily concerns in itself.


Perhaps the most important issue with instinctual stackings (sx/so, sx/sp, etc) is the contraflow/ flow charts? I have to find a source because I read about this a while ago. How the energy actually manifests as a pair with the instincts. 

If I read a description of Sp-4 and Sx-4, I would actually have trouble deciding which is my core type. SX is clear, out of 4 context, but within 4 context I also have many Sp-4 traits. It's like I vacillate between both, even if SX is primary. Social 4 doesn't make as much sense, though I relate to shades. But Sx/So as a stacking, once I learn more about it, makes sense. So perhaps, since we all have all three instincts present, the most important thing in determining the second stack is the "energy?" I don't know if that makes sense, but I'm not sure where else to go with it… any thoughts on the idea of reading individual stacking/ enneagram-plus-stacking descriptions vs. energy flow , where the second instinct is concerned?



> The character Rust Cohle from True Detective seems to be an INTJ 8w7 sx/sp with very poor body awareness and he even repulses the body and the physical despite being very carnal. He constantly talks about the body in a very negative and detached manner e.g. a piece of flesh. He does this likely because he is Ni dom, not because he is strongly id-oriented. *Id is simply libido of desire. Says nothing about body.*


^ This is interesting. It makes sense to me.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@_ephemereality_

I should add - 

Sx/So 4 as a whole DOES make sense, perhaps equally or more than Sx/Sp 4. However INDIVIDUALLY, I am more similar to an Sp-4 description than an SO-4 description by a long shot.

THis is another thing that confuses me.

Perhaps the second instinct is where you're "comfortable" so it's the first and last that will manifest more blatantly?


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

yes
Yes
YES
YESS
YESSS
*YESSS!*


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Perhaps the most important issue with instinctual stackings (sx/so, sx/sp, etc) is the contraflow/ flow charts? I have to find a source because I read about this a while ago. How the energy actually manifests as a pair with the instincts.


Well, the flowcharts are interesting in their own right. Importance is relative. Flowcharts are important if one is interested in understanding enneagram instincts in terms of the interpersonal, but it doesn't really help in terms of personal growth unless one is trying to improve within the interpersonal. 



> If I read a description of Sp-4 and Sx-4, I would actually have trouble deciding which is my core type. SX is clear, out of 4 context, but within 4 context I also have many Sp-4 traits. It's like I vacillate between both, even if SX is primary. Social 4 doesn't make as much sense, though I relate to shades. But Sx/So as a stacking, once I learn more about it, makes sense. So perhaps, since we all have all three instincts present, the most important thing in determining the second stack is the "energy?" I don't know if that makes sense, but I'm not sure where else to go with it… any thoughts on the idea of reading individual stacking/ enneagram-plus-stacking descriptions vs. energy flow , where the second instinct is concerned?


Traits according to who? Not every author understands the instincts as manifested within a core type the same. I think it's better to see the instincts unrelated to core type and should be studied on their own. Otherwise it leads to too much navelgazing where people pigeonhole instincts with core based on descriptions. I stopped doing that long time ago because descriptions are pointless. 

Better to focus on the core idea of the instincts and see how one can see such patterns manifest in one's life. Not every person of a core type even when sharing instincts will be the same. 
[/QUOTE]



Animal said:


> @_ephemereality_
> 
> I should add -
> 
> ...


I am not similar to any description I have come across when core and instincts are involved. I can't relate to most type descriptions as they are already without trying to confuse with instincts. Hence I don't type based on descriptions because they can only mean so much.

And second instinct is only relevant if one actually believes that such a concept exists in the first place. I don't think that's true that instinctual preference always follows a strict linear pattern in terms of value where we have most valued - less valued - least valued. It's about ego concern pretty much. I have no meaning in life without sx connections. That's very contrary to both sp and so logic. The blind spot or last instinct is just that, a blind spot. One can be blind to more than one instinct. I don't even think someone must have an instinctual preference per se, at least not with great clarity.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> Well, the flowcharts are interesting in their own right. Importance is relative. Flowcharts are important if one is interested in understanding enneagram instincts in terms of the interpersonal, but it doesn't really help in terms of personal growth unless one is trying to improve within the interpersonal.


Do you know a link to one offhand? Or anyone else?



> Traits according to who? Not every author understands the instincts as manifested within a core type the same.


Consistently across various descriptions. No matter what else is different, that remains.



> I think it's better to see the instincts unrelated to core type and should be studied on their own. Otherwise it leads to too much navelgazing where people pigeonhole instincts with core based on descriptions. I stopped doing that long time ago because descriptions are pointless.
> 
> Better to focus on the core idea of the instincts and see how one can see such patterns manifest in one's life. Not every person of a core type even when sharing instincts will be the same.


I agree with this to a large extent. Although SX 4 descriptions can touch on some very painful things about myself that I don't WANT to say are true, but they clearly are. That being said, there are segments of every description that I agree with and segments that I don't. So I agree, in the end, it is about the motivations. Not pulling apart the specifics in a description.




> I am not similar to any description I have come across when core and instincts are involved. I can't relate to most type descriptions as they are already without trying to confuse with instincts. Hence I don't type based on descriptions because they can only mean so much.


Yeah this is probably a case by case basis, but point taken.



> And second instinct is only relevant if one actually believes that such a concept exists in the first place. I don't think that's true that instinctual preference always follows a strict linear pattern in terms of value where we have most valued - less valued - least valued. It's about ego concern pretty much. I have no meaning in life without sx connections. That's very contrary to both sp and so logic. The blind spot or last instinct is just that, a blind spot. One can be blind to more than one instinct. I don't even think someone must have an instinctual preference per se, at least not with great clarity.


Yeah I see what you're saying. I am questioning whether there's relevance to identifying the second instinct too (as written above). I still want to know, more for the sake of "I cannot discuss the relevance or irrelevance, merits or demerits of a model until I know where I would fit into it" - but this is sort of what I was thinking.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Do you know a link to one offhand? Or anyone else?


Socionics - the16types.info - Instinctual Stackings



> Consistently across various descriptions. No matter what else is different, that remains.


Considering that I don't even agree with the authors that 4 moves to 2 anymore, I suppose I just disagree that there is such a consistency at all to begin with. Whatever consistency one finds will largely depend upon the authors' interpretation of the type and since I disagree with all major authors on this now, it's just whatever to me. At some point authors try to depict the same archetypal pattern but I am not sure I even think most authors understand the instincts in the first place, without mixing it up with other things, so I just stopped caring. 



> I agree with this to a large extent. Although SX 4 descriptions can touch on some very painful things about myself that I don't WANT to say are true, but they clearly are. That being said, there are segments of every description that I agree with and segments that I don't. So I agree, in the end, it is about the motivations. Not pulling apart the specifics in a description.


Or is it simply introjection?



> Yeah this is probably a case by case basis, but point taken.


It will be true for some, not others. That's the problem. 



> Yeah I see what you're saying. I am questioning whether there's relevance to identifying the second instinct too (as written above). I still want to know, more for the sake of "I cannot discuss the relevance or irrelevance, merits or demerits of a model until I know where I would fit into it" - but this is sort of what I was thinking.


There's a relevance if one assumes one is in possession of such an instinct in the first place. I don't think I am for example, hence it becomes irrelevant at least when it comes to myself. I can't speak for other people, more than I know that people express instinctual variants with greater and lesser clarity, just like some people express their types with greater and lesser clarity.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> …. but I am still interested in figuring my second stack more for theoretical reasons. For instance *I want to formulate my own theory on what the second stack actually indicates*, and use myself as an example in that model to provide deeper understanding.





Animal said:


> I still want to know, more for the sake of "I cannot discuss the relevance or irrelevance, merits or demerits of a model *until I know where I would fit into it*"


Seems to me you may have two goals for discovering your 2nd instinct that can be contradictory at times.

The first quote is how I look at instincts. In this approach, I'm quite certain what my stacking is. It sounds like you are as well (sx/sp).

The second quote is where the contradictions come in. When I read other people's interpretations of the stackings, they don't fit well and would create confusion in me as to what my stacking is. It sounds like this is where you go back and forth between sp and so - you begin doubting your 2nd instinct because some other interpretations make you question your own interpretation.

In other words, you know your own stacking and can come up with your own theory based on that, but...if you want to discuss stacking with others you have to find where you fit into others' interpretations of the stackings. However, when you look at their interpretations you get confused as to whether you fit sx/sp or sx/so best. 

Personally, I go with what feels right for me then develop an understanding around that. When I discuss the instincts with others, I try to understand what 1st, 2nd, or 3rd mean to them and try to understand their personal experience with an instinct in relation to that, but I'm only doing that to get at their experience not to decide whether my stacking is wrong.

If you were to ask my advice, I'd say you're sx/sp and to develop your own understanding of the stackings from there. Everything I've read from you fits my understanding of sx/sp. I haven't read anything to indicate sx/so and you seem to have been very open with yourself in your postings so I don't imagine you have any social instinct tendencies that you've been hiding.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Animal said:


> Sp-lasts:





> How physical are you?


Not as much as I probably should be. 



> Are you aware of your body?



My body has been finding new ways to "remind" me as I have gotten older. 



> Do you feel your emotions physically?


Only extremely intense emotions. I tend to shrug off the lesser ones. 



> How aware are you of the effects of food on your body, or medications? Does this "sneak up on you" or is it obvious?



Mostly sneaks up on me. 



> Do you have powerful cravings?



My greatest cravings are chocolate, beer, and cheese. Depends on my day. 



> Do you know when to stop working out?


I don't seem to have any interest in starting...


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

> How physical are you?


Definitely more mental/cerebral.



> Are you aware of your body?


Generally pretty oblivious to it, unless it's experiencing strong pain or pleasure. I'm someone who has a glass of water with dinner and goes "holy crap, I'm thirsty and haven't been drinking all day! I need six more glasses of that stuff."



> Do you feel your emotions physically?


That though...yes. Generally everything is in my stomach. Sometimes my hands/feet tremble, if I'm acutely upset.



> How aware are you of the effects of food on your body, or medications? Does this "sneak up on you" or is it obvious?


I'm completely oblivious. I have to actively think about it to notice patterns, and even then... pretty terrible at that kind of awareness.



> Do you have powerful cravings?


For sex sometimes, but rarely for anything else. 



> Do you know when to stop working out?


When my brain goes "I'm bored."


----------



## saltana (Jan 18, 2013)

Sp-lasts:

How physical are you? 
I honestly forget that I have a body sometimes. Before instinctive variants I didn't know how to explain that. 

Are you aware of your body?
See above. 

Do you feel your emotions physically?
I heat with anger, and my hands shake when I have high energy. 

How aware are you of the effects of food on your body, or medications? Does this "sneak up on you" or is it obvious?
I rarely take medication. I am rarely fixed on the effects of food on my body, although sometimes I fixate after I have fast food, eek.

Do you have powerful cravings?
Yes. When I have cravings (say, for chocolate) they are usually powerful, and I cannot resist. 

Do you know when to stop working out?
When I get a little tired, bored or otherwise uncomfortable. Working out isn't too important to me so I don't exactly have a science.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

I'm going to answer this as sp-first...

How physical are you? 
Not very. I enjoy some indulgences & luxury & definitely novelty in physical things. I have always had a strong disconnect from my body though. I knock into things. I don't recognize my own face. Sports scare me a bit - too violent, too much commotion. But I like to be on the sidelines of commotion at times, as an observer (bright lights, loud music, whirs of color). 
I forget to eat because I'm lost in my head, but I do like to eat if it's leisurely and I'm in a pleasant environment. 

Are you aware of your body?
No. I block pain out easily. I'm surprisingly clumsy despite a tendency to "float" or have contrived poses, & I don't seem to know where my body ends/begins (see above comments). I am most aware of longings or cravings, such as sex, coffee, or a sugar fix. If a mood aligns with a physical desire, then it's distracting/frustrating to me because I am driven to meet it NOW, but otherwise I am not very intune with my body.

Do you feel your emotions physically?
To a point. I can definitely associate states with body areas (ie. sinking feelings in the gut, shame in the cheeks), but it's overwhelmingly strong. I mostly feel them as mental atmospheres. However, I can identify them metaphorically, poetically, & aesthetically so that they connect to physical things. I feel them in the sky, in the color of a lipstick, in the taste of salt. I often seek out aesthetic experiences which match my mood/emotions. 

How aware are you of the effects of food on your body, or medications? Does this "sneak up on you" or is it obvious?
Not very aware. After realizing I have rather severe GERD & having done (minor & temporary) damage to my esophagus for ignoring its symptoms, I pay more attention. I would say it mostly sneaks up on me. I drink a lot of coffee & still will be surprised when it too much gives me the jitters. Same with alcohol - I can think I'm mildly tipsy & not realize it's closer to sick. 

Do you have powerful cravings?
Yes. But I am careful to not try certain things I don't want to develop a taste for, often for moral reasons.

Do you know when to stop working out?
Yes. I actually like working out & am very moderate & balanced there. It's not hard for me to start or stop. I find it great for managing my moods.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@OrangeAppled
Thank you for answering as sp-first. That is helpful. 
It seems the questions are unrelated to where Sp lands in the stack.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Seems to me you may have two goals for discovering your 2nd instinct that can be contradictory at times.
> 
> The first quote is how I look at instincts. In this approach, I'm quite certain what my stacking is. It sounds like you are as well (sx/sp).


I have typed that way for a long time. For various reasons I've been questioning it lately. 



> The second quote is where the contradictions come in. When I read other people's interpretations of the stackings, they don't fit well and would create confusion in me as to what my stacking is. It sounds like this is where you go back and forth between sp and so - you begin doubting your 2nd instinct because some other interpretations make you question your own interpretation.
> 
> In other words, you know your own stacking and can come up with your own theory based on that, but...if you want to discuss stacking with others you have to find where you fit into others' interpretations of the stackings. However, when you look at their interpretations you get confused as to whether you fit sx/sp or sx/so best.


I don't pay much attention to other people's interpretations unless something really makes sense. There are some people I discuss enneagram with at length, but where they help me the most is giving me a more objective view on *myself.* Enneagram often deals with things we do so automatically that we don't even realize we're doing it. Sometimes enneagram interpretations are helpful, but for the most part I can sort through it and figure out what makes sense. I don't really tend to doubt things because someone else "interpreted it" differently unless I have good reason to see things differently.

The reason I was considering Sx/So had nothing to do with what anyone else said. People have told me "you seek a group setting" or "you are comfortable in a larger group on the forum" and other things which I thought were off-base, were not related to my motives or who I am, and didn't matter in terms of stacking. I reconsidered it because I did a lot of reading and then it clicked what the social instinct actually IS. I am going to do a thread about it soon. It has nothing to do with groups or politics. It's more about attentiveness to a 'wider world.' And how that makes people feel connected. Which is why Sx/So artists tend to view themselves as a symbol of their beliefs. I have always said "i want to be a symbol when I grow up" and I have always been a muse to people around me. Albums and art and writing has been written about me amongst my friends. I stand for who I am. I am a "lifestyle artist" - my alter ego has his own facebook page. I bring my art to my life and my life to my art. The most important thing with my music was singing through my whispery voice, rather than getting another "good" singer after I lost my voice - because I wanted to reclaim my identity and my passion. I AM a singer. Beyond that , I began to enjoy feeling that I was a symbol of triumph for those who have suffered losses. I wanted to be a symbol of the idea that you can be yourself, and live your dreams, no matter what the world takes from you. That was more important than a perfect performance. And it says as much on the front page of my music website. It's not a lie either. I've had people tell me how amazing my writing or my production skills are, or how good I am - this just makes me go "oh thanks" and feel good for a moment. But I know how "imperfect" the album is, so it doesn't really register. I still think there's everything wrong with it. However, I've had a few people tell me nothing about the quality of my music, but simply, "Thank you for releasing your album. I'm going blind and I am an artist.. and because of you.. I am picking up my art again." Or similar things. "I can't walk but I want to learn piano/ I've always been shy but I want to sing/ etc. You gave me the courage and inspiration to make it happen." When I get messages like this - which is not altogether infrequent considering I'm not a celebrity by any stretch - these messages make me cry. It makes me feel like it's worth it to be alive, to be me, to keep fighting the good fight, to reclaim my identity and be who I am regardless of any hardship or suffering I must endure because of it. (And believe me, the suffering is there. For me to get a single note out of my whispery voice, I need a whole lifestyle - a diet, lots of deprivation, can't go out socially at all, cant have many conversations, tremendous isolation, a strict workout schedule, and I need to deal with asshole sound guys who make fun of me for having no voice when I walk in, and audience members sometimes yelling "GET A REAL SINGER" when I'm sick, etc.)

To me, this seems like awareness of a wider impact. Social instinct.



> Personally, I go with what feels right for me then develop an understanding around that. When I discuss the instincts with others, I try to understand what 1st, 2nd, or 3rd mean to them and try to understand their personal experience with an instinct in relation to that, but I'm only doing that to get at their experience not to decide whether my stacking is wrong.


Yeah. This is how I would operate if I were certain of something. The only thing I'm sure of is Sx-first and my core type.



> If you were to ask my advice, I'd say you're sx/sp and to develop your own understanding of the stackings from there. Everything I've read from you fits my understanding of sx/sp. I haven't read anything to indicate sx/so and you seem to have been very open with yourself in your postings so I don't imagine you have any social instinct tendencies that you've been hiding.


The main tendency is that I want to be a symbol. I'll share something from my original typing thread - I feel silly because I have shared this on so many threads. I was not even close to thinking I could be a 4 at that time, and I was not answering it with any stack or tritype in mind; I just tried to be as honest as I could and didn't know the 'deeper' things about enneagram. But this should sum up why I am considering Sx/So.



> On a deeper level, I live to expose my true self through my work. I feel I’m a vessel through which songs and stories emerge. The content serves as a mirror. It exposes parts of myself that are buried deep within my subconscious, and which might otherwise remain unnoticed. In sharing my work, I hope to function as a mirror for others. What success means, to me, is knowing that my fight to sing on my album, despite speaking in a whisper, has inspired someone else to create her own artwork. Success is hearing someone quote my lyrics or reference my stories because it expresses something SHE is feeling. I want people to see themselves in my work, rather than merely seeing “me.” I want to touch on something universal. And, through bearing my own soul, I hope to inspire others to express themselves honestly, and to pursue their dreams against all odds.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> I want to touch on something universal.


There's something I call the universal. I don't think it has to do with the social instinct. It has to do with a more universal connection (not a social or group connection). It's seeing yourself as part of it all. It's something that gives meaning to our lives when personal meaning is not enough. It's a way to lose the self or give it over to something greater. Some people seek it through religion or spiritual practice, some people seek it through career or personal work, etc. i originally thought that it could identify a fourth instinct but it's not like the instincts. The closest thing I've seen in the Enneagram are the Holy Ideas.

For me it came out of personal suffering and pain. It gave meaning to it. It humbles the self and rationalizes the suffering as a necessary lesson or experience to move on to something greater, to give yourself over to the universal. For some reason people, wrongly I think, associate this universal with the social instinct. It could just as easily be associated with the sx or sp instincts. I suppose it could be considered the 4th way of the instincts (similar to how the 4th way of the centers transcends the three centers, this would transcend the instincts).


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

@_enneathusiast_
Why do you think it's wrong to associate that with the social instinct? Thinking of it that way makes sense to me.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> There's something I call the universal. I don't think it has to do with the social instinct. It has to do with a more universal connection (not a social or group connection). It's seeing yourself as part of it all. It's something that gives meaning to our lives when personal meaning is not enough. It's a way to lose the self or give it over to something greater. Some people seek it through religion or spiritual practice, some people seek it through career or personal work, etc. i originally thought that it could identify a fourth instinct but it's not like the instincts. The closest thing I've seen in the Enneagram are the Holy Ideas.
> 
> For me it came out of personal suffering and pain. It gave meaning to it. It humbles the self and rationalizes the suffering as a necessary lesson or experience to move on to something greater, to give yourself over to the universal. For some reason people, wrongly I think, associate this universal with the social instinct. It could just as easily be associated with the sx or sp instincts. I suppose it could be considered the 4th way of the instincts (similar to how the 4th way of the centers transcends the three centers, this would transcend the instincts).


Interesting. 

I am curious if you can explain why you think I am sx/sp, or what you think is the real difference between sx/sp vs. sx/so and how it manifests?

My second instinct isn't obvious at all, but I *did* type at sx/sp for years, with relative certainty. So I am open to hear input at this juncture but don't worry, I won't adopt any ideas unless they make sense to me. Everything contributes to my percolation and the excess gets filtered out.. this is the fun of being an Ne-dom. ;P 


WHat would you say, IS the social instinct?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Nonsense said:


> @_enneathusiast_
> Why do you think it's wrong to associate that with the social instinct? Thinking of it that way makes sense to me.


Look at spirituality as an example where the individual is trying to connect to the universal. It can be pursued on one's own in terms of nature let's say. It can be pursued in a deep bonding with another in terms of a personal connection with God or Jesus or whatever. It can be pursued through organized religion in terms of participation in a church. The instinct to me is about how I operate in a given instinctual context - by myself, with an intimate, within a group. It's about preferring a certain context over another because I prefer to operate in a certain way over another (e.g., autonomous for self-preservation vs. participation for social).

Delivering to the universal is independent of instinctual context. I create something that can help an individual, a relationship, or a group. It also has nothing to do with how to operate in a given context. If anything, it points to the 2nd instinct as to where the type is functioning in order to create something to be delivered to the universal (e.g., sp is creating something for the universal out of the personal context - not in collaboration with a significant other or a group).


----------

