# Examples of All 27 Subtypes



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

See, this is why there needs to be more consensus building with the enneagram. :mellow:


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> See, this is why there needs to be more consensus building with the enneagram. :mellow:


But then we don't have any way to kill time...:sad:


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

What I see as the flaws of Naranjo:

-He's all about neurosis, in other words, people at their ultimate worst. How often are people at their ultimate worst? I relate to his sexual four (and by extension Bea Chestnut's) description when I'm a really shitty human being. Beyond that, not so much. And especially not now that I've become more aware of these qualities in myself and have therefore in many ways moved past them, not to mention matured. Also, his sexual four description is extremely extroverted. If you wanted to pin a tritype to it, I'd go with 478 or 468 (plus add an extremely heavy 3 wing to that Bea Chestnut description.)

I think Bea Chestnut's general four description is quite good. Any four of any subtype I'm guessing would relate to it. So I don't understand why her human example of a sexual four is so patently un four-like, and why this idea of sexual four as being un four-like gets put out there. If any subtype should seem not-four it would be the self pres four, the countertype. That said, I think self pres fours will still relate to a four description if they are indeed fours. In general, I don't put much stock in the concept of countertype. Maybe countertypes will present differently than others of the same type, but internally they have the same drives, fears, and motivations. 

-He's locked in Freudian psychology. For this reason many of his concepts/theories are dated.

-He seems to think more in terms of archetypes rather than actual human beings, or possibly he has one person of that type in his head and he extrapolates that person's characteristics to apply to all people of that subtype. Also, he's figurative/metaphorical in his language. Unfortunately, people often take what he says literally, not to mention as gospel.

-He speaks in terms of 'pure' subtypes while most people are a blend of instincts. For that reason, his subtype descriptions seem too extreme and one-dimensional. It's like he's making tomato soup with one ingredient: tomatoes. Do that, and all the subtleties and intricacies of flavor/texture will be absent.


----------



## Quang (Sep 4, 2014)

sodden said:


> It's like he's making tomato soup with one ingredient: tomatoes. Do that, and all the subtleties and intricacies of flavor/texture will be absent.


Damn, now I am craving for some TOMATO SOUP


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

sodden said:


> What I see as the flaws of Naranjo:
> 
> 
> -He's all about neurosis, in other words, people at their ultimate worst. How often are people at their ultimate worst? I relate to his sexual four (and by extension Bea Chestnut's) description when I'm a really shitty human being. Beyond that, not so much. And especially not now that I've become more aware of these qualities in myself and have therefore in many ways moved past them, not to mention matured. Also, his sexual four description is extremely extroverted. If you wanted to pin a tritype to it, I'd go with 478 or 468 (plus add an extremely heavy 3 wing to that Bea Chestnut description.)
> ...


When you say that Naranjo's Sx4 description is 'extremely extroverted', and describe this 'flaw' in terms of 'tritype', this basically suggests that you identified certain "ingredients" that in your view "impurifies" the tomato-soup with flavors that belong to another type of soup, or in case of Chestnut, an ingredient that is too strongly present to be exemplary for the 'real sx tomato-soup'.

And then you argue that if any tomato soup should not taste like tomato soup, it's Sp tomato-soup, because it is counter-tomato ;p, ...although you don't put much stock in the concept of counter-tomato. (though it appears it served your convience using it to negate someone else's 'tomatoness'). 

Really, I don't see how the human example is un-4 ish, and I don't see sp4's description as un-4ish either. If you can't reconcile these 3 subtype descriptions as the same type, and can't get your head around the concept of counter-type, this could be indicative that your understanding of the type and its dynamic with instincts and neurosis is not enough profound yet. 

With regard to Naranjo being locked in Freud, which I believe is highly exaggerated, I'll quote this paragraph from CN



Naranjo CN said:


> I can say of myself what I have never heard of anybody else saying: Karen Horney is my favorite psychological author. True, Freud was a prophet—a socio-cultural change agent of great magnitude—yet he, who for years shone in my intellectual heavens like a father figure, is someone whose works I cannot read today without some embarrassment. Perls has written that “From Fenichel I got confusion; from Reich brazenness; from Horney human involvement without terminology.”


----------



## Hunger (Jul 21, 2011)

Why is Harry Potter a social 9?

And where does Daniel Day Lewis scale on your typings?


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> honestly, this is one I was a bit ambivalent on. she just seems very uptight and has this contemptuous, pissed off smile that I've only ever seen in 1s and a few Sexual 4s
> 
> 
> she comes across as 1-ish, but more down to earth, less rigid and more sensitive. additionally, she is very success oriented, poised and knows how to market herself well. I think she is a wonderful example of 3w4 Sp/Sx


Re: Renee Fleming. If she is a 3w4 Sp/Sx, then she's the only moderately healthy example of that type I know. Everyone else seems to be some kind of a douche (Tiger Woods, Kanye West, Sting, etc.).


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

L a _social_ 5? Huh. Not that I disagree, I've just never even considered that before. I tend to think of him as sp/sx. I always saw Light as sp rather than social too. Not that being a social dominant makes you benevolent, but he seems to really lack a focus on others. (Aside from killing them. lol.) I think his charm and social persona (and his wanting to be seen as a god) has more to do with him being a 3, than anything.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Clarke said:


> L a _social_ 5? Huh. Not that I disagree, I've just never even considered that before. I tend to think of him as sp/sx. I always saw Light as sp rather than social too. Not that being a social dominant makes you benevolent, but he seems to really lack a focus on others. (Aside from killing them. lol.) I think his charm and social persona (and his wanting to be seen as a god) has more to do with him being a 3, than anything.


that's a reductionist approach to looking at instincts. Social 5 is the Expert and the most purely intellectual of the 5 subtypes (Sexual 5 is more the Romantic, Self Preservation 5 is the Recluse/Miser).


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> that's a reductionist approach to looking at instincts. Social 5 is the Expert and the most purely intellectual of the 5 subtypes (Sexual 5 is more the Romantic, Self Preservation 5 is the Recluse/Miser).


Yeah, I can see that in him. Recluse/Miser doesn't feel too off the mark for him either. Do you think so/sx or so/sp for him?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

The Scorched Earth said:


> Re: Renee Fleming. If she is a 3w4 Sp/Sx, then she's the only moderately healthy example of that type I know. Everyone else seems to be some kind of a douche (Tiger Woods,* Kanye West*, Sting, etc.).


Kanye West?  
he's clearly Sexual 6w7 imo. Self Preservation 3s are down to earth, seemingly modest people who spend most of their time thinking about their work, what needs to get done, how to make things better, etc. if I were to arrange all 27 subtypes in terms of tendencies toward narcissism, they would be near the bottom of the list with 9s (at the top would be non-Social 7s, 2s, Sexual 8s and Sexual 4s)


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Clarke said:


> Yeah, I can see that in him. Recluse/Miser doesn't feel too off the mark for him either. Do you think so/sx or so/sp for him?


I could see either, but probably So/Sp (more down to earth and pragmatic than I imagine Sp-last 5)


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> Kanye West?
> he's clearly Sexual 6w7 imo. Self Preservation 3s are down to earth, seemingly modest people who spend most of their time thinking about their work, what needs to get done, how to make things better, etc. if I were to arrange all 27 subtypes in terms of tendencies toward narcissism, they would be near the bottom of the list with 9s (at the top would be non-Social 7s, 2s, Sexual 8s and Sexual 4s)


That being said, there aren't too many examples of likable Sp/Sx 3w4's. Or for that matter, Sx/Sp.


----------



## Sina (Oct 27, 2010)

@_Swordsman of Mana_

Gandhi as Social 7 is the dumbest typing I have ever heard. The only other that comes close is that of 'mother' Teresa as a 7, who's a 1w2 not a 2 as is commonly said . We've gone over this.

Gandhi is the most obvious example of 1w9 ever. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar as 2's is utterly laughable. We've already gone over this too. Next, you'll Type Genghis Khan at 9w1.

Nicole Kidman is a 3w4 sx/sp. I am not going to buy that whole bubbly, perky shit you've been peddling for Sexual 3s. We discussed this recently, and I've quoted Naranjo and Ichazo to you, considering you claim to be working in the former's "tradition", explained it in simpler terms as well.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Vajra said:


> , you'll Type Genghis Khan at 9w1.


8w9 Sp/Sx imo



> Nicole Kidman is a 3w4 sx/sp. I am not going to buy that whole bubbly, perky shit you've been peddling for Sexual 3s. We discussed this recently, and I've quoted Naranjo and Ichazo to you, considering you claim to be working in the former's "tradition", explained it in simpler terms as well.


I have counter-quotes, but I shall respond when I'm less tired.


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

Vajra said:


> @_Swordsman of Mana_
> 
> Gandhi as Social 7 is the dumbest typing I have ever heard. The only other that comes close is that of 'mother' Teresa as a 7, who's a 1w2 not a 2 as is commonly said . We've gone over this.
> 
> ...


Yeah Sexual 3's seem a lot darker than some of those descriptions claim. Half of the real-life examples are either ruined porn stars or serial killers.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

The Scorched Earth said:


> Yeah Sexual 3's seem a lot darker than some of those descriptions claim. Half of the *mistyped* real-life examples are either ruined porn stars or serial killers.


fixed


----------



## DomNapoleon (Jan 21, 2012)

Vajra said:


> @_Swordsman of Mana_
> 
> Gandhi as Social 7 is the dumbest typing I have ever heard. The only other that comes close is that of 'mother' Teresa as a 7, who's a 1w2 not a 2 as is commonly said . We've gone over this.
> 
> Gandhi is the most obvious example of 1w9 ever. Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar as 2's is utterly laughable. We've already gone over this too. *Next, you'll Type Genghis Khan at 9w1*.


That's because @Swordsman of Mana is obsessed with the subtypes, forgetting what *is* the core of each enneagram. That completely distorts his perception of the enneagram and he is fulfilling himself full bullshit. Like the other day he suggested I was social 7 based on the descriptions of social 7 subtype. That was kinda funny. :laughing: I am not a 7 at all, despise I love the type.


----------



## The Scorched Earth (May 17, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> fixed


So how would you describe an unhealthy Sexual 3?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Mandraque said:


> That's because @Swordsman of Mana is obsessed with the subtypes, forgetting what *is* the core of each enneagram. That completely distorts his perception of the enneagram and he is fulfilling himself full bullshit.* Like the other day he suggested I was social 7 based on the descriptions of social 7 subtype. That was kinda funny. :laughing: I am not a 7 at all, despise I love the type.*


oh please, you suggested the same thing on multiple occasions (including precisely the time at which you accused me of it), so you have no room to talk


----------

