# Things you disagree with Naranjo on



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

It might sound surprising that I'm making this thread, but yeah. I thought it would be interesting

personally, some of my disagreements are
1) 1s are not nearly as conventional as he paints them to be. most are fairly socially critical and, when they do have views which are seen as politically incorrect (or even evil), they are among the types least likely to care.
2) I don't think all Sexual 4s are quite as vicious as he paints them to be. 
3) Not all Self Preservation 6s are pussies who roll over at the first sign of conflict(*summons @Chipps and @MuChApArAdOx *)
4) 8s are not as anti-intellectual as Naranjo makes them out to be. granted, _I think the majority of them are far more anti-intellectual than most on this forum want to admit_, but many, particularly the NT 8s can certainly find pleasure in theoretical meanderings (an 8w7 friend of mine studies psychology, bioenergetics and economics for fun. he is one of the smartest mother fuckers I know, it's just that he is interested in subjects he can somehow apply in the outside world)
@Cosmic Orgasm @Paradigm @Animal @Doll 
you might find this thread interesting


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I disagree with his idea that subtypes must manifest xyz way or they are not that subtype. I think instincts should be seen as separate from the core. I also disagree on the exaggerated sadism of type 8. Yes, there is a streak of sadism in the type especially when unhealthy, but overall I think he tries too hard to make enneagram a legitimate study within mainstream psychology and it forced him to focus on aspects of the system that to me removes it from its purpose and it becomes something else than what's originally intended, similar to how MBTI is not the same as Jungian type.


----------



## DomNapoleon (Jan 21, 2012)

The way that Narranjo correlates mental illness with types. Mental illness is something pathological... not type related.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@ephemereality
I agree about 8s, but I disagree on the subtypes. I think they're very much interconnected and together form a strong pattern of personality (aside from it's accuracy from what I've observed, it makes it light-years easier to type people). 



Phoenix_Rebirth said:


> The way that Narranjo correlates mental illness with types. Mental illness is something pathological... not type related.


type is also pathological, though just how "bad" it is is debatable. personally, I view type as an inner demon of sorts. if it takes hold of you, it can lead to some VERY fucked up shit, but, if you can become aware of it and control it, it can be a source of power and motivation. personally, I kinda like the fact that part of me is that fucked up. 

@OP
a few other things
1) I agree that Social 7 is the counter type of 7 and that they are much more superego than other 7s (I believed that since I started studying the Naranjo at all), but I cannot see them being as extreme as the monks and nuns he paints them as. imo, they're more similar to Riso and Hudson's description of 2s (friendly, giving for the sake of self esteem, superego, but not THAT superego)
2) 2s aren't _quite_ that selfish. they're still a hell of a lot more selfish than most people paint them as, but 2 is a very loyal type in the average to healthy range (though he is absolutely right about unhealthy 2s, who can easily become the most manipulative, evil bastards you will ever meet). 
3) I think he exaggerates the superego influence of 5. the Social 5 tends to be a bit more idealistic and socially critical, but overall, 6 is definitely more superego than 5
4) not every non Sp dom 8 is an Extroverted Sensing dom Dothraki horse lord, though I agree that even the Intuitive 8s have a more "barbarian" aspect to them, the absence of which is usually how I tell an ATE is mistyped (lolz at using @Cosmic Orgasm 's term) 
5) his core type descriptions have the following biases toward a certain instinctual subtype:

2: Sexual
4: Social
7: Self Preservation
8: Sexual


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> @ephemereality
> I agree about 8s, but I disagree on the subtypes. I think they're very much interconnected and together form a strong pattern of personality (aside from it's accuracy from what I've observed, it makes it light-years easier to type people).


I agree with that subtypes may of course make a type manifest more in either direction than another, but I also feel that if one is judging the enneagram system as a whole, I am not sure I have always personally observed such obvious manifestations and I tend to prefer to shy away from behavioral typing in general. I find that tritype makes more sense in this regard than subtypes do.

Didn't see this before


> 4) not every non Sp dom 8 is an Extroverted Sensing dom Dothraki horse lord


but YES. I don't know exactly what people think when they think lust is entirely sensory, but if people think so they are entirely missing the point with how lust is actually a vice and how it relates to holy truth.


----------



## Tater Tot (May 28, 2012)

The holistic medicine stuff was kind of creepy and cult-ish imo. I also remember something about 6's trying to stay warm and I thought that was silly. :laughing:


----------



## Doll (Sep 6, 2012)

I dislike the description that Sexual 4s are "more 8 than 8", which is his theory, right?

Sexual 4 is more aggressive and competitive than the usual 4, but n_ot in the same way as an 8_. Type 4 is a completely different type than type 8. They have separate pathologies and motivations; comparing the two based on an instinctual subtype is silly, unless he's saying they can LOOK, superficially, like an 8. Even then, I don't see it... 

Sexual 4s are guilty of idealizing others and becoming obsessive, but also quick to reject another person if they don't live up to those high expectations. Sexual 4s are more fickle than an 8 would be, and far less pragmatic. There's volatility and desperation, even if it's hidden underneath a calm surface.


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

Doll said:


> I dislike the description that Sexual 4s are "more 8 than 8", which is his theory, right?
> 
> Sexual 4 is more aggressive and competitive than the usual 4, but n_ot in the same way as an 8_. Type 4 is a completely different type than type 8. They have separate pathologies and motivations; comparing the two based on an instinctual subtype is silly, unless he's saying they can LOOK, superficially, like an 8. Even then, I don't see it...
> 
> Sexual 4s are guilty of idealizing others and becoming obsessive, but also quick to reject another person if they don't live up to those high expectations. Sexual 4s are more fickle than an 8 would be, and far less pragmatic. There's volatility and desperation, even if it's hidden underneath a calm surface.


Yeah a lot of the portraits of the Sexual 4 sound like an unhealthy 2 or 8.


----------



## Doll (Sep 6, 2012)

The Scorched Earth said:


> Yeah a lot of the portraits of the Sexual 4 sound like an unhealthy 2 or 8.


I could see a Sexual 4 being more connected to 2 than 8, but I think that's also because 4 has a natural DOD to 2.


----------



## Pelopra (May 21, 2013)

I don't actually know enough to disagree, but I found it surprising slash a bit weird how much the 2 and 3 instinct descriptions inverted/switched what I would have expected. The type 3 instinctual descriptions completely undermine anything I thought I understood about the type, and I've never seen similar descriptions of type 3 anywhere else.....


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

double post scuzi :dry:


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

I don't think you need to take Naranjo so literally. Nobody has said anything about the relations he makes with MBTI, apparently because it's understood the relation is not one on one. And he does the same with DSM, or homeopathy, or when referring to other psychoanalists. So why take that that at face value? Dare I say, you need to see it...in context, or the big picture he paints.

With regard to type and instinct subtype, it's like colors. We say a shirt is red or a car is red, where the first can be more towards purple, and the other orange. It's never as red as pure red, but we still call it red, even when pure red is rarely seen in nature. 

If you are confused because you feel you can relate to other types too, good! You are human. 

We all have three instincts, so it's not strange if you can relate to all three, more or less, or some episode/ stage in life. We don't grow in one continuous integrated curve. We make short discontinuous spurts of progress depending on focus. Sometimes relapse, or fields that get behind and should need more attention. And why should countertype be in any way confusing? People can be contradictory, there's a certain tension or conflict (in ourselves) between the instincts (or instincts to type). Sp vs So, So vs Sx, etc. Other times they operate in conjunction or complementary. This is a complex dynamic, which obviously will result in a myriad of outcomes, rather than to how it is supposed to, according to type descriptions.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

Phoenix_Rebirth said:


> The way that Narranjo correlates mental illness with types. Mental illness is something pathological... not type related.


Yes and they don't fit into one specific box, as in one disorder fits all type I think that R&H's correlations make more sense as far as that goes.



Tater Tot said:


> The holistic medicine stuff was kind of creepy and cult-ish imo. I also remember something about 6's trying to stay warm and I thought that was silly. :laughing:


You mean you missed out on getting your unique type's mini naturpathic tonic that they give out at every upcoming Enneagram workshop? I think that this year, they're even giving people who make the early bird deadline, a year's supply of holy water and bottled sunlight..


----------



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

Pelopra said:


> I don't actually know enough to disagree, but I found it surprising slash a bit weird how much the 2 and 3 instinct descriptions inverted/switched what I would have expected. The type 3 instinctual descriptions completely undermine anything I thought I understood about the type, and I've never seen similar descriptions of type 3 anywhere else.....


In what way did it undermine your understanding? If you don't mind me asking.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

His 1 description sounds too SPish.

Sometimes he falls into the trap of caricatures but it's not until you have progressed through a type chapter that you can see he is also explaining beyond that when he covers defense mechanisms etc. 

His deeper understanding and referencing on Jung is inaccurate in places. E.g the type 4 Jung reference was an INFP description not INFP and INFJ. His other references such as homeopathic medicine were used with more understanding. I don't agree with all of his function correlations but im just being picky. Im surprised he didn't pick on the strong commonalities between type 3 and Fe and maybe as a result the function correlations seemed a little arbitrary for a few certain types. 

His SX counterphobic correlation.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

mushr00m said:


> His 1 description sounds too SPish.
> 
> Sometimes he falls into the trap of caricatures but it's not until you have progressed through a type chapter that you can see he is also explaining beyond that when he covers defense mechanisms etc.
> 
> ...


He says Sx is *the most* counterphobic type. That's not the same as equals or correlation.

However, if you want to know more about the relation between sexuality, aggression (even [religious] ecstasy), and fearlessness or shamelessness, and the role of the amygdala in the brain, read this link from Oprah :tongue:



oprah.com said:


> Female sexual turn-on begins with a brain turn-off: Orgasms can only be triggered when the amygdala (the fear and anxiety center) is turned off. "It requires turning off the worrywart circuits in the female brain to have an orgasm," Dr. Brizendine explains.
> http://www.oprah.com/health/The-Female-Brain


Or http://oxytocinaccelerator.com/oxytocin-and-the-amygdala

And I agree with caricature, but the problem is really the interpretation, when people take things too literally. Jung also uses exaggeration or hyperboles when he describes types.

(thing is, type descriptions based on Average Joe will be more difficult to distinct, even though they are more 'realistic'. Unfortunately some people take them at face value, for instance because they like to identify themselves with "creative genius" or "mastermind", "idealist" or "healer", or get angry because they feel insulted when it is negative, or god knows exaggerate their behavior themselves accordingly and obedient to the stereotype).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> Or Oxytocin and the Amygdala
> 
> And I agree with caricature, but the problem is really the interpretation, when people take things too literally. Jung also uses exaggeration or hyperboles when he describes types.


I'm sorry mimesis but a lot of that seems very questionable from an actual scientific POV.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Pelopra said:


> I don't actually know enough to disagree, *but I found it surprising slash a bit weird how much the 2 and 3 instinct descriptions inverted/switched what I would have expected. The type 3 instinctual descriptions completely undermine anything I thought I understood about the type, and I've never seen similar descriptions of type 3 anywhere else.....*


yes, I noticed the same thing. when I first started studying the Enneagram, I thought it was 3 who was the really Id, egocentric diva, but this is more 2 (who are also MUCH more aggressive than most descriptions paint them as)


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

ephemereality said:


> I'm sorry mimesis but a lot of that seems very questionable from an actual scientific POV.


Send me your actual data then.

Nb. my point being, the instinct responsible for transgression or transcendence (involved with sexuality, aggression /competition, intimacy, spiritual trance, and I would even include criminal behavior, exploration of otherness (heterology) or self exploration (inner journey) ) requires fear and shame to be repressed, turned off or rather to be let go. That ain't no rocket science.


----------



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

Swordsman of Mana said:


> yes, I noticed the same thing. when I first started studying the Enneagram, I thought it was 3 who was the really Id, egocentric diva, but this is more 2 (who are also MUCH more aggressive than most descriptions paint them as)


Well, I figure they're still Id. Just more subtle about it because of a Competency-fixation.


----------

