# Random Enneagram Thoughts, Ideas, Vents, etc.



## Lunar Light (Jun 6, 2013)

Thought this would be a good thread for the main ennea forum. I feel like a general one for everyone would be pretty cool, also more accessible to the forum at large, both for viewing and discussing. A lot of the time, I have thoughts but don't feel they warrant a thread. Thus they get lost in my brain or remain forever in off-forum interactions, as they don't really fit elsewhere. 

Discuss the nine types, instincts, sub-theories like subtypes and tritype, authors, tests, mistypes, misconceptions... whatever is floating around your mind that is related to enneagram  (random things that annoy you in other types or yourself, things you like. Idk, everything yo).

_____

When I started writing again, I realized recently that I've always idealized type 7s, especially sx 7s. All my characters that are based off me are either genuinely 7 or pseudo-7 (generally counterphobic 6w7). 

Then I looked at my life as a whole and I think I understand why. I'm a highly phobic 6 and I've always wanted to transcend this fear, inhibition, hesitance that constantly plagued me (even when I wasn't fully aware that they were those things). Cp 6s, who are generally nonetheless controlled by authority even when they're rebelling because of the fixation on it, were still a step up from where I was as a kid. 

Don't mean to glorify 7s, but to me, 7s were even better, as authority / rules generally seem unable to contain the natural confidence and exuberance they have. It's far less of a neurotic thing, at least. In addition, I deeply admired their passion and forwardness with attaining their desires. A lot of them just seem able to own themselves in a way I haven't fully been able to yet. Like, here I am and I'm all awkward and constantly trying to modify what I say because of my deep inner uncertainty. It's literally happening as I'm writing this UGHHHHH.


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

Finally, someone made this thread! I had this idea months ago but never did anything with it. ('-')

And any random thoughts I had I've forgotten.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

I thought bubble that I must say quickly. Is that we are overly focusing solely on the individual and not on the culture and constructs that we arise from our various enneagram activities. People often come to the ennegram solely for the fact that they might become more "enlightened", but I believe that this might actually shut oneself off into any form of actual self-actualization. It might be true that we have one type, but I believe that the environment could also be typed around them. Several of the cleverer members have exposited on the idea of police, firefighting groups that focus on the 6ish based mentality of impermeability. Or the "earth-based" (as I call them) movements that are focused on meaning, sensation and pleasure, like tumblr. The pissing contest, argument culture that is based on the chans which reflects the water (Image)/fire (gut) type well enough. This forum's over all (air) head typish focus on knowledge, and how to properly use it, and other such categorizations that might be useful to analyze. Not as as silly side project, but as an important part of what the ennea/dodegram might provide for us as a whole. It comes from the western thought of individualism, without taking into context what sort of influences that you are subjected to. Both consciously and not.


----------



## DomNapoleon (Jan 21, 2012)

Lunar Light said:


> Thought this would be a good thread for the main ennea forum. I feel like a general one for everyone would be pretty cool, also more accessible to the forum at large, both for viewing and discussing. A lot of the time, I have thoughts but don't feel they warrant a thread. Thus they get lost in my brain or remain forever in off-forum interactions, as they don't really fit elsewhere.
> 
> Discuss the nine types, instincts, sub-theories like subtypes and tritype, authors, tests, mistypes, misconceptions... whatever is floating around your mind that is related to enneagram  (random things that annoy you in other types or yourself, things you like. Idk, everything yo).
> 
> ...


I also idealize type 7. :crying::crying: I wished so badly to be a 7. The seem to be the ''happy'' type, without being affected by anxiety or negative thoughts. The way they pursuit their passions... it's just admirable. But the truth is that I am a 5w6 (with a strong wing 6), and I have a huge connection to type 7. It makes me go healthy, fun-looking, more extroverted in a sense.


----------



## Lunar Light (Jun 6, 2013)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> Finally, someone made this thread! I had this idea months ago but never did anything with it. ('-')
> 
> And any random thoughts I had I've forgotten.


Haha, I got your back yo . I've always wanted to make something like this so that those thoughts wouldn't be lost. The enneagram forum feels a bit dry at times too, so I thought this would be nice instead of waiting around for an interesting thread to pop up. Something like this would allow for some more flow because it's so loose and open.

I feel so soc for this. Looking out for the forum, aye, and trying to create a more accessible opportunity for discussion :tongue:. 



Sixty Nein said:


> I thought bubble that I must say quickly. Is that we are overly focusing solely on the individual and not on the culture and constructs that we arise from our various enneagram activities. People often come to the ennegram solely for the fact that they might become more "enlightened", but I believe that this might actually shut oneself off into any form of actual self-actualization. It might be true that we have one type, but I believe that the environment could also be typed around them.
> [...]


This is a good point. Looking specifically to oneself does naturally allow for some enlightenment, but considering those constructs larger than ourselves help connect the dots of bigger patterns. Understanding the interplay of my enneagram types and my family's was quite helpful, but I feel like I gained a lot from considering the actual culture itself, as well...something I credit to @hal0hal0, who understands the 2 pride of Chinese culture really well . 



Mandraque said:


> I also idealize type 7. :crying::crying: I wished so badly to be a 7. The seem to be the ''happy'' type, without being affected by anxiety or negative thoughts. The way they pursuit their passions... it's just admirable. But the truth is that I am a 5w6 (with a strong wing 6), and I have a huge connection to type 7. It makes me go healthy, fun-looking, more extroverted in a sense.


Ugh, yeah. I get what you're saying with "happy" though I think I'd describe it more as a sort of indomitable spirit, even when things are really difficult and they've been broken down. Something that's influenced by positive outlook, maybe? I see it in one of my characters and I just envy it so much. It can be so beautiful and I feel like I understand it better after reconnecting with the type. At this point, I do see that they aren't invincible, a mistake I made earlier that I'm glad @Vajra helped me unlearn.


----------



## Vive (Nov 11, 2013)

Stupid tritype of mine, it's almost like I can never truly be honest with myself and others because I notice myself copying some of their mannerisms, the way they talk, the words they use, so I can fit in. I really need to pay attention to such moments, and if I don't then often I will end up seeing how I have contradicted myself at so many points, and it just annoys the shit out of me. The same goes for this forum, when I post something, I always find myself somehow copying certain points of view from people, always working from what others say, but when I just have to make something myself out of nothing, seemingly forgetting to apply most of my own knowledge something like starting a thread, or posting in such a venting topic, I just feel empty, I have no clue what to say. 

I find honesty to be very important, but it's a bad value to have if you don't even know if you yourself are being honest most of the time, I feel rather self-deceptive, but at the same time I'm not sure how much I'm just unnecessarily worrying, but then again, I might have a point.


----------



## Ik3 (Mar 22, 2015)

Lunar Light said:


> Thought this would be a good thread for the main ennea forum. I feel like a general one for everyone would be pretty cool, also more accessible to the forum at large, both for viewing and discussing. A lot of the time, I have thoughts but don't feel they warrant a thread. Thus they get lost in my brain or remain forever in off-forum interactions, as they don't really fit elsewhere.
> 
> Discuss the nine types, instincts, sub-theories like subtypes and tritype, authors, tests, mistypes, misconceptions... whatever is floating around your mind that is related to enneagram  (random things that annoy you in other types or yourself, things you like. Idk, everything yo).
> 
> ...


As a 7w8, I am flattered by the way you seem to view 7s

I will say that we are somewhat shallow, however. Not in the stereotypical way, but in a more.... practical way? It's hard to describe, but my own experience is that our behavior is very predictable. We think of ourselves as deep and complex, and yet our actions and decisions still follow very simple patterns. We may have put a lot of thought and contemplation into a specific choice or discussion, but in the end, we're really just validating what most others already know will happen, inside ourselves. 

It's kind of silly, really... And we often don't even know we're doing it. It's like "I'm so persuasive that I'm going to persuade myself to do what I already want to do, and then act smug like it was an actual choice." 

Not sure if any of that makes sense to anyone else.. *shrug*


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

Okay, not entirely legit, but there's an ad I keep seeing on Youtube where this woman in a yoga class thinks "They look so non-judgmental....I don't trust that." And the first thing I thought was "I think I found a Six..."

Also, how many other people would like to be any other type than their actual one? I still keep thinking Ninedom is boring, enough that it seems I spend more time on the Four forum these days than the Nine forum...


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

*General ennegram observations*

I can only speak from my own personal experience but I was reflecting on intertype relations and this reminded both of a thread in the 4 forums and Socionics relationships in between types. Those aren't always 100% accurate as every individual is different and you can't expect humans to be perfect stereotypes or feel the same way but I've noticed a pattern.

I think that people whose cores belong to the same triad (in my case the frustration triad) tend to understand and motivate each other much more easily than 'clashing ones'. For examples, snowflake storms aside, I tend to have an immediate understanding with other type 4s and I adore type 7s. One of my friends said that 4s and 7s deal with similar struggles while moving in opposite directions (ie: internal focus and external focus, negativity and positivity, self loathing and self encouraging, punishment and excess) and I think it's quite accurate. 4s are cold with an inner fire they don't know how to suppress while 7s radiate warmth but seek emotional intensity.

I don't have much experience with type 1, other than my father that might not be the right comparison, but the 1s I've met were always quick to be encouraging and give me definite lines of improvement and growth. I think types in the same triad can bring out the best and the worst in a person since they often integrate or disintegrate into each other.

Wings are interesting too. 

I can understand a 5's motivations better than a 3's in a way that I can personally connect to, I tend to appreciate 5s a lot although in more of a distant way as both have different approaches with common links. Having a lot of it in my tritype also helps.

Generally one tends to get along the best with people with types similar to their wings (both core and fixes).
People with your disintegration point as core are hard to swallow, I'm still trying to appreciate healthy 2s.

Type 4 and type 6 is an interesting connection, I'm not saying that only out of bias (my boyfriend and a large amount of people I like or I'm kind of close to) but the thing about 6 and 4 is that both feel a deep sense of alienation, both seek truth and realness, both feel extremely self conscious and fighting it (or succumbing in the case of sp-doms, I'm speaking from a sx-dom perspective).

It's interesting how we think about the same issues but our ways to deal with those are completely different. Relation vs Individualism, Rationality vs Emotion, emotional openness but hiding fear vs showing fear but hiding deep private emotions. Different ideas of trust, strength, self image and yet there's that link that draws them to each other and results in a rollercoaster that might end in perfect harmony or war.

Integration types tend to be admired or idolized, perhaps.
It's all very subjective although many's favorite type is either in their triad or same realm (head/heart/gut).


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

I think this thread is a great idea. I like to read the SX thread but don't really feel comfortable posting in it; since I'm an SX second.


----------



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

Chesire Tower said:


> I think this thread is a great idea. I like to read the SX thread but don't really feel comfortable posting in it; since I'm an SX second.


I sometimes post in it anyway, and now I'm considering sx-last. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Don't think that will stop me, but hey. Still a nice thread to have, though.


----------



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

Vive said:


> Stupid tritype of mine, it's almost like I can never truly be honest with myself and others because I notice myself copying some of their mannerisms, the way they talk, the words they use, so I can fit in. I really need to pay attention to such moments, and if I don't then often I will end up seeing how I have contradicted myself at so many points, and it just annoys the shit out of me.


Oh, I forgot to comment on this before (or I was too lazy to). I notice myself that I can be prone to copying the person I talk to, but in a way I do it... deliberately? At least I'm aware of doing it and can stop myself if I want to. Although that arguably makes it worse. Like, "oh, I like their personality. *tries to steal it*" Or something like that. >_> (Just now I got tempted to compare myself to a magpie, but a quick google search seems to show that they _don't _actually like to steal things, so not the best comparison.) As for copying others point of view, I don't know about that (though I can be too anxious to argue against things I disagree with), but they can stick to my mind easily. Like I can watch a movie and might think about how a friend would react to it and I can see him criticizing certain aspects and I might even be like "well... yes," and mention those things myself or whatever, thus voicing opinions that weren't originally my own. Or I might just get annoyed with him, but yeah. Although it's not entirely a bad thing, I think, because then it's like I have someone playing devil's advocate in my mind. Even if it can feel a bit lazy to pick up on other people's thinking like that, I like to be open to other opinions if I'm able to.


----------



## HellCat (Jan 17, 2013)

really, you had the chance to say anything in the world and you chose to lash out and criticize strangers instead? damaged little girl, "nobody here"


----------



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

Does anyone else get jealous if, say, they see someone else thank their friend's posts? Not like this happens with _every _friend I have... but still, it's kind of ridiculous. I remember @mimesis wrote an interesting post on jealousy and the Sp instinct once, and now I'm trying to pick apart how jealousy relates to the instincts in my case. This stuff is surprisingly confusing, I guess because of the added distress making it hard to be really thorough about this stuff. And I usually tend to feel decently self-aware, and now I'm confused by my own feelings. >_>


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I don't get why jealousy is associated with fear of abandonment?When I'm jealous it's not because I have a fear for my relationship with the person but because...I don't know,all I know is that we can live million miles apart and never talk and I can still be jealous if they talk to someone else,so how it is about abandonment if I'm already "abandoned"?Or am I taking it too literally?


----------



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

@Living dead
Hmm, well. It likely happens because of _some _reason. In that case, it wouldn't be a _fear _of abandonment so much as it's worsening the sense of abandonment perhaps? Although I guess it could be for other reasons.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Worsening of sense of abandonment,maybe.But all I want is for them to feel the same way ,or at least to not feel anything similar towards anyone else.Basically either love only me or don't love anyone.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jun 3, 2012)

As someone who rejected the possibility of type 9 as a gut fix right from the get-go and clung to type 8 for dear life, I'd like to write about what I've learned after coming to accept the type nine influence within me.

First of all, I rejected the type because I thought nines were weak. All the descriptions paint them as passive, fearful of conflict and unable to defend themselves- hence why I was repulsed by the idea of being a 9-fixer. In no way do I back down from conflict or struggle to stand up for myself. I relate to the basic fear of type eight: being harmed or controlled by others.

I am always in control of myself and my own feelings, and thus, no one can exert power over me, so 8 seemed to fit perfectly. But... this is actually not how eights deal with conflict. I can't speak for them, but as a 9 fixer, the way I respond to the anger of others is by completely shutting down and going cold. It is impossible to drag me into conflict because there is no way to make me do anything I don't want to do. I don't avoid conflict. I simply refuse to be consumed by it.

However, I become emotionally unresponsive when attacked because I fear _my own anger_, not the anger of others. I perceive going into a rage in response to anger as a loss of power- so I never go on the offensive. I never "explode" the way most people do. I am incapable of it.

I ignore my own anger because I fear losing control over myself, and this often gives me the upper hand over others. It's _so_ empowering when you realize that you are the only one who is able to think straight. I could be facing someone hell-bent on destroying me, blinded by their own fury, and feel immensely powerful because I know that I can bend the situation to my will.

Anger breaks down walls and defenses- when people let themselves be consumed by the fire inside, they become vulnerable in their quest to tear the other person down. They forget to protect themselves as they go on the offensive and reveal all of their weaknesses and insecurities in the heat of the moment. They don't mean to, but I've seen it happen over and over again- so many times that it's now impossible for me to lose control because I feel horrified at the thought of revealing myself like that.

The nice thing is that nothing infuriates these people more than the absence of a reaction. Because they're waiting for _you_ to do what they did, to lose control and take down your own defenses so that they can gain power over you. But I don't react. I refuse to take their anger seriously and smile as their hands turn to fists. And then they destroy themselves completely.

Why does this work? Anger is the desire to affect the world around you in some way. But it also works both ways: when you refuse to change or be affected by the world around you, you become invulnerable. _This_ is what 9s do. They don't submit or run from conflict like cowards. They simply accept the state of the world and other people as it is, and they refuse to let their environment have power over them because they feel secure in their being. That is what true peace means. It's not the fearful denial of the world, but the full acceptance of it.

I think the eights are often credited as being the most powerful types in the gut triad, but 9s have real power too. I've felt it over and over again in myself, so I'd advise everyone to never underestimate a nine.


----------



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

bellicose said:


> However, I become emotionally unresponsive when attacked because I fear _my own anger_, not the anger of others. *I perceive going into a rage in response to anger as a loss of power*- so I never go on the offensive. I never "explode" the way most people do. I am incapable of it.


Yes, that's pretty much my main reason for disliking anger as well (my own, at least), and I agree with your post/the way you view anger and control in general. Although I'm not that good at actually staying in control/ignoring my anger/remaining unaffected (though I've... gotten better, I guess), which is one reason I'm not 100% sure of being core 9 at least.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jun 3, 2012)

Kink said:


> Yes, that's pretty much my main reason for disliking anger as well (my own, at least), and I agree with your post/the way you view anger and control in general. Although I'm not that good at actually staying in control/ignoring my anger/remaining unaffected (though I've... gotten better, I guess), which is one reason I'm not 100% sure of being core 9 at least.


Yes, I can understand that. I'm not a core 9, so I'm not perfect all the time. I can lose my cool on occasion, usually when someone pokes at something that makes me deeply insecure. However, this is only happens when I'm in a more "safe" environment, like at home or with family where I know that my weaknesses won't be taken advantage of.

I don't know what your type is, but I'd imagine that core 9s can't stay unaffected all the time either. I mean... at the end of the day, the anger has to go _somewhere_. It has to be released in some way because it can't just stay trapped inside of someone forever. I think, with type 9s, it leaks out over time in the form of passive aggression, rather than big explosions like with 8s, and _absolutely not_ during conflict.

I think you can contrast 8 and 9 anger by looking at a nuclear bomb- the anger of the 8 is explosive and quickly destroys everything in its way, while the radiation that comes afterwards can be compared to the way a 9 releases anger, in short bursts over a long period of time. Both are extremely harmful in different ways.

Again, though, I'm not a core 9  I don't want to make any assertions about the type that might be incorrect, but this is my working knowledge of the type.


----------



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

@bellicose
Yeah, I def tend to be more overt about my anger when I'm around my family. When I'm around other people, on the other hand... ehh, it depends. Typically I probably don't show it much, though, so I come across as pretty chill I guess.


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

Chicago captures some enneatypes quite well.

Billy 3w2 sp/so:











2w3 sp/sx (husband 9w8):


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

Velma 7w8 sx/sp:











(Had to divide my post due to Perc's limit for videos in a single post)

Perhaps it doesn't fit here but I didn't know where else to post my associations.


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

Hotaru said:


> Velma 7w8 sx/sp:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I saw this before the videos loaded, and I was hoping to see some Scooby Do, wtf hotaru, way to disappoint.


----------



## Lunar Light (Jun 6, 2013)

I'm always trying to be more than I am because in some way I'm never enough. Having so much superego influence sucks. You see expectations everywhere, some that are truly there, others that are magnified tenfold by your own unrealistic ones for yourself. I look to my childhood and all I can see is me trying to live up to unreachable standards, trying to somehow be "okay" because whatever I did (or didn't do) adhered to this long list of "should"s. I should be stronger. I shouldn't cry. I should be more grateful. I shouldn't let myself be a burden. 

Even now, it's occurred to me on a deeper level how I feel the need to live up to a certain image, how I need to bring forth certain aspects of my personality. How my avatar contributes to this, actually. I have to live up to this sort of stewing and lost but intelligent gaze, to this idea of depth, to this longing and withdrawn vibe that doesn't actually really exist in me. Look at my words and it's apparent. I'm highly present and always have been. Whatever withdrawn vibes that exist are almost purely created from my own idealization of that sort of trait, that sort of mysteriousness that lends itself to what others perceive as "depth." What light there is in my personality must be countered by somberness, a harsh jerk of reality to fit with all of this. It's literally present as I'm writing this. I actually really like who I am, for the most part, but I'm hesitant to show it in a platform such as this one. I fear that others won't see me, won't appreciate me in just a pure expression of myself, so I tend to focus on something that might be of "worth." Accepting myself, in the sense that I actually allow myself to just be myself, is so hard. 

It's shocking to me how much being aware of patterns such as this doesn't actually help, after a certain extent. I've known that I should fight them, and I've learned to as well as how to in most instances - not simply self-consciousness, but subtle passive-aggressiveness and other habits. But knowing can't make the situation go away. It doesn't just stop the whole process. The fear still exists, as does the over-awareness of oneself. Freedom has never felt so close and yet still so far away.

Ugh, >_>.


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

Lunar Light said:


> I'm always trying to be more than I am because in some way I'm never enough. Having so much superego influence sucks. You see expectations everywhere, some that are truly there, others that are magnified tenfold by your own unrealistic ones for yourself. I look to my childhood and all I can see is me trying to live up to unreachable standards, trying to somehow be "okay" because whatever I did (or didn't do) adhered to this long list of "should"s. I should be stronger. I shouldn't cry. I should be more grateful. I shouldn't let myself be a burden.
> 
> Even now, it's occurred to me on a deeper level how I feel the need to live up to a certain image, how I need to bring forth certain aspects of my personality. How my avatar contributes to this, actually. I have to live up to this sort of stewing and lost but intelligent gaze, to this idea of depth, to this longing and withdrawn vibe that doesn't actually really exist in me. Look at my words and it's apparent. I'm highly present and always have been. Whatever withdrawn vibes that exist are almost purely created from my own idealization of that sort of trait, that sort of mysteriousness that lends itself to what others perceive as "depth." What light there is in my personality must be countered by somberness, a harsh jerk of reality to fit with all of this. It's literally present as I'm writing this. I actually really like who I am, for the most part, but I'm hesitant to show it in a platform such as this one. I fear that others won't see me, won't appreciate me in just a pure expression of myself, so I tend to focus on something that might be of "worth." Accepting myself, in the sense that I actually allow myself to just be myself, is so hard.
> 
> ...



All. Of. This. 

My idealized traits might be different from yours, but I know I do the same thing. I've started discussing it with someone recently - how much of my mental life is motivated and shaped by image and expectations, albeit personal ones. I have a hazy idea of who I am past what I believe I need to be, but fear letting it out more than occasionally. Because in my view, it has less worth than the ideal, maybe even no worth at all. It's a little...frightening to realize it and to face it. Even more so as, just in the last day, I've become rather aware of just how reflexive this idealization is - it shows in the kind of things and topics I like, the way I write. I'm not entirely certain what's really part of _me_ and what are superego demands.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Not that I don't believe myself to be a 4w3, but I used to be a lot more 5ish and I find that interesting. It was to the point I thought I was a core 5 not a fixer


----------



## Blindspots (Jan 27, 2014)

My tendency towards schizoid behaviors makes figuring my own instinctual stacking rather complicated ._.


(I am aware that SPD is no longer in DSM-V, but I still use the term "schizoid personality" when referring to that particular group of traits and their probable causes and effects.)


----------



## galactic collision (May 1, 2014)

I bet every circus performer or acrobat is a SX 3, 4, 6, or 7.


----------



## FakeLefty (Aug 19, 2013)

This happens all too often.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

FakeLefty said:


> This happens all too often.


I love to say this, but in reality, I'm often insomniatic or too drawn to how my mind and emotions come alive at night for me to fall asleep at a reasonable time


----------



## cinnabun (Apr 11, 2011)

My sx and my 4 were very happy today.


----------



## Maker of helmets (Sep 8, 2014)

I feel like maybe if there were a group of the same or similar Tritype, and subtype, somehow, somewhere, maybe they could understand me best, best in terms of a group understanding me. 

One reason I feel like this would be the case is because I believe other Tritypes are unlikely to be able to speak very well on their experience of a Tritype, if it is not theirs. 

I am inclined, now, to give credence to the Tritype thing, as long as it is used as a tool where one can *self-identify*. 

I sort of feel calling what others' type may be is a bit rubbish, to some extent, because I believe the point of Enneagram theory is about self-identification; it's like a tool for self-development, and if you're not in a position, experientially, where you're able to commit to positive improvements, I think one ends up just resorting to stereotyping themselves, as well as perhaps others, and getting kicks from that.

I don't want to use these systems for others, so much, anymore. I want to use it for myself  But now I feel like I need that bonding and community where I can ENJOY the knowledge that I've gained of myself. Then the knowledge becomes meaningful to me, by sharing it with others for whom it is genuinely meaningful also. 

I wish there were more opportunities where there were others with similar experiences. Not that you need specific kinds of similarity with others in order to be able to connect, but I've found I enjoy my knowledge a lot more when I can share it with others, especially when it is a kind of knowledge which is integral to my understanding of myself... and especially when it is a new-found kind of knowledge! 

It's cool being on here and finding people that write in similar kinds of ways to me. I'm Tritype 146 (inasmuch as I self-identify as that), and have found some others of that type that write similarly, and seem to have a similar kind of spirit, which is comforting, cos it feels like there's not just "one" of me out there .


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

^ ENTP 7w8 sp/sx

I'm preparing interesting insights but for the time being, this works too.


----------



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

Too sad to really write anything in-depth, but it does feel a bit ironic to me how type 4 is supposed to be about realness and shit while at the same time it's into romanticisation, which to me always seemed like the most artificial fucking thing ever.


----------



## 0+n*1 (Sep 20, 2013)

I'm not an artist or close to being or becoming one. But I relate to this song. Whenever I try to use imagination to interpret myself and I feel like I'm using too many words to pretend I'm more than a simple human that's going to die one day or when I perceive me as someone special, that I'm too complicated or complex to be understood or that I am too deep or an intellectual or like a character in a movie or my emotions are very intense and I'm too intense or that I am dark or whatever other fuck, or when I use a lot of exaggeration, decor and beat around the bush, I feel like this. This kind of anger and straightforward way of cutting through all the bullshit. I relate to that type of feeling that is expressed in this song.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

DAE think it's weird that anger is an emotion, fear is an emotion, but ... shame (in my opinion) isn't a pure emotion? Even though shame is the dominant "emotion" of the heart center? Shame seems like a collection of emotions to me, like feeling embarrassed, violated, humiliated, weakness, un-love-able-ness, aloneness, sadness, etc.

I wonder if the heart center is saying that emotions are non-linear and complex.

Huh. :mellow: /Anger is like a cast-iron pan. Good for cooking food. Good for hitting people. What else would I need?


----------



## galactic collision (May 1, 2014)

cir said:


> DAE think it's weird that anger is an emotion, fear is an emotion, but ... shame (in my opinion) isn't a pure emotion? Even though shame is the dominant "emotion" of the heart center? Shame seems like a collection of emotions to me, like feeling embarrassed, violated, humiliated, weakness, un-love-able-ness, aloneness, sadness, etc.
> 
> I wonder if the heart center is saying that emotions are non-linear and complex.
> 
> Huh. :mellow: /Anger is like a cast-iron pan. Good for cooking food. Good for hitting people. What else would I need?


I had a therapist tell me that anger is a secondary emotion - a reaction to fear or disappointment. So I've kind of always been like "???" for every center that isn't the head center. I don't fully understand anger, and shame even less. But that's why I'm here - I want to learn. I want to be able to understand.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

justforthespark said:


> I had a therapist tell me that anger is a secondary emotion - a reaction to fear or disappointment. So I've kind of always been like "???" for every center that isn't the head center. I don't fully understand anger, and shame even less. But that's why I'm here - I want to learn. I want to be able to understand.


 Huh, really? What would your therapist say are primary emotions? By any chance, are there three of them? :crazy:

Because this idea is intriguing to me, I googled it, and found this image of basic emotions:









And since I'm such a robot, there's this link, and "shame" is listed under "sadness", along with sadness (again), shame, neglect, suffering, etc.

I like the words "love, joy, surprise, anger, sadness, fear" to describe the six primary emotions. And since I make no effort to hide my bias, I totally think anger is a primary emotion. So here's my theory:

love, joy, and surprise is probably freely available to everybody after enough work on core problems
anger -> anger triad
fear -> fear triad
sadness -> shame triad
Unless I want to get fancy:

anger -> anger triad; when healthy: anger -> love
fear -> fear triad; when healthy: fear -> surprise
sadness -> shame triad; when healthy: sadness -> joy

According to this table, "hate" falls under "anger".













> There are also moves to minimize the number of basic emotions. Jack et al. (2014) analyzed the 42 facial muscles which shape emotions in the face and came up with only *four basic emotions*. Starting from the Ekman group of anger, fear, surprise, disgust, happiness and sadness, they found fear and surprise are similar, with 'eyes wide open' as the person increases visual attention. Anger and disgust are also similar, both starting with nose wrinkling.


 Hmm... so that leaves us with:

Anger/disgust
Fear/surprise
Sadness
Happiness
That's kind of cool. I'm relatively positive that happiness is available to everybody once they've sufficiently worked out their core emotions. And apparently "love" isn't a basic emotion! :shocked:


----------



## galactic collision (May 1, 2014)

cir said:


> Huh, really? What would your therapist say are primary emotions? By any chance, are there three of them? :crazy:
> 
> Because this idea is intriguing to me, I googled it, and found this image of basic emotions:
> 
> ...


That's interesting! I think there are several different schools of thought on this. I had an acting professor who taught my class that there are six cathartic human emotions that everyone expresses in the exact same way (when they are in their purest form, i.e. catharsis, it's the only thing you are experiencing and you are experiencing it completely) -
-Joy
-Anger
-Fear
-Sorrow
-Tenderness
-Erotic love

So almost the same as the list you found. 

My professor was trying to make a point about emotional expression and how most expressions of emotion come from six main points (and that all other emotional states are a mixture of these six) but I think it can be relevant here. I think this theory (or yours) can be applied in tandem with Enneagram, but I'm still interested to know where shame comes in. I read a thread on here once where people were discussing how shame was interchangeable with grief as the core emotion of the heart center. Shame and grief, after all, are both a reaction to the loss of something, which is a core idea of the image center, something all heart types share (this sense of loss). I'd be interested to hear your input on this, as well as the input of some 2s, 3s, and 4s. @Animal @Gray Romantic @kaleidoscope @lycanized @KindOfBlue06


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

Hitofuri said:


> I wonder whether most discussions on the differences between types can be boiled down to this question:
> 
> If we're both talking about the enneagram, why aren't you understanding me the way I understand myself?
> 
> Yes, I mean to use "me", pertaining to the individual, rather than "my type". The discussions seem to end up about the individuals in question. Not that I think it's wrong not to be objective in topics like this; after all, enneagram had to do with the subjective experiences of an individual.


 The thing that bothers me, in this forum, is that people write off the perceived differences to being another type in a different typing system, like "oh I'm ___ in myer briggs" or "oh I'm ___ in socionics", when a lot of easier-to-understand explanations are at the cultural level rather than needing to bring in another personality system. And I'm not just saying this because I specialize in the enneagram and have little interest in other typing systems.

It's one thing to be an eight and have overt anger issues that my friends notice. It's another when my friends, and the relevant ones in this anecdote are US-born Americans, think that when I'm talking to my family in Chinese, they think we're arguing all the time. So when they ask me whether I'm angry or whether we're arguing, I get confused and go "No? I was just telling them that I'm going somewhere", and then they recall stories that, in the end, say that they think Chinese sounds like an angry language. Sort of like how many English speakers might think German sounds like an angry language.

Like, I know I have anger problems, but...


----------



## Blindspots (Jan 27, 2014)

cir said:


> The thing that bothers me, in this forum, is that people write off the perceived differences to being another type in a different typing system, like "oh I'm ___ in myer briggs" or "oh I'm ___ in socionics", when a lot of easier-to-understand explanations are at the cultural level rather than needing to bring in another personality system. And I'm not just saying this because I specialize in the enneagram and have little interest in other typing systems.
> 
> It's one thing to be an eight and have overt anger issues that my friends notice. It's another when my friends, and the relevant ones in this anecdote are US-born Americans, think that when I'm talking to my family in Chinese, they think we're arguing all the time. So when they ask me whether I'm angry or whether we're arguing, I get confused and go "No? I was just telling them that I'm going somewhere", and then they recall stories that, in the end, say that they think Chinese sounds like an angry language. Sort of like how many English speakers might think German sounds like an angry language.
> 
> Like, I know I have anger problems, but...


I think it's a lack of familiarity, or even awareness that people's behavior can be interpreted other contexts. The contemporary US culture seems to be the assumed context in PerC, but I live outside the States, and it's sometimes hard to talk about my observations of the people around me on this forum without other members knowing about the nuances of the culture I'm situated in.

"But why would you be concerned about your uncle? He's not that even closely related to you." The culture I grew up in (over)values family ties, and you can, even expected to, influence your family no matter how distantly related to you are. I happen to still be attached (willingly) to my parents, and I'm angry that my uncle is making them pay his debts. It may appear that I'm being a nosy perfectionistic 1 nitpicking my uncle, because in one culture my parents' business and my uncle's business are none of my business. But how can I relay that the culture I live in sees this differently, and even I see this differently from that culture?

Also, cultures take time and effort to dissect and analyze than a personality. Being members of PerC, it's predictable people are already more inclined to discuss things in terms of typology. It's like the carpenter and his hammer.

Still, I do agree cultural differences should at least be acknowledged, even if they're not completely understood.




You touched on something else that's been bothering me a bit. Type in this forum tends to be discussed in isolation, as if individuals are always pure archetypes of their type, and are unchanged by time and space and other circumstances. Maybe types themselves can be discussed like that, but perhaps individuals can be talked about in a more holistic way.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@_cir_ @_Hitofuri_

I agree with your point about culture. I've tried to make the point that Enneagram type doesn't describe personality but describes one of many influences upon personality (albeit a very important influence). Another influence on personality is cultural background for example. 

IMO, the problem with discussing Enneagram type is that many people look at it as a way to categorize personality traits, behaviors, characteristics, etc. instead of looking underneath personality to see what the core of Enneagram type actually is (personality may express Enneagram type but how it gets expressed is not going to be exactly the same for everyone - many other influences come into play that are unique for each individual). I'd love to see more discussions on what the core of each type is but I don't think anyone really knows (at least I've never seen a satisfying answer to that question).


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> @_cir_ @_Hitofuri_
> 
> I agree with your point about culture. I've tried to make the point that Enneagram type doesn't describe personality but describes one of many influences upon personality (albeit a very important influence). Another influence on personality is cultural background for example.
> 
> IMO, the problem with discussing Enneagram type is that many people look at it as a way to categorize personality traits, behaviors, characteristics, etc. instead of looking underneath personality to see what the core of Enneagram type actually is (*personality may express Enneagram type but how it gets expressed is not going to be exactly the same for everyone - many other influences come into play that are unique for each individual*). I'd love to see more discussions on what the core of each type is but I don't think anyone really knows (at least I've never seen a satisfying answer to that question).


 The "core" of a type is one of those situations where "less is more". The fewer boundaries that are discrete, but not to the extent that there are zero discrete boundaries, the more variations can be made. Subjectivity needs to be used to fill in the rest of the picture, and the closest thing you can get to "objectivity" is to see how many other members across *all* types can vouch for its relate-ability (which requires some emotional competency and possibly cultural awareness). It's more art than science.

The "core" of each type has a whole lot of breadth and depth, so even if people do discuss the cores of their types, then you'll run into these problems where not everyone can agree on whether something is "core" or auxiliary or tertiary. Or whether what people say is prescriptive or descriptive.

Not all correctly identified people within a type will agree. This may have to do with cultural influences that are absent for some members of a type, or the quality of a person's environmental upbringing and conditioned behavior, or even health, etc.
Then you have deliberately mistyped people who maintain themselves of "being a type" who will argue and attempt to invalidate some newly proposed information about the core of a type in order to protect their image (and discredit the image of whoever they're arguing against). These people tend to be focused on the "I'm not like that" declaration while not providing depth of reasoning.
Then you have deliberately mistyped people who do so to prove a point about how futile it is to type other people down over the internet.
And then you have people who are *genuinely* mis-identified, but provided they eventually find their true type, their experiences while *genuinely* mis-identified should still be valid experiences of said core.
And then you have correctly-identified members outside of the core in question with a good understanding of themselves and how they relate to others, and their points of views should be considered as well.
And then you have correctly-identified members outside of the core in question with a faulty understanding of the enneagram themselves.
Because everyone has all nine types within them, everyone will experience each core differently. Whether something is "valid" or "possible" depends on whether people can provide some personal reasoning, where *both* the emotional and logical components are congruent with each other.
In my example, people IRL could think that I'm an eight... and they should have a lot of reasons to, but if they chose the reasoning "I'm always arguing with my family" while I'm just speaking to them in Chinese... then...

English speakers are used to "ROY G BIV". But I personally think indigo is too forced. And in other cultures, blue and green are the "same'ish" range of colors. Think about what what people in this thread are saying. And some of them are _native_ speakers. It's like how a foreigner can speak a language in a technically correct fashion that's understandable by others, but a native would simply accept the imperfections and ambiguity within their native tongue because to them, it's always been that way. When trying to isolate "the" "core" of a type, you're going to run into those kinds of problems. People can really only identify fragments of a core at a time.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

cir said:


> The "core" of a type is one of those situations where "less is more". The fewer boundaries that are discrete, but not to the extent that there are zero discrete boundaries, the more variations can be made. Subjectivity needs to be used to fill in the rest of the picture, and the closest thing you can get to "objectivity" is to see how many other members across *all* types can vouch for its relate-ability (which requires some emotional competency and possibly cultural awareness). It's more art than science.


IME, it's simply about recognizing type as it operates internally. The biggest problem to me is that people are looking in the wrong place (personality) when it's really something going on within. The other problem is when people try to describe it in terms of what they've read instead of just looking at and describing what's there (their actual experience). 

It seems very much like I'm the only one trying to find the core of type. I wouldn't mind being proven wrong on this because I think it would be easier if more people were looking for it as well but I imagine that's just beyond most people's interest in it or they just don't know how to do that or they just don't think it's possible (it's simply too open to interpretation). I guess I just have to push on forward in my effort and try to ask the right questions of others when I can.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> IME, it's simply about recognizing type as it operates internally.


 Yes, and for it to be "simply", that means there's an internal logic where both emotions and thoughts are aligned together and pointing in the same direction. Think of how point one is the "logical" anger type with a line to the "emotional" heart type, or that point eight is the "emotional" anger type with a line to the "logical" head type. That there should be an "easy" way of explaining it, so that even if you can only detect half of the information conveyed, it still leads you to the right place. Like the whole point of the "explain like I'm five" subreddit.

Then it turns out that what's "easy" for me is incredibly difficult for others. I think that, perhaps related to me being 873, "triple id", something that communicates "the lowest barriers of entry", or "so simple a child can do it", that I'm particularly susceptible to these influences: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Processing_fluency


> Processing fluency may be one of the foundations of intuition[13] and the "Aha!" experience.[14][15]


 Where I would describe the "Aha! experience" or the "lightbulb going off in my head" experience as my seven'ness. The gluttony thing is to get our brains to be excited and light up in that way. Seriously, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, the emotion of "surprise" is a variant of "fear". This emotion is necessary for that "novel" experience" that sevens are after in their gluttony. Within everyone, their point seven experience is when suddenly, things make sense! In the process enneagram, where points in the circumference are understood as an "accumulation" or "integration" or "area under the curve" relationship, when you get that "lightbulb turns on feeling" in your head, you've entered the third octave of something... and preparing the enter the first and/or second octaves of other things...

And yeah, intuition to the eight part...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics


> Mathematical considerations, such as symmetry and complexity, are used for analysis in theoretical aesthetics. The fact that judgments of beauty and judgments of truth both are influenced by processing fluency has been presented as an explanation for why beauty is sometimes equated with truth.[6] Recent research found that people use beauty as an indication for truth in mathematical pattern tasks.


 This even explains why one of type three's virtue is "truthfulness"... which, combined with a type whose Holy Idea is Holy Truth... The virtue is the transformed heart center, and the Holy Idea is the transformed head center, so to _me_, it seems "obvious" that there's an area where "the truth" is aligned in both the heart and head centers.

To relate it back to others in a way that they can understand it? That's a very different skill, and a necessary one so that you can get outside feedback in order to check how "off" or "close" or "calibrated" your internal sense of scale and measurements are.

There is value in understanding how each type is operating internally. There is also value in knowing how each people's internal enneagram measurements are calibrated differently. There are lessons to be learned from investigating the source of their differences. For some people, it even introduces the concepts of "error tolerances" or "ambiguity" or "close enough". It lets us know when we're "speaking the same language" or "talking about the same thing", so to speak. When that understanding is established, it allows the conversation to progress to places where it otherwise couldn't, than if we were to simply recognize and resign to the fact that subjectivity exists, so what's the point in trying to find a common ground?

It's a process. After all, there's the process enneagram too...



> The biggest problem to me is that people are looking in the wrong place (personality) when it's really something going on within. The other problem is when people try to describe it in terms of what they've read instead of just looking at and describing what's there (their actual experience).


 Well, as I have found, for many people, it's because they don't have the language skills to communicate their feelings. There's an interesting irony in the existence of programming languages. If something can be thought as "objective", then that means there's a way to program it into existence. But how many people think programming languages are easier to understand than human languages? Due to the nature of emotions being inherently "subjective", that means there's this chaotic barrier between how someone feels and how they're able to express it. Yet, as a result of being able to work through that, think of how and why art can transcend language barriers.

Being able to express their own feelings is a skill in itself, and it requires practice before they become better at it. It's important for the people who figured out how to do it display an example of it, so that it can communicate "it's possible" and "here's one way how". There is a particular intelligence in mimicry, and I say this to highlight the intelligence center of point three, who is an "id" type. Babies, the "id", and mimicry. Though people might mimic or echo what you've said previously, it could help them in developing their own awareness, voice, and style, and I believe there's a particular kind of authenticity in having a unique style.

While I am annoyed that people tend to write off their differences to other personality systems rather than cultural differences, or how you see it, "in terms of what they've read instead of just looking at and describe what's there (their actual experience)", it could very well be because they haven't had this kind of exposure in learning to express how they feel. That's one of the consequences of "awakenings" or "enlightenment": they are now more aware of greater things, but have yet to find the language to express them. They have to start somewhere. Copying something they've read is better than not doing it at all.



> It seems very much like I'm the only one trying to find the core of type.


 I can see why you _feel_ that way. "Objectively", I also recognize others, myself included, who are also trying to find the "core" of the type. But the problem is in what is defined as the "core". And keep in mind, in this forum, the _shared_ bias we all have is the language of English. By adopting the convention of one language, we automatically subscribe to the biases of that language, which makes some things easier to understand and other things harder to understand (and therefore, we either ignore its existence or its importance).

Think of it this way. The understandings of the enneagram is also available in other languages aside from English, but if you are not able to read or speak in that language, then those kinds of knowledge are inaccessible to you. There's no such thing as a 1:1 translation of things between languages; there are simply thoughts that exist in one language that do not exist in other languages. And even if we all speak English, well, English is only the third most-spoken language in the world. That accommodates a lot of cultural differences. It masks a lot of cultural barriers to understanding.



> I wouldn't mind being proven wrong on this because I think it would be easier if more people were looking for it as well but I imagine that's just beyond most people's interest in it or they just don't know how to do that or they just don't think it's possible (it's simply too open to interpretation). I guess I just have to push on forward in my effort and try to ask the right questions of others when I can.


 Yeah. I've realized I'm very lacking in the "asking the right questions" department.

But also, as @hornet said in another thread, the problems that the enneagram addresses are very dark. It requires people to have the courage to face their own darkness, and it requires people to be able to be honest and own up to their own pain. It's inherently incredibly painful. Which is also interesting, since I'm "triple id", and the "id" is all about looking for pleasure and trying to avoid pain, that, in a sense, _all_ of my growth was a result of being willing to experience the most soul-crushing pain the world has to offer. Things that question the point of living. What I feel is the "abyss" represented in point five (or perhaps 258 entirely) or is represented as the "dark night of the senses/spirit/soul" in 174. Without the existence of pain, there cannot be pleasure. What is the value or meaning of life in the absence of death?

Based on the private messages I'm getting, I've also started to develop an awareness of what is "just the facts" to me is "very dark" for others. I personally think that's a measure of "how asleep humanity is". There are a lot of fucked up things happening in this world that people have resigned to or accepted is "normal". Here's one article that touches on it: *​*6 Toxic Relationship Habits Most People Think Are Normal And the other half of the story: 6 Healthy Relationship Habits Most People Think Are Toxic


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@cir

To tell you the truth, your last post is an example to me of what I mentioned about how people tend to try to match their experience to what they read instead of just looking at the experience directly. People tend to think about the experience in terms of all the theories and concepts in their heads and overcomplicate things thus missing the directness of the experience itself.

I hope I can explain it in a simpler way to people one day. Firstly though, I think people will need to work through or simply let go of all the concepts that get in the way otherwise they'll continually drag that baggage into it and overcomplicate things for themselves. It's funny how people tend to think that the more complicated their understanding is the more they think they understand it when IME at a certain point it actually becomes the opposite (the more complicated their understanding is, the farther they get from it - when they get closer to the experience, understanding it actually becomes simpler and more obvious).


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> @_cir_
> 
> To tell you the truth, your last post is an example to me of what I mentioned about how people tend to try to match their experience to what they read instead of just looking at the experience directly.


 By the way, I really enjoy these kinds of discussions with you. It's rare that people... care enough... to talk about it... 

"Looking at the experience directly" could be quite fleetingly and floodingly sensual, visual, and emotional, yet wordless. There are _not enough_ words to describe the experience of the infinite, and when your brain is being blanked out and flooded by the overloading of your senses that it's difficult to capture a still moment of it for your memory or even capture a still moment for your sanity, and when you start to try to put your experience into words, whatever it was you were concentrating on escapes your focus and is quickly replaced by a different experience, and even if you manage to put your experience into words, there's a "tightening" of the boundaries that causes it to lose their meaning... Very quickly, you'll forget what you were trying to say...



> People tend to think about the experience in terms of all the theories and concepts in their heads and overcomplicate things thus missing the directness of the experience itself.


 There's a *huge* barrier between the _direct_ experience and being able to communicate that experience to others. They're two different things, perhaps with a "prerequisite" kind of relationship. Experience it first, _then_ think or talk about it. The reason why you think the scenario you presented is flawed is because the order of operations is backwards, which relies on some implicit assumption that thinking produces experience.



> I hope I can explain it in a simpler way to people one day. Firstly though, I think people will need to work through or simply let go of all the concepts that get in the way otherwise they'll continually drag that baggage into it and overcomplicate things for themselves.


 Whoa. You hope _you_ can explain it in a simpler way if _other people_ let go of _their_ concepts? That's a boundary violation. Some of those "concepts" are "words", and how do you intend to explain it to people in a "simpler" way if you also choose to let go of the mechanisms of "language" that allows others to understand you? (A possible way is to take LSD, but don't drug other people.) 

When trying to communicate those experiences to others, they have to use words and concepts, and they pick up that vocabulary by reading about other experiences. It's like how in English class, reading more can help people improve their writing. When their writing improves, perhaps, they are able to communicate more concisely or precisely their subjective experiences. Yes, there's a problem where jargon becomes too thick that it prevents people from understanding something, but that's why there are people out there who work on translating information and breaking it down to everyday colloquial language, by usage of analogies/metaphors/idioms if they have to, which could possibly make it easier for others to understand.

It's human nature to attempt to explain their own subjective experiences using concepts they've previously acquired, and it's perfectly allowable to invent new concepts for new ways of understanding. Single-handedly trying to change human nature is an uphill and losing battle. The path of least resistance to me is to learn their language and then translate my experiences into their language. Code-switching. Which is why it appears to you like I'm "stuck in all of those theories and concepts". Sure, some things get lost in translation, but it's better than nothing.

Communication protocols do not work if none of the relevant parties choose to agree and adopt something resembling a mutual standard. If I were in your position, I'm going to choose to accept that those concepts exist for a reason. There's a functional reason for their existence. There's a functional reason that people should not be able to understand something if they do not adopt that communication protocol, and it allows people to filter and select who they want to communicate to. 

It's like, since you don't speak Chinese, you think it's easier to communicate to Chinese people by demanding that all Chinese speakers stop thinking in Chinese. Well, that doesn't mean they're going to know English, so either way, they won't understand you (unless they're bilingual, or have acquired and can fluently use another set of theories and concepts).

Not everything will always be relevant though, so it's good to not over-complicate things and leave out things that could be irrelevant. But why it's relevant or irrelevant needs to be explained, since it will not always be obvious to everyone. However, if you're consistently unsatisfied by all of the valid and possible answers that are given... you're the common denominator in your dissatisfaction... and you think the answer relies on depriving _other_ people of their legitimate understanding... that you refuse to recognize could be legitimate because it goes against your own experiences... which, by the properties of "everyone is unique" that point four symbolizes means everyone's experiences are going to be unique...



> It's funny how people tend to think that the more complicated their understanding is the more they think they understand it when IME at a certain point it actually becomes the opposite (the more complicated their understanding is, the farther they get from it - when they get closer to the experience, understanding it actually becomes simpler and more obvious).


 Sometimes, it's not necessarily "the more complicated their understanding" as much as the sheer magnitude of the flow of their experiences. It could "simply" be "one" "simple" concept, but with an infinite number of manifestations of those concepts. 

The "core" of any type is infinite, and what appears to be "complication" to you are just many, many individual fragments from those cores. The "core" of every type is pure light, essence of being. It's not just a visual thing, but it's also something that's felt in the body. I literally felt weightless, "light". But what does that mean to anyone else? Even if I could explain it to anyone else, if they haven't experienced it themselves, then it won't mean anything to them. I will warn though, a flood of light is also a type of destruction that can cause death. Too much darkness and people can't see; too much light burns off the cornea from your eyes; either way, blindness is the end.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

cir said:


> The "core" of any type is infinite, and what appears to be "complication" to you are just many, many individual fragments from those cores. The "core" of every type is pure light, essence of being.


I think we're talking about two very different things when we use the word "core" of an Enneagram type. For me, I'm thinking of the focus that lies at the root of the type structure. 

The closest example I've seen others write about would be the "inner critic" of type 1 (a self-monitoring as to whether I'm being correct and doing what I should be doing). It doesn't describe personality or variations of how type 1 might be expressed but a "core" focus around which an individual might organize their reality and approach to life. Understanding that core focus helps understand not only where the personality is coming from but also offers a clear distinction between types at a level beneath personality. In other words, we're no longer categorizing traits and behaviors but exploring the process that's driving those. 

I think the trick is to identify these core processes for each type and then have people describe how they experience them working and all the while explore if there's anything more elemental to that structure. Otherwise people are simply looking at surface personality traits and characteristics that may or may not fit particular individuals identifying with a particular type. IMO, the problem arises when people are not trying to understand it from direct experience but from concepts and labels they've learned (e.g., inner critic is very different from labelling type 1 as perfectionist or moralist or reformer or looking at the passion of anger or fixation of resentment, etc. - that just overcomplicates any attempt to get at the core focus).


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> I think we're talking about two very different things when we use the word "core" of an Enneagram type. For me, I'm thinking of the focus that lies at the root of the type structure.


 ... which is a reaction to their perceived loss of connection to light or essence of being...



> The closest example I've seen others write about would be the "inner critic" of type 1 (a self-monitoring as to whether I'm being correct and doing what I should be doing). It doesn't describe personality or variations of how type 1 might be expressed but a "core" focus around which an individual might organize their reality and approach to life.


 Uh huh...











> Understanding that core focus helps understand not only where the personality is coming from but also offers a clear distinction between types at a level beneath personality. In other words, we're no longer categorizing traits and behaviors but exploring the process that's driving those.
> 
> I think the trick is to identify these core processes for each type and then have people describe how they experience them working and all the while explore if there's anything more elemental to that structure.


 Yeah, plenty of people have done that, exploring the process that's driving those behaviors... It's strange to me, considering how often we interact with each other, that you don't recognize when I'm doing that, but many other people do...



> Otherwise people are simply looking at surface personality traits and characteristics that may or may not fit particular individuals identifying with a particular type. *IMO, the problem arises when people are not trying to understand it from direct experience but from concepts and labels they've learned* (e.g., inner critic is very different from labelling type 1 as perfectionist or moralist or reformer or looking at the passion of anger or fixation of resentment, etc. - that just overcomplicates any attempt to get at the core focus).


 I see...









Yeah... I don't get the feeling you understand how body types work. Understanding the Enneagram with Judith Searle


> My personal experience is that this form of intelligence might be characterized as “*direct knowing*,” “gut-level knowing,” or “grounded intuition.” Akin to discernment, it allows me and other body types I know to make distinctions and decisions almost instantaneously. If questioned about my process, I usually fall back on after-the-fact logical explanations of a process that was not initially involved with any intellectual analysis (or conscious emotional progression).


In my opinion, the problem is most people didn't do the reading...


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

cir said:


>


Interesting that you highlighted the temptation for type 5 in the table that says "replacing direct experience with concepts" which is the opposite of what I'm suggesting which is "replacing concepts with direct experience."


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> Interesting that you highlighted the temptation for type 5 in the table that says "replacing direct experience with concepts" which is the opposite of what I'm suggesting which is "replacing concepts with direct experience."


 Sure. In that case, "replacing concepts with direct experience"... That means "forget everything you know about it and just do it"... and _then_ reflect on your experiences. You're talking about processes. Body types "just process things" without too much thinking or emotional reasoning. While you're out and about doing things, such as "being present", those extra dimensions of your experiences should give those concepts a lot more weight or meaning. You see the contexts where certain things become a bit more important than other things, and other situations in which they matter, but in a different way; stuff which some people might write off as possible sources of confusion. But you need context, that's how things start making sense.

And if you don't want to forget the concepts, then just look up what all of those keywords mean and pick the simplest definitions to start off with. Your concepts need to have some ambiguity so that you can see it showing up in multiple contexts. Your conceptions of certain ideas _will_ morph over time as a result of greater experience; and that's fine and expected. They're descriptive pointers, like internal map-markers of the mechanisms within a type... and you use the "inner critic" to ground and position yourself relative to that map. If you're starting to understand how those words connect and flow together, and how they can disassemble and reassemble themselves in a new context, then you're on the right track to figuring the functional processes of each type.

And if you compare and contrast your experiences of other types with other people, then investigating the sources of those differences should yield additional understanding. Blake's The Intelligent Enneagram, chapter on "legominisms". Remember how Gurdjieff taught the process enneagram using music? Remember when I mentioned something about an intelligence center that is about mimicry, or perhaps, mirroring? Code switch with me for a second here.



> There is a reason we tell people to start with a "Hello, world." Because at that point in their journey, accomplishing that means that have conquered a certain number of fundamentals. You understand how to compile, how to run, how to call a function and pass it parameters. Writing a clone of an existing program is another big step, almost as important as the hello world step, only at a different stage of your journey. *When you are done with it*, you have overcome certain challenges. You had to figure out where to start, how to plan it, how to organize it, how to deal with the bugs, give it a personal touch, and package it up at the end so it is a usable thing. Even when cloning a simple program, you are learning all of the process.
> 
> You might be wondering how cloning existing programs will help you come up with new ideas though. Well, like music, it requires creativity. With music, how does playing someone else's song help you learn to write your own music? Well, you have to understand how other people do it first. You have to understand how they structure things and what patterns they use. *After you've done this enough times* you start to see the bigger picture and then you have a wealth of knowledge to draw upon. You put together little pieces you learned from different places and re-use some of the patterns you saw. You might tweak the patterns, combine them, or break them completely. As they say, you need to learn the rules in order to break them. In programming we have common patterns like MVC. That is one stable and accepted pattern for writing software. In music, we have common progressions. For example I-V-vi-IV. Of course that's not the only one, but it's a good one to know!


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

This discussion reminds me of the conflict between holism and reductionism.
You have a holistic picture of the world, then you break it up into pieces,
yet to integrate it you need to actually put the pieces back together.
Since you now have had experiences with the pieces, your new holistic outlook will be different from the last one.
This cycle never ends, yet we somehow are always so sure of our current outlook, 
even when we know that given a new cycle, much of what we now hold as "truth" might be lost.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Interesting that you highlighted the temptation for type 5 in the table that says "replacing direct experience with concepts" which is the opposite of what I'm suggesting which is "replacing concepts with direct experience."


Each time you proclaim 'direct experience', and how you apply it, it appears to me that it reflects the observation of a disembodied mind, whereas direct experience as I have experienced it is one of 'unified consciousness', of body and mind. If you don't mind, I won't simplify it by citing a koan...



Access to Insight said:


> Knowledge and Vision (Ñana dassana)
> 
> "Concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are": Despite the loftiness and sublimity of these exalted attainments, immersion in deep concentration is not the end of the Buddhist path. The unification of consciousness effected by serenity meditation is only a means to a further stage of practice. This stage, ushered in by the next link in the series, "the knowledge and vision of things as they really are" (yathabhuta-ñanadassana), is the development of insight (vipassana bhavana).
> 
> ...


So while I would agree with you that concepts can obscure direct experience, so does the way we are conditioned, which is something that not only takes place in the intellectual realm, but also in the emotional realm, and the physical realm. You say you want to observe direct experience of other type, in order to find it within yourself, (which you say you are conditioned to ignore or something alike) which arguably is not only a pre-conception in itself, it is also somewhat contradictory to think you need to observe direct experience in others in order to directly experience that within yourself. 

It's not only that this rather curious detour contradicts the very nature of direct experience that you proclaim, it also seems ignorant of the fact that you are conceptualizing that experience in order to 'directly experience' it in yourself, (which to me exactly confirms what is indicated in the diagram) and it seems ignorant of the psycho-physical nature of our conditioning, e.g. our conditioned visceral responses to experience that can influence our perception and interpretation to begin with (as explained in the text above). To say the least, I find that odd, much like setting up the chariot in front of the horse. For that reason, your understanding of direct experience to me appears as a purely intellectual notion, rather than one that is grounded in the unification of body and mind, or at least direct experience as I understand and experience it.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> Each time you proclaim 'direct experience', and how you apply it, it appears to me that it reflects the observation of a disembodied mind...


Then let go of your stereotype of me as a type 5 - a disembodied mind.

I'm not talking about some esoteric idea of direct experience. I'm simply exploring the inner experience of each type and I try to do that by finding it within myself. The words, labels, concepts, etc. offer approximations to where that experience might be so I can experience it directly for myself. They have no other meaning for me than that.

If you really want to understand my use of direct experience as compared to yours, just explore what it means in Zen. Here's a quote from the first page I found in doing a search for "zen direct experience" (do your own search if you'd like more).



> *Zen practice* is difficult (technically impossible) to explain using written or spoken language, because the essence of zen is “the unsymbolization of the world” (R.H. Blythe). This is, of course, a very difficult “concept” to grasp, because in zen, what we’re trying to be “free” of is exactly that — all symbolization and conceptualization. Zen instead seeks direct life experience, without the filters of language, concept, or interpretation.
> 
> *Therein lies the paradox* of trying to write or teach about zen — whenever we use words, or any other types of symbols, for that matter, we move further away from the essence of zen and the direct experience of our being.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Then let go of your stereotype of me as a type 5 - a disembodied mind.


Why not respond with a little more substance rather than self-victimization or demonization?

That so called stereotyping was not without any foundation.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Then let go of your stereotype of me as a type 5 - a disembodied mind.
> 
> I'm not talking about some esoteric idea of direct experience. I'm simply exploring the inner experience of each type and I try to do that by finding it within myself. The words, labels, concepts, etc. offer approximations to where that experience might be so I can experience it directly for myself. They have no other meaning for me than that.


You don't see how you contradict yourself? What do you think made you not directly experience it in the first place?

There's nothing esoteric about it btw. It's actually pretty down to earth, and grounded. It better be, lest one not lose track.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> Why not respond with a little more substance...


I did. I was going through several edits when you responded. I'm done now so take another look if you haven't already.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> I did. I was going through several edits when you responded. I'm done now so take another look if you haven't already.


Thanks. I was familiar with that. However I have nothing to add to what I already wrote.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> There's nothing esoteric about it btw. It's actually pretty down to earth, and grounded. It better be, lest one not lose track.


Maybe so once you get it but your quote was very esoteric (understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest). I doubt that many on this board, including me, have knowledge or interest in "Knowledge and Vision (Ñana dassana)".


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Maybe so once you get it but your quote was very esoteric (understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest). I doubt that many on this board, including me, have knowledge or interest in "Knowledge and Vision (Ñana dassana)".


Haha, I'll admit I'm a bit lazy. But it reflects my personal direct experience very well. They are just concepts, you know. In my experience I never saw labels or signs or symbols. Then it's more like awareness of how your gut area responds to thoughts passing your mind. And when you get to the root of that unease or resistance, it opens another can of worms, metaphorically speaking. All stuff we like to avoid or resent in some way. And that text speaks of purification. So it's insight in the process that shapes who you are. And you can solve all those points of resistance, or knots, that underlie the 'ontic loops' or self-fulfilling prophecies that ALL the enneagram authors speak of.

And by solving those knots, you enable what is obscured, from within, not from without.

I mean you can watch compassionate people everywhere, but that doesn't mean you can look for that compassion within. Like as if you can find self-love within by looking for it. You need to unlock things to enable that. It's not about searching and strive for, but about finding.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> What do you think made you not directly experience it in the first place?


We have difficulty accessing all nine types in ourselves because our dominant type gets in the way of that. That's why the first step is to find some freedom from the dominant type. 

I'm not talking about this because I read it somewhere. I've already gone through this and continue to go further with it. Unfortunately, there are no books or special texts to help me at this point because I haven't found anyone else doing what I'm doing. So, when people throw a bunch of esoteric references or book understanding of the Enneagram types at me (there are way too many people doing this for my taste) then I'll just skim it and probably ignore it because it's very likely irrelevant to where I am and what I'm trying to do.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> We have difficulty accessing all nine types in ourselves because our dominant type gets in the way of that. That's why the first step is to find some freedom from the dominant type.
> 
> I'm not talking about this because I read it somewhere. I've already gone through this and continue to go further with it. Unfortunately, there are no books or special texts to help me at this point because I haven't found anyone else doing what I'm doing. So, when people throw a bunch of esoteric references or book understanding of the Enneagram types at me (there are way too many people doing this for my taste) then I'll just skim it and probably ignore it because it's very likely irrelevant to where I am and what I'm trying to do.


Yeah, unfortunately you can't illustrate it in any way right? We just have to take your word for it.

And I am very happy that I'm not the only one to have walked this path, so it's fairly easy for me to google paths to liberation and similar life experiences. I don't have any pretense to be the first to find out, what I know. 

Unlike you, apparently.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> And by solving those knots, you enable what is obscured, from within, not from without.


It doesn't get at Enneagram type though. The only way to get at that is by understanding how type works within you. There are levels to it though that seem to go on forever. When you think you've completely understood your type then it's got you again because there's another level to it that you're not aware of. Those who think they're beyond that are either looking at the wrong type or haven't found the next level to it.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> It doesn't get at Enneagram type though. The only way to get at that is by understanding how type works within you. There are levels to it though that seem to go on forever. When you think you've completely understood your type then it's got you again because there's another level to it that you're not aware of. Those who think they're beyond that are either looking at the wrong type or haven't found the next level to it.


Sounds like a defense mechanism.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> It doesn't get at Enneagram type though. The only way to get at that is by understanding how type works within you. There are levels to it though that seem to go on forever. When you think you've completely understood your type then it's got you again because there's another level to it that you're not aware of. Those who think they're beyond that are either looking at the wrong type or haven't found the next level to it.


I'll agree that enneagram descriptions don't really help much to unlock that from within. But so far I have found it useful as a medium between my experience and another person's. Btw it was never intended to be that way and for most it's part of a more comprehensive program. 

In case of Naranjo the very Vipassana I quoted above. He also refers to it at the end of Character and Neurosis. So there you go.

Which I think is fair enough.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> Yeah, unfortunately you can't illustrate it in any way right? We just have to take your word for it.


You don't have to take my word for anything. I point to something and say look at that and you look at my finger and say "I'll just have to take your word for it." LOOK FOR YOURSELF to determine whether it's of any value to you. 

If you can't see what I'm pointing to then we're simply in two different places. When I realize that, I simply try to stop pointing at that (when you're willing to let me) and look for something else that you're interested in or able to see. You can do that too with whatever you're pointing at when you find someone else is in a different place than you and disinterested in or unable to see it.



mimesis said:


> And I am very happy that I'm not the only one to have walked this path, so it's fairly easy for me to google paths to liberation and similar life experiences. I don't have any pretense to be the first to find out, what I know.
> 
> Unlike you, apparently.


I have no idea why you're on an Enneagram personality type forum expecting people to talk about paths of liberation that have nothing directly to do with the Enneagram personality types. I know I'm not here for that. I'd go to another forum for that if that's what I was interested in.

Unlike you, apparently.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> You don't have to take my word for anything. I point to something and say look at that and you look at my finger and say "I'll just have to take your word for it." LOOK FOR YOURSELF to determine whether it's of any value to you.
> 
> If you can't see what I'm pointing to then we're simply in two different places. When I realize that, I simply try to stop pointing at that (when you're willing to let me) and look for something else that you're interested in or able to see. You can do that too with whatever you're pointing at when you find someone else is in a different place than you and disinterested in or unable to see it.
> 
> ...


Hm, actually no I wouldn't say it has nothing to do with the enneagram. It's life, you know. 

For instance the text I quoted talks about purification, discipline and calmness. I see that within the realm of type 1. 



> Only a mind which has been rendered pure and calm can comprehend things in accordance with actuality, and the discipline of concentration, by suppressing the hindrances, engenders the required purity and calm.


And the text before that one in the link, suggests a relation with what we could see in the realm of 7:



> "Happiness is the supporting condition for concentration": The attainment of access signals a major breakthrough which spurs on further exertion. As a result of such exertion the bliss generated in the access stage is made to expand and to suffuse the mind so completely that the subtlest barriers to inner unification disappear. Along with their disappearance the mind passes beyond the stage of access and enters into absorption or full concentration (samadhi).


That's what fascinates me in Enneagram. What I had personally unlocked from within, without any notion of enneagram or needing to categorize my direct experience in types, and what you are trying to find in others to find in yourself by categorizing them into types even trying to go against a certain causality or logical or conditional follow up of things, as explained above. It's you who tries to conceptualize it in 'directions of attention' or whatever you call it.

And in that sense I certainly don't limit my personal experience to just one enneatype, but am very much interested in how they interrelate. But I don't see them as discrete, like slices of pizza, and look for your 'inner salami' or pepperoni, but much more fluid and yes I guess holistic.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> That's what fascinates me in Enneagram. What I had personally unlocked from within, without any notion of enneagram or needing to categorize my direct experience in types, and what you are trying to find in others to find in yourself by categorizing them into types even trying to go against a certain causality or logical or conditional follow up of things, as explained above. It's you who tries to conceptualize it in 'directions of attention' or whatever you call it.
> 
> And in that sense I certainly don't limit my personal experience to just one enneatype, but am very much interested in how they interrelate. But I don't see them as discrete, like slices of pizza, and look for your 'inner salami' or pepperoni, but much more fluid.


I don't know if you just don't hear what I say, don't comprehend what I say, or simply misinterpret what I say. Just know that what you think I'm doing is not what I am doing and I see no way to help you understand it. I've tried but there's something in the way and I just don't know what it is.

At this point, all I can do is express my opinion directly and you can do with it what you will. You are caught in your dominant type and you don't seem to know it. In fact, you don't even know which type is dominant (I'd guess 6w5 or 1). Because of that, you have no way to recognize it's workings and find any freedom from it. So, every other type you look at will be reinterpreted through your dominant type and you won't be able to understand the experience of those types directly.

I wish you luck with your approach. I spent some 15 years doing that myself before I started working with the Enneagram. The Enneagram types were the only thing I found which helped me understand how I structure my reality and the different ways in which people structure their reality. You can't find freedom from the structure until you understand it because you'll always be looking at the world through it and not even know it.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> I don't know if you just don't hear what I say, don't comprehend what I say, or simply misinterpret what I say. Just know that what you think I'm doing is not what I am doing and I see no way to help you understand it. I've tried but there's something in the way and I just don't know what it is.
> 
> At this point, all I can do is express my opinion directly and you can do with it what you will. You are caught in your dominant type and you don't seem to know it. In fact, you don't even know which type is dominant (I'd guess 6w5 or 1). Because of that, you have no way to recognize it's workings and find any freedom from it. So, every other type you look at will be reinterpreted through your dominant type and you won't be able to understand the experience of those types directly.
> 
> I wish you luck with your approach. I spent some 15 years doing that myself before I started working with the Enneagram. The Enneagram types were the only thing I found which helped me understand how I structure my reality and the different ways in which people structure their reality. You can't find freedom from the structure until you understand it because you'll always be looking at the world through it and not even know it.


Believe it or not but I even visited your website. It's not that I don't care to even try to understand what you are saying. I don't have quite the impression nor illusion that much of what I say sticks with you. If it were just you and me and not a public forum, I would have left the conversation a long time ago.

You could also look at it by the virtues you have enabled. Do you think that is a way of measuring, perhaps? Because I have faith. You wouldn't recognize that, would you? Do you have faith? Is your mind calm and free from resentment? Do you feel you can be free to be yourself? Are you free from the need to be free? We could pass all enneatypes if you like and discuss vice and virtues and give our take on it.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mimesis said:


> Believe it or not but I even visited your website. It's not that I don't care to even try to understand what you are saying.


I'm not saying that. I'm just saying there's something in the way and I don't know what it is. One guess I have is that it has to do with your dominant Enneagram type. But, since you're not working on that I don't see that impediment going away.

BTW, my Nine Types of Attention website is in dire need of updating as is that book that goes along with it. That's one reason I pulled the book from being available. It needs a complete rewrite to build on the one I'm working on now.


----------



## BoomBoom (May 5, 2016)

enneathusiast said:


> mimesis said:
> 
> 
> > Believe it or not but I even visited your website. It's not that I don't care to even try to understand what you are saying.
> ...


Hmmm so I'm an ESTP 8w7 yell me what you know about this


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> I'm not saying that. I'm just saying there's something in the way and I don't know what it is. One guess I have is that it has to do with your dominant Enneagram type. But, since you're not working on that I don't see that impediment going away.
> 
> BTW, my Nine Types of Attention website is in dire need of updating as is that book that goes along with it. That's one reason I pulled the book from being available. It needs a complete rewrite to build on the one I'm working on now.


Okay I'll keep that in mind. 

Anyway, I jumped in to discuss direct experience and I think we both have put our points forward so I guess we can leave it there.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

BoomBoom said:


> Hmmm so I'm an ESTP 8w7 yell me what you know about this


???


----------



## BoomBoom (May 5, 2016)

enneathusiast said:


> BoomBoom said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm so I'm an ESTP 8w7 yell me what you know about this
> ...


Yeah like what it means and stuff cause it's very convoluted in the website


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

BoomBoom said:


> Yeah like what it means and stuff cause it's very convoluted in the website


I appreciate the faith in me that I might know that but I think you'd be better off asking someone who identifies as ESTP 8w7. They're the one who's actually living the experience and could hopefully speak to it 1st hand. Maybe someone would be willing to answer that in the type 8 forum.


----------



## BoomBoom (May 5, 2016)

enneathusiast said:


> BoomBoom said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah like what it means and stuff cause it's very convoluted in the website
> ...


Ah there's a forum and shit? Okay then I will


----------



## Blindspots (Jan 27, 2014)

How can one tell whether what's being discussed is "type X" or "people who are type X"? Maybe not the most concise or even precise way to reword it: the pure idea (fixation and their corresponding vices and virtues), or the person who is influenced by that idea in their dealings with the rest of the world. 

While I can't articulate exactly how to do it at the moment, I do think ideas and people should be treated differently, and I get the feeling that's how hang-ups in some discussions happen.


----------

