# How valid is the enneagram system?



## My Name is Jack (Jan 2, 2013)

I'm not here to really challenge the validity of the system as I have no facts or data to back up any claims other than my own personal experience, but I'm highly skeptical.

I've been on a journey for a long time now of self-exploration. A number of months ago I began to research the psychology of the personality and obviously I eventually came across the MBTI and Enneagram systems. Over the course of these past few months I've been heavily reading into both. I was able to determine after a time, with a great deal of deliberation, that I am an entp. I've had no such luck with enneagram typing.

It seems that I have characteristics of every type, and that none actually fit me. Further, it seems to me like most people would have characteristics of every type. Jungian functions make sense to me, these vague descriptions of archetypes just don't seem to fit the reality of most people in the real world. You might point to trityping as a more accurate method, but that just seems a convenient excuse to me to throw out the nets so to speak and cover as much ground as possible to appeal to a larger number of people.

Basically, knowing my mbti type is not enough for me. I need more explanation than that for my behavior, and I've been looking to the enneagram to fill that gap for me. I've become more and more frustrated with my failure to find my type. I can't help at this point but to chalk the enneagram up to being a psychological horoscope.

Perhaps it's because of my own health, but I just don't see myself as any type. And don't get me started on instinctual stackings, it seems like utter nonsense to me. I don't have a sexual, social, or self-preservation instinct. Of course, I might feel that way because I don't do anything with my life. But then what does that mean?


----------



## Rachael (Sep 29, 2012)

Hi, I thought the same things, turned out to be far more valuable to me than I thought it would. It's purpose is not just identification of type, but to understand the purpose of it's identification. It's actually a tool to work on your self. What it does is show you where you are in need of some self development and about accurate internal exploration, the 'why' to the 'what'. 'Why' is a lot harder even than the 'what'. Looking for your internal motivators is a lot harder than looking for external cognitive patterns, because mapping my behavoirs was easy, mapping my internal reasons required standing still and looking inside. I don't stand still, and I don't look inside...well, didn't ever before 

Give it a try, you might like it.


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

It's as valid as you make it to be.


----------



## illicit iridescence (Dec 31, 2011)

My Name is Jack said:


> I'm not here to really challenge the validity of the system as I have no facts or data to back up any claims other than my own personal experience, but I'm highly skeptical.


I don't even know if there is such data or fact that you are looking for. I mean, the enneagram simply isn't like evidence based medicine. There is no such psychological personality theory, I think, that is like scientifically proven to be true. Therefore, it is actually as valid as you make it to be.

But other than that, I feel that with enneagram there is more to be gained than with MBTI. It's nice to know how you perceive and judge but that's pretty much it, given the Jungian functions. Between the two, I feel that MBTI is the most horoscopical really, given the descriptions of the 16 types.

What I like about the enneagram is that regardless what you think of it's spiritual aspect, it focuses on nine common life themes through the types. Running your life past these types can help you recognize what you consider the most important to you, and find out how that has influenced your behavior. It is in that way also a tool to make self-growth possible. Even if it doesn't lead you to find your type, then going on an enneagram tour at least will help you identify your main motivations, the things that you find important, the reasons for why you did what you did, etc etc.

So I guess for some, enneatype is about being a certain type in a spiritual sense. For others, it is a way of labeling oneself or making oneself 'recognizable' through common life themes. A way of communicating to others who you are (or think you are). A way of connecting with others through finding similarities and differences. Etc.

I'm sorry that it's been a frustration for you up til now to find your type. This stuff takes months, years in some cases. Or that after a while, we find out we've been actually deeply wanting to be seen as or behave like a certain type, but in reality, are not that type. These are the situations in which people have typed themselves superficially. That happens. As said, enneagram is probably as valid as you think it is. 

If you can bring up the patience, keep at it, don't give up yet  Perhaps go here, if you haven't yet: http://personalitycafe.com/whats-my-enneagram-type/

If not, then it may indeed be time for you to move on. That's totally up to you ^^


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

The enneagram doesn't seem to be entirely comprehensive. MBTI is another "fabricated" system, but supposedly with a binary pair covering all the listed quantities, it "covers the entire space" even if some people don't fall easily into one of the 16 types (they borrow traits from more than one).

The ennegram is nine separate archetypes which might or might not be comprehensive (i.e., covering all the typological space). They were then arranged and strung together by the Arrows of (Dis)Integration, to make the schematic more of a process rather than static. But the types listed don't necessarily cover all the space. This is why things like the Wings, the Tritype, and the Variants were developed, eventually, to make up for the inadequate coverage of personality type.

The end result is that some people will really resonate with one of the nine types, while others won't seem to fit a particular type, even when the wings and variants are considered. So YMMV.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

kaleidoscope said:


> It's as valid as you make it to be.


This is very true. Because it is only a system meant to be applied on an individual basis to better understand some of the interlocking parts in personality, it's only useful insofar as it actually lends the individual insight.

Before I came to personality theory, I thought of personalities as vague inpenetrable messes of traits, but since, I've been able to gain clearer understanding of what drives me and possibly others, all because the theories underline some neat patterns. It certainly isn't objective by any means, and it takes on a lot of dubious assumptions, but as I've said before, the more BS a "science" is, the more immediately applicable it often is to the common person.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

When I first came across the enneagram, I thought exactly the same thing. It seemed like nine completely arbitrary personality types and I couldn't see why anyone would necessarily fit into one of them, so I dismissed it as glorified astrology. The problem is that most sources present the nine types, but don't explain the logic behind the system. Once I learned what the types were really about, I realised that the enneagram is actually a very logical system, I'd say much more so than the MBTI. 

You're not going to be able to find your type by looking at the traits. Any type can exhibit any trait; it's your motivations and underlying perceptions of reality that matter. For example, what exactly do you mean when you say you "don't do anything with your life"? Does that make you feel disappointed with yourself or are you quite happy with it? I'm not asking you to reply to those questions necessarily, but those are some things you might like to think about to help you to discover your motivations. You are right in that everyone is going to relate to all of the types to some extent, and some people are going to appear to fit into the system better than others because they fit the stereotypes and expected traits of their type. It's the traits the online descriptions tend to focus on, so it's possible that you won't relate to most descriptions of your type.

If you're interested I'll go through some of the things that convinced me of the validity of the system, but I'm not here to convert you; it's not for everyone, so if you're not interested I won't try to convince you. Of course, it's just a model, so it's not going to be 100 % accurate all the time, but as long as you think critically about everything you read I think it has a lot to offer.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

The enneagram, because it focuses on unconscious motivations, will never really be justified by western science. The reason is that western science focuses on empiricism and visible things - imagine behaviorism. The enneagram, in theory, eschews behavioral manifestations of behaviors (seen) in favor of unconscious motivations (unseen), although there is overlap. :happy:


----------



## My Name is Jack (Jan 2, 2013)

Octavarium said:


> For example, what exactly do you mean when you say you "don't do anything with your life"? Does that make you feel disappointed with yourself or are you quite happy with it?


I mean that I pretty much sit around all day on my computer from the morning until late at night and then go out and smoke, come back, go to sleep, rinse, repeat. I go to work on the weekends, and sometimes I go to my college classes, but I don't have any hobbies, I don't go out and do stuff, nothing happens in my life. Hell, sometimes I just sit in silence and just think.

As to whether I feel disappointed or happy, I don't know. I'm probably disappointed in myself, but this has been happening for years so I'm incredibly used to it at this point. I'm not happy though.



Octavarium said:


> If you're interested I'll go through some of the things that convinced me of the validity of the system, but I'm not here to convert you; it's not for everyone, so if you're not interested I won't try to convince you. Of course, it's just a model, so it's not going to be 100 % accurate all the time, but as long as you think critically about everything you read I think it has a lot to offer.


I'm definitely interested if you would be so kind.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

unctuousbutler said:


> The enneagram, because it focuses on unconscious motivations, will never really be justified by western science. The reason is that western science focuses on empiricism and visible things - imagine behaviorism. The enneagram, in theory, eschews behavioral manifestations of behaviors (seen) in favor of unconscious motivations (unseen), although there is overlap. :happy:


I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea.

It's true that these personality theories often run counter to modern science, but in the case of MBTI/Socionics, for example, there is actually brain research that correlates very nicely to types, suggesting that we might someday find evidence to support Enneagram theory as well. Just because they're "unconscious" motivations doesn't mean that we can't eventually validate the structure we've come up with to describe them. 60 years ago it was inconceivable that we would ever even begin to understand how genes replicate, but now we're engineering them in unprecedented ways.

Dario Nardi's neuroscience research with types:


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

My Name is Jack said:


> I'm definitely interested if you would be so kind.


Ok, well for a start I would recommend having a look at these: Articles - Enneagram Article Series and Articles - The Freudian Theory of Enneagram

As you will learn from the first link, the most basic aspect of each type is its holy idea. If you are put off by that term, think of it as an ideal, or an aspect of reality that each type is particularly sensitive to. The holy idea is the basis of the worldview of each type. We might like to see ourselves as completely rational and objective, but we all make assumptions about reality, and then seek out evidence to support our biases. So the enneagram is a theory that explains our most basic assumptions about ourselves and the world, and how those assumptions lead to our motivations. Once you understand the worldview of each type, the characteristics begin to make a lot of sense; they're not just random collections of traits.

Then you might wonder why your wing has to be one of the types next to your core; my answer to that would be that the types are arranged in a very logical order, although it might not seem that way at first. They are categorised into image/heart types (2, 3 and 4), head types (5, 6 and 7), and body/gut/instinctive types (8, 9 and 1). the types in each of those groups or "triads" have certain issues and life themes in common. Here's an article that explains the triads: Articles - Enneagram Triads

Each type is associated with one of the Freudian agencies, as explained in the second link at the top of the post. We all have an id, ego and superego, but someone who is primarily driven by their id is going to be very different to someone who is driven by their superego. The id types are 3, 7 and 8, the ego types are 4, 5 and 9 and the superego types are 1, 2 and 6. You may notice that the types are arranged in such a way that adjacent types that do not belong to the same triad have the same freudian association, for example, type 4 is an image type and type 5 is a head type, but both are ego types. Once you understand those groupings, and what each type is about, the reasons why they are arranged the way they are will hopefully become clearer to you.

I hope that makes sense, and sorry if I explained anything you already know.


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

RoSoDude said:


> I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea.
> 
> It's true that these personality theories often run counter to modern science, but in the case of MBTI/Socionics, for example, there is actually brain research that correlates very nicely to types, suggesting that we might someday find evidence to support Enneagram theory as well. Just because they're "unconscious" motivations doesn't mean that we can't eventually validate the structure we've come up with to describe them. 60 years ago it was inconceivable that we would ever even begin to understand how genes replicate, but now we're engineering them in unprecedented ways.
> 
> Dario Nardi's neuroscience research with types:


The MBTI and Big 5 are actually relatively vindicated by western science compared to the enneagram. 

The MBTI (information processing) and Big 5 track behavior and rather one-dimensional attitudes (self-assessment) - the how, if you like. The enneagram tracks the why - unconscious motivations. The latter is much harder to gauge via tests and validity numbers. :wink:

I know all about Dario - Keys 2 Cognition - Cognitive Processes :crazy:


----------



## Teen Rose (Aug 4, 2018)

illicit iridescence said:


> I don't even know if there is such data or fact that you are looking for. I mean, the enneagram simply isn't like evidence based medicine. There is no such psychological personality theory, I think, that is like scientifically proven to be true. Therefore, it is actually as valid as you make it to be.
> 
> But other than that, I feel that with enneagram there is more to be gained than with MBTI. It's nice to know how you perceive and judge but that's pretty much it, given the Jungian functions. Between the two, I feel that MBTI is the most horoscopical really, given the descriptions of the 16 types.
> 
> ...


''horoscopical'' what even is that? Even astrology works for a reason. People are not so intuitive to understand these soft connections and understanding like MBTI. What even is there to prove enneagram? It is much easier to understand like Big 5 and is direct so u praise it, but MBTI is lot more the reason for many misunderstandings so it is brought into open for helping people. But it just explains the differences and leaves it there since it thinks people are intelligent enough to pick from there. Enneagram still tries to use MBTI for sustenance. I still don't understand what to do with enneagram. I think it is for extroverts. That is why it is more famous.


----------



## Teen Rose (Aug 4, 2018)

Jennywocky said:


> The enneagram doesn't seem to be entirely comprehensive. MBTI is another "fabricated" system, but supposedly with a binary pair covering all the listed quantities, it "covers the entire space" even if some people don't fall easily into one of the 16 types (they borrow traits from more than one).
> 
> The ennegram is nine separate archetypes which might or might not be comprehensive (i.e., covering all the typological space). They were then arranged and strung together by the Arrows of (Dis)Integration, to make the schematic more of a process rather than static. But the types listed don't necessarily cover all the space. This is why things like the Wings, the Tritype, and the Variants were developed, eventually, to make up for the inadequate coverage of personality type.
> 
> The end result is that some people will really resonate with one of the nine types, while others won't seem to fit a particular type, even when the wings and variants are considered. So YMMV.


What the hell is with this MBTI hatred? What is fabricated? It is observed and it is brought to help people. Promote ur ennegram without bringing down other more helpful systems for others. For me MBTI opened my eyes and kind of saved me.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Teen Rose said:


> What the hell is with this MBTI hatred? What is fabricated? It is observed and it is brought to help people. Promote ur ennegram without bringing down other more helpful systems for others. For me MBTI opened my eyes and kind of saved me.


yeah i'm a big bad mbti h8r roflmao

MBTI was actually the first type theory I really ran across that had some comprehensive sense to it, and it liberated me from feeling all my life that something was wrong with me because I was different from the rest of the people in my environment. Suddenly it was really clear to me that people were not just different in the cosmetic details but hat there were also core differences in motivation and response and priority, and that there was not "one right way to be," there was space for me and there was space for others to all be ourselves.

I don't prefer enneagram to mbti. But they are both constructed systems, versus ones that might be a bit more anchored on more narrowly focused traits, like Big Five or DISC, whereas the enneagram and MBTI have more philosophical roots in approach. Think a bit about it too: Why did MBTI pick the pairs it did, to focus on? Are they comprehensive in nature? That's what I meant by "fabricated." They created categories of interest (binary pairs) to them. Maybe fabricated was a shit word for it, I wrote that post over six years ago so I don't know why I chose the words I did.

Enneagram is even moreso that way, it's basically nine archetypes someone decided were... the... only... nine... archetypes? But the wing theory and directions of integration/disintegration really add flexibility to the system and seem to be patterns of typical directions of growth vs decline. It can be a useful self-calibration tool for change.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

Oo fun to read posts of mine from 6 years ago and compare my current thinking to what I said there. My thoughts on the Enneagram have evolved quite a bit since I posted in this thread. For one thing, I don’t think it’s quite so easy to make a distinction between stereotypes/surface traits and the deep stuff that the Enneagram is really about. I still think the internal is more important than the external, since the ways people behave can be influenced by circumstance, but I don’t think the external should be discounted entirely. And, I’m not so confident that everyone really is one of the 9 types underneath. I think the types are tendencies that exist within human nature, so it probably is true to say we all have all 9 types within us to some degree, and people vary in which types/tendencies are strongest within them. But some people don’t fit exactly into one type. Some people relate almost equally well to two or more types. For some people, which type they relate to most strongly will change depending on which author/school of the Enneagram they’re working with.

How valid is the Enneagram system? Well, there’s not much scientific/empirical work on it. It wouldn’t be fair to liken it to astrology, because astrology predicts personality type from date of birth, whereas the Enneagram does not claim any such correlations; instead, people type themselves by learning about the types and choosing their best fit. So, as long as the system is describing real tendencies within people (the Enneagram is) and there’s more to it than the forer effect (there is with most Enneagram sources, and you can verify that by comparing profiles of different types and noticing how the people described are quite different) the Enneagram is bound to say quite a lot of true things, perhaps even quite insightful things if the author of the source you’re consulting is psychologically astute, about the people who choose any given type as their best fit. 

It doesn’t meet the strictest standards of social science, and, quite frankly, there’s a lot of nonsense being purveyed even by the most reputable Enneagram theorists, and that’s why critical thinking is so important here. But not all of it is nonsense. It can still be useful so long as its limitations are understood. Some people within the Enneagram community are calling for more scientific study and caution about whether claims made are evidence-based, and I’m glad of that effort, because I’d love to see more scientific investigation of the system. At the same time, though, the things we most care about when it comes to the human personality are hard to measure.


----------



## Heavy (Jun 16, 2010)

I've already provided empirically valid evidence for the enneagram. 

https://stackemup.livejournal.com/

If the enneagram wasn't valid, I would not have been able to organize 2500+ exemplars into the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack. The breakdown is valid because it is conceptually, structurally, logically flawless.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Heavy said:


> If the enneagram wasn't valid, I would not have been able to organize 2500+ exemplars into the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack. The breakdown is valid because it is conceptually, structurally, logically flawless.


:laughing:

I've never seen so many mistypes in one place. It's bad enough that so many of the types are off but throw in the instinctual stacking and that just compounds the mistypes.

Please...if you're new to the Enneagram types don't use these "exemplars" as examples of the type and instinct given. Sure, some of them are accurate but the majority are off in type, instinct, or both. This is an example of how the interpretative nature of the Enneagram types can lead to extreme variations in interpretation and lack of agreement.

To answer the OP's question: How valid is the Enneagram system?
Validity has to do with the basis for each type. Problem is there is no single basis. Each person chooses their own mix of what constitutes a particular type. Sometimes the focus is on a particular concept like fixation, passion, basic fear, worldview, behavior, etc. Sometimes it's more of an intuitive "feeling" about something that simply can't be put into words. How can the Enneagram types be validated when you don't know what to validate?

The important thing is that it doesn't have to be validated to be useful. It just means that people are going to have different interpretations on the types - sometimes agreeing and sometimes not. It's original purpose was for self-exploration not categorizing people.


----------

