# Instincts. What are they? All ideas and questions about Instincts Welcome.



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

There is a lot of debate about what instincts, and stackings, _actually mean.

_For instance some people would say Sp means managing your finances and health, but some people who overeat or overspend are Sp-firsts who are unhealthy and triggered in that area. Others would say Sp is about personal fortitude, self-possession, knowing when to shut up, etc.

Some would say "Sx" is about being horny, lonely, or wanting so desperately to find _The One_. To that I'd say, I know Sx-lasts who are plenty lonely and horny - and doesn't everyone want to meet "The One?" 

Some would say "Soc" is about group participation, or can manifest as extreme antisocial sentiments. Others would say it's about a wider awareness of world affairs. Others would say it's about contemplating one's role in the group, but it doesn't have to be about socializing, or even wanting to socialize.


So, what in the hell are these things?

And what about the stackings? What do they look like in the last and middle position?

I made this thread to exchange ideas and vent thoughts. I want to hear thoughts also from people who aren't sure, or are still thinking about it; just as much as people who have firm ideas. I have read all the basics and books by most of the enneagram authors; I've read the typical explanations a thousand times. I am interested in what doesn't sit right FOR YOU, and your own experience, and things that confuse you, as well as themes you have noticed which don't match the "more normal" interpretation, and comparisons between the literature and what you feel is accurate.

I had a bunch of my own thoughts but I keep overriding them with better concepts and now I'm just confused.

So I'd rather open this up to anyone who is confused OR has input. Also feel free to be self-referential - discuss why you type your instincts the way you do, and what might be tentative about your typing, if anything.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

As an additional thought, I don't mind if people use other forum members as examples or mention why they type someone at a certain instinct - IF that person gives permission. I am giving my consent for anyone to type me at any instinct or stacking if it helps you to use me as an example of that instinct or how you picture it.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

I'll throw out some ideas about the instincts that may be a little different from the norm. Maybe it'll kickstart some discussion.

Self-Preservation - not about self-survival but about having some boundaries that preserve the self instead of the self getting lost in other people's expectations. "I'll do my thing, you do yours."

Sexual, One-to-One, Intimate - not about "intensity" in the purest sense but about losing oneself into someone or something deeply, intimately.

Social - social circles, spreading oneself around, maintaining connections with friends and participating in group concerns.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Sp - A safe place to bunker down

Sx - Need to love and be loved

So - There's strength in numbers


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Sp - A safe place to bunker down



pretty accurate (doesn't quite encompass the whole thing, but that's about 60% of it)



> Sx - Need to love and be loved


it's more than just "love" though. there is a more selfish, visceral quality to it. more "I want to emotionally possess and/or be emotionally possessed"



> So - There's strength in numbers


that's phobic 6, not Social. Social is more "I can get ahead by forming relationships and navigating social groups"

edit: damn you and your exotic fonts! :laughing:
whatever, I'm just going to leave it like this :tongue:


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Regarding Social... 

To me it is like a lens that highlights interpersonal connections. How will an action impact the people it affects? How will that affect others who come into contact with those affected? How does one person impact others? How do groups impact individuals? What influence does an individual have versus a group? How will a group composed of certain individuals be different than a group composed of others? How does the way one person feels about another impact the decisions they make? How does a person's standing with many individuals in a group affect the way they are treated? And so on...

I think it was the Running Father blog that pointed out that Social is sort of "mechanical", in that it is a bit like looking at everything as gears and seeing how each gear connects into one another and impacts one another and how all the gears together form larger and larger movements. Given it's not as straightforward of that, but I liked the imagery, anyway.



Swordsman of Mana said:


> Social is more "I can get ahead by forming relationships and navigating social groups"


At least personally I do not experience much of an awareness of how I can use my instinct to get ahead - just a clarity in terms of what I notice. I would liken it to how once you are familiar with a certain realm, it's like a whole little world opens up that you wouldn't really have noticed much otherwise. Like how I worked in a grocery store for a while as a teen and even now when I go to the grocery store I notice the empty spots on the shelves and tend to tuck the items back into place as I shop. It's not really because I feel like I will gain anything out of it. It just is apparent and I therefore tend to include it in my decision-making processes. So too with the Social realm. I do not think about "using" it much - I rarely have intentional goals besides facilitating individuals being happy and healthy (ok and scheduling exciting travel plans). This spiderweb of interpersonal connections is just is how I tend to see the world. 

Of course I am sure my perspective on it is slightly sx-tinted as well.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

I'll be bock with more of an opinion on this, but here's a piece on subtypes I haven't yet seen posted here. It tries to define "subtype," and compares ideas on subtypes and instincts across authors. 




> *Subtypes Revisited
> by Gloria Davenport, Ph.D.
> 
> *A note to the reader. I have two motives for writing this article. First, a determined effort to make some sense out of the concept of subtypes for myself and my students, fully realizing that the results will be impacted by a One’s perceptual distortions and personal and professional journey thus far. Secondly, if I share my conclusions with you (also Tom Condon’s advice since it’s too long for my book!), it just might accomplish a deeper motive. Like Jerry Wagner and others, I too want to stimulate discussion and interactive feedback through the _Enneagram Monthly, _with the hope that a rethinking and assessment of some of the concepts (for me “subtypes”) might yield an acceptable common language and understanding. Attaining consensus is an enticing challenge, especially since the instincts and “subtypes” are such critical factors, not only in relationships, but in the transformation process.
> ...


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> pretty accurate (doesn't quite encompass the whole thing, but that's about 60% of it)
> 
> 
> it's more than just "love" though. there is a more selfish, visceral quality to it. more "I want to emotionally possess and/or be emotionally possessed"
> ...


At it's most basic level the instinctual subtypes are all survival strategies. One favors hoarding and building a safe space, one favors intense one-to-one relationships, and one favors cooperating with others.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> At it's most basic level the instinctual subtypes are all survival strategies. One favors hoarding and building a safe space, one favors intense one-to-one relationships, and one favors cooperating with others.


I agree. I think people over-complicate the instincts, which is to say, an sx last can also feel a strong desire for unity and connection with someone else but at such a constant neurotic level, perhaps while even being _in_ one or maybe several relationships like an sx dom, though? Probably not.

One thing I notice about social doms is how they care a lot about the social pecking order, like they can tell who is more or less popular and they often try to shame or deflate a person's social status within the social environment in order to increase their own standing. 

It makes sense because social doms believe they cannot survive on their own, so being at the bottom of the social hierarchy where you are at a constant risk of being rejected by the entire social order is a great deal of concern for them.


----------



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

@Figure
Didn't read the whole thing yet, but I find it interesting that the questions asked are like "do I have a right to X" which probably does have to do with the author's own type indeed.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Entropic said:


> I agree. I think people over-complicate the instincts, which is to say, an sx last can also feel a strong desire for unity and connection with someone else but at such a constant neurotic level, perhaps while even being _in_ one or maybe several relationships like an sx dom, though? Probably not.
> 
> One thing I notice about social doms is how they care a lot about the social pecking order, like they can tell who is more or less popular and they often try to shame or deflate a person's social status within the social environment in order to increase their own standing.
> 
> It makes sense because social doms believe they cannot survive on their own, so being at the bottom of the social hierarchy where you are at a constant risk of being rejected by the entire social order is a great deal of concern for them.


the last time we talked, you said that the instinctual subtypes were not about instincts. this is a contradiction. I agree through, they are not complicated, and certainly they're less cerebral/intellectual than people are making them out to be.




tanstaafl28 said:


> At it's most basic level the instinctual subtypes are all survival strategies. One favors hoarding and building a safe space, one favors intense one-to-one relationships, and one favors cooperating with others.


Social and Self-Preservation are survival strategies, Sexual is not, it's about replication. 
PS: not a dig at you personally, but I'm getting tired of people equating Sx with "1 to 1". most people are "1 to 1". I am 1 to 1 far more because I am an NFP than because I'm Sx (an ESTP Sexual 8w7 man is unlikely to be 1 to 1, he's much more likely to be a womanizer lol)


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

I just want to throw this out there to see if it gets any traction.

IMO, the difficulty with explaining or understanding the instincts is that people are assuming they're talking about the same thing when they're not. It looks the same when the same terms self-preservation (SP), sexual (SX), and social (SO) are used but the underlying assumptions about what they represent are often different. Maybe it would be more useful to explore that aspect of it (it might reveal the hidden subtext in people's disagreements). Here are some examples of what I mean.



Survival Instincts - they represent three different approaches to survival: SP = going it alone, SX = pairing up, SO = being part of a group.
Animal or Biological Instincts - they represent instincts that can be seen in animals: SP = the self-survival instinct, SX = the mating instinct, SO = the herding instinct.
Not so much instincts but a focus of energy - SP = focus on survival needs (money, health, home, etc.), SX = focus on intensity of experience, what gives you juice, looking for that charge, SO = focus on status, belonging, participation, tracking what others are doing.
Not so much instincts but interaction with others - the one, the few, the many: SP = preferring to do your own thing, SX = preferring to do things with an intimate few, SO = preferring to do things with a group of people.

Or some customized mix of the above that may include other things as well - in all, quite a variety of possible different interpretations based on what appears on the surface to be the same thing but really isn't when you look underneath.

And don't forget the differences in how instinct is applied. Mixing these can be an apples and oranges thing as well.



Instinctual Subtypes - the traditional approach where instinct doesn't stand on it's own but is only applicable in creating three subtypes of each type where you choose one and only one instinct.
Instinctual Variants or Stacking - the newer approach where instinct can stand on it's own and may or may not be used with Enneagram type and you have all three instincts in preferred order.
Instinctual Centers - Ichazo's approach that groups 891, 234, 567 into the instinctual centers: Conservation (How am I?), Relation (Who am I with?), Adaptation (Where am I?). Trifix actually chooses one type from each instinctual center. Tritype is just a reinterpretation of this to fit the centers of intelligence.

So can the instincts be simple to understand? Sure, if you choose one assumption about what they are and stick to it. I do feel for the people trying to make sense of the instincts because what they're hearing seems to be about the same thing when under the surface it's really not but no one seems to be making that explicit for them.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> the last time we talked, you said that the instinctual subtypes were not about instincts. this is a contradiction. I agree through, they are not complicated, and certainly they're less cerebral/intellectual than people are making them out to be.


I don't know what you mean by instincts, here, because in this context "instincts" are clearly referring to sp, sx and so. They are instincts.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Entropic said:


> I don't know what you mean by instincts, here, because in this context "instincts" are clearly referring to sp, sx and so. They are instincts.


yes, and that's what we were referring to when you said they didn't represent instincts (might have been somewhere on the gentle mistype thread).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> yes, and that's what we were referring to when you said they didn't represent instincts (might have been somewhere on the gentle mistype thread).


I don't remember the context and what I said, so I can't comment on exactly how it would be contradictory. I think the issue lies in semantics and contextual use of said semantics. It's probably related to that I don't think that the instincts are per se actual instincts in the same way you have an instinctual reaction when you are threatened or the like, but it doesn't change that within the enneagram context, they are named and called instincts so I'll refer to them as such. If I called them something else no one would understand wtf I mean.


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

I haven't yet read this thread due to a slow computer, so I may just be stating something obvious/already said. I've come to major conclusions over the last year or so, and this is one of the fruits of that. It's just where I'm at on it right now, take it or leave it.


* *




My current thinking is that your dominant instinct, regardless of which one it is, is where the torture is. The pain, the hangups, the insecurity. Your self-esteem is quite literally pegged on how well you follow its demands--and if you manage to screw up in this area, you'll know about it because it really does seem like the end of the world. Your mind invents hierarchies around it, haves-have nots, and you can feel your hackles going up when someone says something related to it in the course of normal conversation. It draws out the worst in you when your boundaries are directly crossed--not only your enneagram type's defenses, but your all around worst.

You may even come to resent everything pertaining to this instinct, to defy its demands, to keep away from it so that it doesn't irritate you/hurt you/embarrass you again. If there's someone you perceive as being at the top of your neurotic little hierarchy (at your expense), you may resent them as well. They make you feel like shit. 

It's even possible you won't want to talk about it at all or have anyone make any comment referencing it. People can be extremely shy to open up about it because your entire worth as a human being feels pegged to it. Consequently, the Dominant may not even be visible to others, or you may appear to be [first instinct]-last.

At the same time, you feel compelled to follow the demands of the instinct (not necessarily the most literal meaning of the word. Social firsts might not be compelled to socialize, sexual firsts might never have sex, etc). You build your life and mentality around it, whether you are for it or against it. You might not even realize you're doing it. People of other instincts might wonder why you're going to these lengths...and you can't imagine why they're NOT. This is what gives your life substance and meaning.

*Whole philosophies of life (how things "really" work) have been built around the dominant instincts of their creators, but they crumble to dust when you realize it's all a neurosis. See for example the sentiments of the Red Pill movement (sexual-first, some socials); The 48 Laws of Power (social-first). When you read one of these of another dominant instinct, it's just like, No, that's not how it is.




I realize, when I write that, how much it sounds like everything other authors have written. That's because it's perfectly true. For those who are confused, the problem is realizing WHICH area is the worst and in what way.

All you can do is observe yourself and try to determine which realm best describes this. Beware, your core fixation may work against your ability to see it clearly.

I don't want to go into what each instinct specifically IS because I only know how my own works for me. There's an associated realm for each instinct, and we are already familiar with what those realms are. It's a matter of seeing how it plays out for YOU in relation to the concepts presented. Start with yourself and work outwards, rather than trying to find yourself in this online jumble of concepts and personal testimony.

Best I can do.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Lord Bullingdon said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


THIS IS ABSOLUTE GOLD!

I have felt this way for a while but didn't have the words to express it.
Everyone and their mother tells me I'm Sx first, and it is quite obvious that I am. But then I see people writing about how much they want relationships and want sex and how lonely they are and how their Sx isn't fulfilled, blabla. Thus they type at Sx first. I absolutely do not see those people as Sx first. I also don't see Sx first in people who throw their whole lives away for a relationship, and go from one relationship to the next and "give it their all." Those are usually Sx seconds.


In my experience, as an Sx dom... well first of all, Sp4 descriptions are spot-on for me; it's what I wear on my sleeve. (I am questioning my second instinct but I'll get to that later.) I have issues about it "missing" or being idealized, but I also embody it in some ways. As for social it's easy for me; a non issue. However when it comes to dating and sex, oh boy. My history is quite complex. I have had a lot of long obsessions that I wrote books about, but couldn't confess, and acted like I didn't care. I've had short relationships in which I focused on power and domination. I have a reputation preceding me in my hometown and in college (I never even hooked up with anyone at that college!) as being a heart-breaker, seducer etc. I've had several men do things like write albums about me , get tattoos of my shitty artwork, I've had more than 10 marriage proposals in my 20s... I was "the one who got away" to so many people... and I never pretended to be otherwise. I slapped men for saying they loved me; for wasting the precious concept of love on a creature like me. I slapped men for trying to save me; how dare they suggest they can even SEE ME for who I am, let alone save me. I kicked men out after I fucked them and slept next to no one, until my close friend - who I never hooked up with - convinced me to sleep next to him so he could "Warm me up." He's So/Sx. I made a show of being cold-hearted and in many ways, I was.

This resulted after I had lost everything- my voice, my passion, and my first love. I hated Sx more than anything (without knowing enneagram) .. I wanted to find my passion & purpose in life, and tripped alone on LSD and ran experiments on my mind to figure out what it was and who I was and how to get back the emotions and innocence I lost (if I ever had it)... I was an animal and a symbol of my lost humanity. But I was not impulsive, reckless or anything.. these trips were alone, in safe places, etc, and I never felt a need to party socially or prove anything, though people in my college & hometown have called me a "legend" probably due to how fucking weird I am and how I would dress. But, I was never in long relationships. I was hateful toward men I wanted, and I sought to conquer or be conquered. Surrender was not something I could imagine myself doing. Then I fucked myself over when I tried to conquer someone who was able to twist my heart into pieces in his sleep. He consumed me; showed me I could obsess and care again, and yet I'd lost the capacity and I turned it into a game. Although I could win games, I could not open up. Although he wanted to SEE the real me, I could not show him.

This is when I realized how fucked up I had actually become. I moved away - because that was the only way to avoid "passing by" or showing off how many guys liked me and how much I didn't care about him while he worked in the bar in town - and spent the next six years working my ass off , getting my voice back. This guy was a musician; a symbol of everything I lost when I lost my voice. I wanted to show him I could do it better, deeper and harder than he ever could; even though I spoke in a whisper and was chronically ill. I fronted my own band, recorded my album and handed it to him. He shook and cried; was jealous that I did it first, but also proud of me. VENGEANCE.

It took me more years to find my own tenderness in this area. I've now met my soulmate, and I am so thankful for how much I've worked on myself these past few years because I would hate to have put him through any of this or worse, lost him. I was still fucked up in some ways when we met but he whipped me into shape in the sweetest and most honest way possible. I still can't believe it sometimes when I think about it.


So when people claim to be Sx first because they want to meet their soulmate, care about their ideal lover, want sex all the time or are lonely, I want to punch them in the face kind of, because it undermines my very serious battles here. Of course that is selfish, I have been mistyped several times and it's all part of the process. But I have SUFFERED over this. It has DESTROYED me, and the people around me. I channeled my Sx passion mostly into my music and writing so that I could feel worthy of actual love, or even, so that I could feel seen for who I am at all. I hoped maybe, just maybe, someone would find my music and relate to it, or see my soul in it, and understand. My soulmate did exactly that. I fucking can't believe it and I love him so much. This is beyond Sx. But before him, I resisted relationships so hard it's not even funny; while still being consumed by obsessions for people, and having that as fuel not only to find myself, but to take action. Even with him - I was obsessed and wanted him, but still, he had to crash through these walls before he could get to my heart. His honesty won me over and I could not help but surrender.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Entropic said:


> One thing I notice about social doms is how they care a lot about the social pecking order, like they can tell who is more or less popular and they often try to shame or deflate a person's social status within the social environment in order to increase their own standing.
> 
> It makes sense because social doms believe they cannot survive on their own, so being at the bottom of the social hierarchy where you are at a constant risk of being rejected by the entire social order is a great deal of concern for them.


I have heard ideas similar to this fairly often and I think they are typically somewhat of a simplification/misunderstanding. 

At least personally as a social dominant I see the social realm as much too complicated to identify any single pecking order within. Each culture, each large group, each small group, and even every single individual on Earth has at least one but probably several if not more different ranking "systems", and they all overlap and interact in complex ways. 

Along a similar line, I do not think it is so much an explicit fear of not being able to survive alone - as in not being able to be self-sufficient or individual - but an acknowledgement that any collection of individuals truly turned against a person could quickly and easily end that person's life and/or make it functionally impossible for them to have a life worth living.

So yes, a social dominant will certainly likely be keen to perceiving the ways in which social factors will impact people, and how that could therefore be leveraged against others - just like a sexual dom may tend to be keen to what is particularly motivating or demotivating to others and how a self-pres dom may tend to be keen to how successful or unsuccessful others are at providing for themselves. And that may indeed result in cliquish and shaming behavior, but there are other ways in which it may manifest as well, such as recognizing when others are left out and figuring out how to include them without detrimenting either the group or individual, accommodating unusual and/or unexpected situations, facilitating communication between people who are disagreeing and/or misunderstanding one another, and so on.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

angelfish said:


> I have heard ideas similar to this fairly often and I think they are typically somewhat of a simplification/misunderstanding.
> 
> At least personally as a social dominant I see the social realm as much too complicated to identify any single pecking order within. Each culture, each large group, each small group, and even every single individual on Earth has at least one but probably several if not more different ranking "systems", and they all overlap and interact in complex ways.
> 
> ...


Yes, I am not saying that my description is exhaustive by any means and I'm not a social dom myself so I can't quite wrap my head around this instinct, tbh. It almost feels like a blind spot except I devalue sp more and I have some skill in the social area, so whatever. 

It's just a personal observation that I've made which seems very specific to people who are social first. Social doms can also be great at using their connections to help others people to connect. I do want to stress I don't think this is the same as networking in the generic sense of networking at your job, for example, because I think that's fairly artificial and a way to force social connections. Not every social dom is going to be socially extroverted and really enjoy networking.

With that said, I do think a lot of social doms also tend to have a great deal of energy of wanting to connect with people and overall, social doms strike me as the people who prefer to strike random conversations with others as a way to connect. My main office seems to have a work environment very emphasized on the social instinct, and one thing everyone keep talking about as being positive about is the social environment and the friendliness of people there. 

On a similar sidenote, the backside of the social instinct is probably how it can be equally exclusive of people and refuse them to allow them to be a part of the social sphere.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Entropic said:


> Yes, I am not saying that my description is exhaustive by any means and I'm not a social dom myself so I can't quite wrap my head around this instinct, tbh. It almost feels like a blind spot except I devalue sp more and I have some skill in the social area, so whatever.
> 
> It's just a personal observation that I've made which seems very specific to people who are social first. Social doms can also be great at using their connections to help others people to connect. I do want to stress I don't think this is the same as networking in the generic sense of networking at your job, for example, because I think that's fairly artificial and a way to force social connections. Not every social dom is going to be socially extroverted and really enjoy networking.
> 
> With that said, I do think a lot of social doms also tend to have a great deal of energy of wanting to connect with people and overall, social doms strike me as the people who prefer to strike random conversations with others as a way to connect.


Well, for what it's worth, I do think you're right about identifying that as social instinct behavior. I just wanted to clarify that there is more nuance to it for the sake of compiling information - I didn't identify as soc myself for quite a long time because I thought it was all about friend groups and work-like networking (in fact I felt quite repelled by the idea of the social instinct!), and now that I understand more it is much more interesting!

I agree with you about networking as well. It's not like work networking, where the point is getting ahead. I do feel like maybe So/Sp individuals might be more naturally skilled at that - using their social connections to support their Sp - but there is certainly another type of Soc networking, a sort of mental database of people and groups. I was reading about Social Work a few weeks ago and it struck me that I sort of tend to do that already. Like at work if I hear a coworker discussing how she could use some extra hours and then I hear that someone called out of another department - it seems only logical to mention one to the other. Though whether I tell the individual coworker or the department head - that's an interesting question with a lot of factors involved.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@Animal
do you have your own description of the instincts anywhere on this thread (not how you specifically relate to them, but what they're like in general)?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@_Animal_

I agree with a lot of your last post regarding my sp preference over so. 



Animal said:


> I don’t trust anyone except myself, and I don’t expect anyone except myself to follow through; if there was one thing that annoyed my band mates, it’s that I took too much on myself and didn’t “collaborate” enough with the responsibilities; but I did that because I knew there needed to be a solid vision - and I was very straight forward about it.


Something similar to this happens at work for me. Others with more social awareness suggest I contact and coordinate with others to get the job done. The problem for me is that I often just don't trust them to know what they're doing or to have the commitment and follow through to get it done. I'd usually just rather do it myself because I knew it would be done as I saw it needing to be done and time wouldn't be wasted getting everyone's approval and agreement which usually ended up in a watered down version of things that wouldn't be worth doing in the end. 

There was this social tendency in this one environment where I worked that all these different people in all these different departments needed to be involved along with various committees that needed to put their stamp on it and such but out of all those people involved I was the only one who had any experience working on what was at hand - it felt as if everyone had equal say in something that only I had any significant knowledge and experience on. More often than not, whenever I'd give in to the social pressure and let everyone have their say either the project wouldn't get done or the result was so watered down through compromise or incompetence that it simply wasn't worth the effort in the end. 

On the other hand, if I was asked to participate in someone else's project I usually didn't have any problem as long as it was something that I felt I could make a contribution to so that I didn't feel it was taking up time that could be better spent elsewhere. I would take it as helping them realize the vision they're after - I didn't have any personal investment. But, if it was just to be a part of the group or team or such then I generally had no interest.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Ah but I do that as well.

I literally trust no one to do anything right. I don't believe people will follow through. I prefer to do things myself, because it's the only way I know it'll be done right.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Ah but I do that as well.
> 
> I literally trust no one to do anything right. I don't believe people will follow through. I prefer to do things myself, because it's the only way I know it'll be done right.





QueenOfNight said:


> But, I am also quite aware of "social pecking orders." Example, I know who my riding trainer's favorites are and I'm not one of them. I deject social groups quite often though. One of the reasons people told me I'm Soc-last is my complete inability to insert myself/melt into a social group. Could be introversion, could just be one of my quirks, but if I'm in a group of people I'm not familiar with I get spoken over and pushed to the side. To which, though it's actually very painful for me, I give one big "f*** you" and walk away. In my college acting class, it was full of very extroverted, lively, kind of clique-like people and I just didn't fit in. Instead, I made a closer friendship with one guy, who seemed to be "rejected" as well, and turned my nose up to everyone else. Him and I stuck by each other like glue through that class. This happens in all my classes, I end up "sticking" to a couple of people I connect with and dismiss everyone else. My sister tells me this quality may make it seem like I'm a snob from other people's POV.


I don't identify with anything you wrote above though. It sounds like you're in reaction to the social. I don't have a reaction one way or the other. I'm generally not even aware of it unless I notice other people becoming aware of it or telling me about it or trying to pull me into it in some way. It usually just doesn't register. If I do find myself in it, I'll usually just leave as soon as I can because it's simply uncomfortable and I don't want to get sucked into it.

Perhaps what you posted has to do with the type 4 response to their 1st instinct at times (love/hate relationship with it?). It reminds me of a Marilyn Manson response to the social instinct. Yours doesn't sound like an sp response though. It sounds more like "I don't need to be included in your circle, I'll just make my own." It just sounds more rebellious in nature than simply something to get away from.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> I don't identify with anything you wrote above though. It sounds like you're in reaction to the social. I don't have a reaction one way or the other. I'm generally not even aware of it unless I notice other people becoming aware of it or telling me about it or trying to pull me into it in some way. It usually just doesn't register. If I do find myself in it, I'll usually just leave as soon as I can because it's simply uncomfortable and I don't want to get sucked into it.
> 
> Perhaps what you posted has to do with the type 4 response to their 1st instinct at times (love/hate relationship with it?). It reminds me of a Marilyn Manson response to the social instinct. Yours doesn't sound like an sp response though. It sounds more like "I don't need to be included in your circle, I'll just make my own." It just sounds more rebellious in nature than simply something to get away from.



Well, being compared to Manson in any way is a bit of a compliment. LOL. He's a Type 4 as well, I've heard.

Some have said that I am a 6w7 first as well, but... I don't know... my "lens" and everything I write is so blatantly 4-ish. Lol. I'm always writing something about my identity or my awareness of being unique/different.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Some have said that I am a 6w7 first as well, but... I don't know... my "lens" and everything I write is so blatantly 4-ish. Lol. I'm always writing something about my identity or my awareness of being unique/different.


 @Animal started a discussion titled "A 4's Basic Fixation is not About Uniqueness - it's About Meaning." that you might find interesting if you haven't seen it already.

One thing that seems to have come out of that is that type 4 is more about authenticity and significance. Uniqueness/difference may come out as a byproduct of that. I don't think a sense of being unique/different is exclusive to type 4.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> QueenOfNight said:
> 
> 
> > Some have said that I am a 6w7 first as well, but... I don't know... my "lens" and everything I write is so blatantly 4-ish. Lol. I'm always writing something about my identity or my awareness of being unique/different.
> ...


I think it depends on what exactly is meant by "authentic."

I strive for authencity a lot too. In that I feel truly at peace with myself when I'm allowed to true to me, who I am, what I believe, expression. 

That being said, I do still put quite a bit of value on uniqueness/individuality. I do not think this is totally NTR. As I've seen many people just not put any thought into individuality or expressing uniqueness in any form.

I tend to do that 4 thing of "longing"/melancholic brooding about a better life or being envious, seeing myself as somewhat a victim of circumstance that others have what I just do not.


----------



## Ztommi (Aug 31, 2014)

@Animal

I found this on a website:
sx/sp seducer (weak sp) - sx in full command produces an active recruiter of potential mates; but being sx/sp this remains in the yin mode of seducing. charismatic and overtly sexualized, arguably the most purely sx of all stacks and ranges. draws from so/sx shadow to liven up sx into an erotic playfulness and to keep sx far ahead of their relatively nominal sp. an emotional yearning to their mating ritual; an inherently unstable range that can lead to a pattern of serial heartbreak. often confused for sx/so. 

sounds like you.

This is me:

sp/sx ascetic (weak sx) - mimics sp/so building of career and security, with an eye on advancement in the name of self sufficiency, but little or no concern for status as in the case of so/sp. generally serious but enjoys being amused by others.
quote: "looking out for number one."
pulls from: so/sp, to mute sx
role: the island, the one-man enterprise
exemplars: tiger woods, jerry west, hugh heffner, evel knievel, paul newman, george lucas, johnny carson
fictional from star wars: boba fett

and there are more!


----------



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

I've self-typed as self preservation since I met the instincts. It's the only thing that has remained constant in my self-typing process. I considered social once because I thought I was very socially inclined, but I'm not very sure of that anymore. The reason why I started considering sp/so, instead of sp/sx, which was my first self-typing, was that I started to think I was sx-last and not because I thought my social instinct was strong or very present, which came later.

For me self-pres has always been about being independent and self-sufficient. Being able to do on your own. Of course my tritype molds it. The 3-fix, which I've come to accept as my heart fix, ties my sense of worth to it, the 6 pushes me to prove myself I certainly can. I have reacted with hostility to others trying to help me. I try to not be demanding and I don't like asking for things. In my mind I constantly tell me that I must get it without asking for it. I don't want to be a burden for anybody. When I see people out there walking comfortably on their own and going places without disturbing anything around them, I imagine them adventurous, steady, strong, resilient and I envy that idea. One man against the world. 

I dream of walking long distances carrying a big backpack with only the necessary for survival, proving I can do without a lot of comfort and by myself, and also an opportunity to clear my head, to see the world around me, to find peace, to find myself. I don't like the idea of needing others, despite feeling lonely and trapped inside my head. I want to experience things and go places, explore the world, expand mine, but I catch myself wanting others guidance or company and I feel uncomfortable in places where I'm supposed to be with others. I know it's not impossible, there are people out there living the lifestyle I want for myself without needing somebody to accompany them or supporting them through it, unrestrained, and I compare myself to that standard. I still think there's something precious in being with others, that life is stale without sharing experiences with people, that life is suddenly wider, but I wonder if it's just my weak will looking for excuses. Can life be as rich on your own as it is with others? I wonder. And the question remains. There's always a vigilance. The idea that being alone and living a very fulfilling life is possible and if I don't live up, it's because I failed and I am weak and I must force seclusion. The idea of having a family is beautiful, but should I be on my own? The idea of connecting with someone very intimately is beautiful, but should I be on my own? The idea of finding a partner for life is beautiful, but should I be on my own? Should I be on my own?


----------



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

...Although at the same time, I believe I'm an Sp-dom, and I mostly idealize that instinct. At least the image of it. =P


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> I think it depends on what exactly is meant by "authentic."


I think that "authenticity" for type 4 is based on the feeling/emotional center. It's about being true to what you feel. Doing or being something that's not true to that would feel inauthentic. 

Type 4 is not dominant for me though so you might ask someone who lives there to explain the experience more fully. I just try to visit it as best I can.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> QueenOfNight said:
> 
> 
> > I think it depends on what exactly is meant by "authentic."
> ...


Yes I know exactly what you're referring to. I know with me, I'm always checking in to whether or not something is authentic to me. I will not do or portray anything that is not who I am. 
Also sounds little bit like Fi?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Yes I know exactly what you're referring to. I know with me, I'm always checking in to whether or not something is authentic to me. I will not do or portray anything that is not who I am.
> Also sounds little bit like Fi?


Like I said, I don't like mixing the two systems. But, I don't think Fi has the self-identity element to it (type 4 cultivating an identity out of feelings). I think the Enneagram types detail beyond the Jungian functions. I think that's another reason why the two systems don't equate.

Type 4 may or may not be dominant for you. Personally, I find you need to get into the actual experience taking place and see if that fits. I could say I want to be true to my feelings as well but it ultimately gets into what that means experientially.

It's kind of like those weed-out courses in college where you take the prereq intro course to know whether you should rule out that program of study. Likewise, if you find "emotional authenticity" doesn't fit then you can rule out the type but if it does fit you still don't know until you explore it a little deeper. The best way I've found is either by eliminating all the other possibilities or verifying the experience of type with someone who's living it (even then there can be many gotchas - are they typed right, are they talking about type experience or something else, are they self-aware enough to clearly explain the experience, do they know the Enneagram well enough to talk to specific type issues, etc.).


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Yes I know exactly what you're referring to. I know with me, I'm always checking in to whether or not something is authentic to me. I will not do or portray anything that is not who I am.
> Also sounds little bit like Fi?


Not all 4s are the same and I don't know how it is for other 4s.. but to speak for myself, I don't need to "check in" - I'm an INFP and whether something is "me" or not is a FELT experience. I weed out anything that isn't almost in my sleep.. it's probably very frustrating for people around me, but for me, I just can't imagine being another way, so I'm not really sure what I could "check In" for... .although maybe if you elaborate on how you "check in" it would make more sense?


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> @_Animal_
> do you have your own description of the instincts anywhere on this thread (not how you specifically relate to them, but what they're like in general)?


I love that you asked. I did have one, but now I'm confused again, so I'm percolating again. I'll post it as soon as I have it, probably in my enneagram comparisons thread. But it won't be for a while, probably.

The thing is I need a wider base of how instincts affect other people..... but, first and foremost, I need to understand how it operates within myself before I can really say much. I understand how Sx works for me and I think I have a decent eye for it in others, but I don't have some "Se" or "Ti" explanation of what it actually means; it's more "felt." The other two instincts are just damn confusing in terms of "feel" ... maybe because I haven't categorized them in myself yet, and for me that always needs to happen first before I can move forward. Of course, I don't base my conclusions on myself alone; it's always a very wide database, but for me I have to understand something in myself before anything else can make sense. That is step 1. And step 2-10 happen much faster after that.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Grrrr.... I'm getting a bit tired of this. One moment, I think I have my type nailed down, the next, someone says something that makes me question everything and it feels like I go back to square one. Sometimes it's tempting to throw typology into the fire altogether. But, that's not me. I don't let things go until they're solved. -_-"
________________________________



Animal said:


> Not all 4s are the same and I don't know how it is for other 4s.. but to speak for myself, I don't need to "check in" - I'm an INFP and whether something is "me" or not is a FELT experience. I weed out anything that isn't almost in my sleep.. it's probably very frustrating for people around me, but for me, I just can't imagine being another way, so I'm not really sure what I could "check In" for... .although maybe if you elaborate on how you "check in" it would make more sense?


I "check in" with my own self, my own heart. Do I believe this is wrong/right? Completely independent of outside influence. Now, some things are instantaneous. I KNOW and FEEL what is not right and wrong, inauthentic or authentic right away. Some things I, completely on my own, ruminate on within myself. Some people do also get very irritated with me on this, too, because I'm fiercely stubborn and would never dream of letting anyone else make a decision for me. The thought almost makes me balk and would likely kill my soul. 

I've found that to some people, this way of thinking completely eludes them or they think it's stupid how introspective I am. *I*decide what is right for me.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> Like I said, I don't like mixing the two systems. But, I don't think Fi has the self-identity element to it (type 4 cultivating an identity out of feelings). I think the Enneagram types detail beyond the Jungian functions. I think that's another reason why the two systems don't equate.


Yes, neither do I. I've only heard Fi be described this way in the past.

I know that for me, I cling to anything having to do with my identity, who I am, what is right. As I said in my above post, I've noted that some people don't understand my level of introspection. May sound judgmental, but I often find those people as a bit shallow or lacking self-awareness. 



> Type 4 may or may not be dominant for you. Personally, I find you need to get into the actual experience taking place and see if that fits. I could say I want to be true to my feelings as well but it ultimately gets into what that means experientially.


What exactly do you mean by "actual experience?"



> It's kind of like those weed-out courses in college where you take the prereq intro course to know whether you should rule out that program of study. Likewise, if you find "emotional authenticity" doesn't fit then you can rule out the type but if it does fit you still don't know until you explore it a little deeper. The best way I've found is either by eliminating all the other possibilities or verifying the experience of type with someone who's living it (even then there can be many gotchas - are they typed right, are they talking about type experience or something else, are they self-aware enough to clearly explain the experience, do they know the Enneagram well enough to talk to specific type issues, etc.).


It's always so hard to see if you relate to another person of a type, though. As for one, I think there are other factors at play that make people different. We're all unique outside of type, still. I DO know that everything I've read that 4's have wrote, I "get" what they mean, as I've felt it myself.

Secondly... you don't know if the person is typed correctly.  Lol.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Grrrr.... I'm getting a bit tired of this. One moment, I think I have my type nailed down, the next, someone says something that makes me question everything and it feels like I go back to square one. Sometimes it's tempting to throw typology into the fire altogether. But, that's not me. I don't let things go until they're solved. -_-"
> ________________________________


Haha. I know the feeling. Also if you're an ISFP... you would have hidden agenda Ni which means you won't rest til you SEE WHATS AT THE CORE OF THE THING. 
(I know this because my husband is sort of the same but in a different way. He sees the core immediately, as he is an INFJ but , what he can't figure out sometimes is how it works for himself, and then he goes into Ni-Ti loops  )
My hidden agenda would be Si, and that makes so much sense.. in that things need to be felt viscerally, as part of me, but something coming from inside. I sometimes overdo sensual or sensational details in my writing for instance, and then my ENTP father edits it and crosses out a bunch of Fi and Si stuff and is like "lets get back to the action" hahha.


> I "check in" with my own self, my own heart. Do I believe this is wrong/right? Completely independent of outside influence. Now, some things are instantaneous. I KNOW and FEEL what is not right and wrong, inauthentic or authentic right away. Some things I, completely on my own, ruminate on within myself. Some people do also get very irritated with me on this, too, because I'm fiercely stubborn and would never dream of letting anyone else make a decision for me. The thought almost makes me balk and would likely kill my soul.
> 
> I've found that to some people, this way of thinking completely eludes them or they think it's stupid how introspective I am. *I*decide what is right for me.


Yeah I can relate to the "independent of outside influence" part for sure. I don't really care either if it's wrong or right, though I do care about being clear with my "intentions" if they involve other people, because I'm conscious of their own needs and autonomy as well. But when it comes to who I am and what works for me that really isn't up for debate; but how it affects someone else is also not up for debate because, well, I totally empathize with anyone who can take responsibility for their own feelings and own up to it.... tell me that I've hurt them and this is why... but without projecting expectations or other blame onto me , simply telling me how it affects them. When someone does that I'll empathize and work with them every time; but when someone starts in with "you SHOULD do or be XYZ" they won't get very far. I don't even care to prove myself right or argue, I just bow out of that shit. Go ahead and talk to yourself about what I should be while I'm over here being who I am.  Enjoy! If you want to fix me, make me into a fictional character and do whatever it is you think would make her perfect!  







hehe.


Anyway.. uhh.. I'm sorry to keep asking questions, I feel a little intrusive so feel free to ignore me... but if you're willing 

I'd be curious when you do need to ruminate... do you have a concrete example of this, and how you ruminate and what goes through your mind? If it's too personal I understand.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Philathea said:


> Thank you for this.
> 
> I want to talk a bit about being Sx-last. I originally typed at So/Sx, because I could not relate to being dry, or dispassionate, or uninterested in relationships. Being Sx-last has not stopped me from losing sleep over a guy for weeks and weeks. It has not stopped me from feeling heartbroken, so jealous I become sick, or even from being obsessed. I have.. researched guys I like to the point of stalking (I know all his relatives names and where his parents and grandparents went to college.. I SHOULD NOT KNOW THIS). I work two jobs: my crush only works at one of them. My schedule changed recently and he unfortunately happens to work there on the two days I don't. It is not unusual for me to work 12-18 hours a day, because I take on extra shifts on those days just so I can see him. In fact, I often go there on those days just to see him. I meet with friends or do schoolwork but honestly, he's the only reason I'm there.
> 
> ...


I'm so happy you wrote this. I've heard this from two sx lasts, but I hate speaking for others in too much detail. This is exactly what I've always observed about Sx lasts, they can be totally obsessed and out of their comfort zone with anxiety like I can when obsessed with someone. But in some ways it's even harder for them because it's so rare for them to connect in that way and maybe they over-value it when it does happen in the slightest little way; and in the case of the Sx last who is a 6, he is less likely to even TRUST that chemistry, whereas the Sx last 4 I know would trust her feelings but have no idea what to do with them.



> Also, on a different note, @_Animal_
> 
> I have always seen you as So-last. But it's just a "feeling". I pick up vibes from people and get strong opinions on their type easily, but I have zero ability to verbalize it.. so all I can say is I get a So-last feeling from you. For whatever that's worth, haha.


I completely get "feelings" - i'm the same way with verbalizing them. If you ever find the impetus or words to explain this at all, even if it's in impressions or doesn't quite make sense, or even if some of it is insulting, feel free  I am very easy going about that stuff, I promise I won't be pissed off  but I can understand if you just don't have the words. It happens to me all the damn time.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Animal said:


> Haha. I know the feeling. Also if you're an ISFP... you would have hidden agenda Ni which means you won't rest til you SEE WHATS AT THE CORE OF THE THING.


Like hell I won't. Higher Ne valuers tend to love the open-endedness of things like this. Me? I need it set in stone. I need the absolute. ONE TRUTH. Could be Ne PoLR, but I HATE when things are unresolved or left open-ended. It eats at my very core.  Yet, since Ni is lower, it's more sporadic that I come to these absolutes on my own. I like to know exactly where things are headed, when, and why. It puts me at ease.



> When someone does that I'll empathize and work with them every time; but when someone starts in with "you SHOULD do or be XYZ" they won't get very far. I don't even care to prove myself right or argue, I just bow out of that shit. Go ahead and talk to yourself about what I should be while I'm over here being who I am.  Enjoy! If you want to fix me, make me into a fictional character and do whatever it is you think would make her perfect!


I'm the same. The second someone tells me who they think I should be/what I should do, it's bye Felicia. I change who I am for nothing and nobody. 

Sounds weird, but ever since I was a little girl I would watch cartoons or whatever where a person would fake an identity or lie to get someone else's approval and this behavior baffled me. The thought of generating such inauthentic feelings completely eludes me. Like why? The biggest thing that my family can say about me is I never changed for anyone. I was rejected totally by the "popular" kids because I simply refused to conform to them. On the flipside, I love people who are genuine. All my friends are a little strange and unusual... just like me. And I love them for that. 



> Anyway.. uhh.. I'm sorry to keep asking questions, I feel a little intrusive so feel free to ignore me... but if you're willing
> 
> I'd be curious when you do need to ruminate... do you have a concrete example of this, and how you ruminate and what goes through your mind? If it's too personal I understand.


It's... difficult to explain. It could be more Fi-Ni, but I start to ruminate on an inner vision, the consequences of my actions, thinking about if this decision is going to be true to what I want from life/my goals. I'll try to think of a concrete example, but I've had one hell of a day today.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Like hell I won't. Higher Ne valuers tend to love the open-endedness of things like this. Me? I need it set in stone. I need the absolute. ONE TRUTH. Could be Ne PoLR, but I HATE when things are unresolved or left open-ended. It eats at my very core.  Yet, since Ni is lower, it's more sporadic that I come to these absolutes on my own. I like to know exactly where things are headed, when, and why. It puts me at ease.


Haha. That makes a lot of sense. I don't know if I'd say i "love" the open endedness as much as, it's completely a non issue. As long as I have a sense of self, purpose and integrity, everything in between is negotiable.




> I'm the same. The second someone tells me who they think I should be/what I should do, it's bye Felicia. I change who I am for nothing and nobody.
> 
> Sounds weird, but ever since I was a little girl I would watch cartoons or whatever where a person would fake an identity or lie to get someone else's approval and this behavior baffled me. The thought of generating such inauthentic feelings completely eludes me. Like why? The biggest thing that my family can say about me is I never changed for anyone. I was rejected totally by the "popular" kids because I simply refused to conform to them. On the flipside, I love people who are genuine. All my friends are a little strange and unusual... just like me. And I love them for that.


Yeah. This is actually very 468 in any order (sorry to be non-conclusive, but I can't lie!) 

Hm, some people have told me my friends are strange just like me, etc, but to me, it's not about being strange or regular; it's about being authentic or inauthentic. As you might have seen on my other thread in the four forum about "4s don't want to be unique, they want meaning"... it seems not everyone agrees on that so I'm not going to speak for all 4s but again only for myself.. the idea of valuing uniqueness for its own sake is lacking in integrity for so many reasons. Here are a few:

- Who sets the standard of "unique" vs normal? What's normal in one city is different in another; what's normal in one family is different than the next... I don't even understand what "normal" means; never did. My brother used to ask me "Does this look normal?" about his clothes.. and I would be absolutely baffled. Like..huh? What am I supposed to look for??!

- If there IS some outside standard of unique or normal, that still would have no bearing on who I am inside. If who I am inside happens to line up with a norm, fine; if not, fine. Actually, I'll make a little confession - the fact that I married the love of my life, and he's my husband, and I still love the living hell out of him, makes me feel like I beat the humans at their own sick game. While all my friends were whining about being single, reading articles about how to attract a husband, obsessing over wanting a family; I wasn't aiming to get married, and I didn't want kids and didn't need to be in a relationship - but now here I am, doing what everyone seems to want and expect to do - Loving my husband. That's what humans want to do, right? And I'm authentic about it, I can't stop loving him even if I tried. According to divorce rates, and the fact that most of my friends in my age range - i'm 35 - have been married and divorced at least once, in some cases twice; it makes me smirk a little that those who were so desperate to get married totally failed while for me it happened so authentically and I have a perfect marriage by any standard,, except, errm, money.. but we'll work on that. ;D (sorry, yeah, I'm a competitive bitch. But really, on an individual basis I swear I do have empathy for people. I just can't help laughing when their dumb fake asses fall all over themselves and I don't even give a shit about what they're doing and in the end, I found something TRULY authentic. middle finger to society's pressure and bullshit for that.)



> It's... difficult to explain. It could be more Fi-Ni, but I start to ruminate on an inner vision, the consequences of my actions, thinking about if this decision is going to be true to what I want from life/my goals. I'll try to think of a concrete example, but I've had one hell of a day today.


I'd love to hear a concrete example whenever you are in the state of mind to write it out  It's hard for me to say if I can relate abstractly.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> What exactly do you mean by "actual experience?"


I find the biggest problem with people trying to figure out their type is that they use the words to try and determine their type. You can easily have multiple people say they identify with "authenticity" and say therefore I must be type 4 but when you look at it closer they're all just using the same word to describe different experiences. Like I said the words just help you eliminate what doesn't fit and point to something that might. You need to see if the actual experience fits instead of some word that can be used to describe different experiences.



QueenOfNight said:


> I DO know that everything I've read that 4's have wrote, I "get" what they mean, as I've felt it myself.


Yeah, that's the type of experience that can help confirm type. I try to go one step further by looking one layer deeper to make sure that the motivation or focus behind that is also the same. Take for example what @_Animal_ said here to go beneath the idea of being true to your feelings.



> I don't need to "check in" - I'm an INFP and whether something is "me" or not is a FELT experience. I weed out anything that isn't almost in my sleep..


If you understand at that deeper level then it's a deeper confirmation. If not, then I don't think you can close that door yet.

If you're just wondering between type 4 and 6w7 then it may help to compare introjection vs. projection in this sense.

Type 4 introjection is basically associating with things in the world that you emotionally resonate with and cultivating a sense of self from that - that's me, that's not me.

Type 6w7 projection is more about imagining what others might be feeling, thinking, etc. around a given situation. Your feeling, thoughts, etc. are then coming through others in reaction to that projection.

In other words, type 4 primarily goes with a direct self-reference for feeling while 6w7 feeling comes through the other in a roundabout way.

Here's a video of type 6w7 explaining her experience of projection at about 4:20 in the clip (most people wouldn't even be aware that they're doing this).


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> If you're just wondering between type 4 and 6w7 then it may help to compare introjection vs. projection in this sense.
> 
> Type 4 introjection is basically associating with things in the world that you emotionally resonate with and cultivating a sense of self from that - that's me, that's not me.
> 
> ...


My close friend is a 6w7, and definitely an introvert.. and she would say she's self directed and her feelings come from within. She would probably identify more with the 4 portion of this statement, though she knows she is a six.

The projection for her is more like... well, I will put it this way - she wrote the exact same thing in a group chat today that @_QueenOfNight_ wrote here, in so many words - about, who she is, is non-negotiable, and those who try, "goodbye felicia" .. well she used different words (sort of)but pretty much said the same thing. She has strong Fi, strong inner vision, is self-directed.

The thing is she feels the need to point that out. Things like, "I confirm my type - no one else does." or "I decide who I am, no one else does." Sure, I agree with that, but I don't feel the need to assure myself of it or say it - although it is an obvious truth - it's just... I have never come close to caving to anyone else's vision of what I should be (much to their annoyance and believe me I have a 1 mother and a 7w8 father and they both have strong ideals and are very forceful; I'm unmoldable but I am NOT rebellious. My father is a musician, was a famous rockstar; I'm a musician.. fine. The music was genuine in me; no need to prove I'm not what he wants me to be. I also always got good grades because I wanted to, not because my parents wanted me to; although they felt strongly about my grades. But they also felt strongly about what time I should go to sleep and what I shouldn't wear or say in public or who I shouldn't date, and that didn't go over so well, lol) 

I don't feel the need to first see what others are doing and then act for it or against it. I don't feel the need to measure myself against them in any way, really. Nor do I feel the need to measure my identity against what others expect me to be. I end up getting into conversations about that with sixes and I DO relate to them on that point, that nobody can mold me.. but think about it this way.... why do 3s integrate to 6?? 6 is about authenticity MORE THAN 4s in a way. 4 is about wanting to embody their ideal identity - being painfully aware of the huge gap between that and their perceived flawed self - whereas six is about being skeptical about what is real and what isn't, which often means, as a result, being true to yourself. 3 integrates to 6 because 6 sees through their own lies and 3s do not; they identify with their idealized image to the point that they self-deceive. 6s are allergic to that.

Here is a great video about a 6's feelings on the line to 3, and authenticity. Amy Lee is a 6w7 with a 4 fix. The important part is the video not the song as much.







8s also care about authenticity. Why else would innocence be so holy to them? Children may be whining, fighting demanding selfish little assholes but at least they're honest, which is innocent. 8s easily distinguish between falsehood and things that are "put on" vs. things that are real; and they have a very gut-felt sense about it. My ex is an ESTP 8. I asked him do you like porn ? (I don't. I hate it.. thats another story though) ... he responded with, "No. It's fake." I'm not saying all 8s don't like porn (lol that would be an absurd thing to say) or that porn preference is type related, but the point is his reasoning is often about something is fake or it's real. That's just being a reactive type in general.



I'm not saying that you're a 6 or a 4, @_QueenOfNight_, just pointing out that anything you wrote so far isn't conclusive, and that my 6 friend with a 4 fix says the same things too (though you could argue that I do too, so again it's not conclusive).


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> I don't feel the need to first see what others are doing and then act for it or against it.


Right, that was what I was talking about with projection. It's often a feeling in reaction to what's being projected upon others as to what they're feeling or thinking. The problem is that people who do this don't usually know that they're doing it because they don't have a reference for doing it any other way. It only gets revealed in subtle ways when comparing experiences (or when someone has observed it before and can make that discernment). That's why I mistakenly told @QueenOfNight that I thought 6w7 was dominant for her (I mistook her for someone else I saw doing this).


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

" 4 is about wanting to embody their ideal identity - being painfully aware of the huge gap between that and their perceived flawed self - whereas six is about being skeptical about what is real and what isn't, which often means, as a result, being true to yourself. 3 integrates to 6 because 6 sees through their own lies and 3s do not; they identify with their idealized image to the point that they self-deceive. 6s are allergic to that."

^ I edited this into my last post so if you didn't see it, I just wanted to repeat it  It's probably the most important part, since I think this is widely misrepresented where sixes are concerned.

To add to it,
Some sixes project their skepticism about who they really are or what is "real" vs "fake," onto the world, by feeling like other people expect something of them which is different from who they are. But what is really happening, is the six expects something of herself that doesn't line up with what she truly feels, or something of that nature, and she projects the idea of it outward, thinking that it's OTHER people looking at her badly, or feeling like she should be something other than she is. This is very easy to confuse with 4 descriptions, because of the very intense focus on authenticity that some sixes have.

Fours long for an ideal self that has been destroyed. There's a sense of one's origin being the "ideal self," like they were born a certain way - even if it's flawed - but it was genuine, or it was really them..but they have moved away from it, or it was taken away. They'll search inside themselves for what is meaningful, what would make them significant, what would give substance to their identity. The more they try to find it, the more shallow it becomes. What makes it real is taking action, _embodying_ whatever they are in the moment; simply _being_, instead of examining who they really are. 9s for instance are good at BEING, without any pretenses, but they don't self reflect (if unhealthy) or the reflections just don't go deep enough; they tune out what hurts the most. 4s have the opposite problem where they overly self reflect to the point that they can't even tell if what they're projecting to the world is "the real them" because they spent too much time mulling over it, or what's lacking from it, rather than just embodying it. This has nothing to do with other people and how they're perceived, really, it's about the self-perceived ideal being in line with its embodiment; which it never is. It's a very self-absorbed type. They feel disconnected from their origin and perceive it as something separate from everyone else, which they need to discover on their own; when in truth, we all stem from the same origin, so the way to find it is to express oneself, to turn the internal hall of mirrors outward and let the rest of the world reflect on themselves in the mirrors we create. That's why some 4s are drawn to art and self-expression. It's what they do best when healthy. Art doesn't leave room for lies because the aesthetic eye knows when something is forced or fake. Shame can distort this - between the ideal identity and the perception of what is lacking from the self and what doesn't line up with the ideal or the origin. The best thing to do is just get it OUT, create OUTWARD mirrors; communicate out loud , or just... focus on something concrete and do it, something deeply meaningful and expressive of the self, but... the steps toward expressing it will get our hands dirty in the world and get our minds out of the "who am I" rut or obsessing over what we desire to be but can never be; what we once were and could never be again, or what we want but can't have.


The problem is, in making the ideal "real," it will lose some of the ideal form - for example my album will never be what I heard in my head... and sometimes the ideal is all we have.. the gap between that ideal and the actual self is all we know.... so it's hard to let go of it by making it real and watching "reality' destroy that perfect ideal at every turn; it's harder than just saying "I'll never reach it" ... in some ways.. because what is left if not the ideal?

As Marilyn Manson said, "When all of your wishes are granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed." That has been my favorite quote since I heard it in 1998. Nothing has ever come close to it. And he is a 4, and I think that's why 4s hesitate to "embody" their ideals because..t hey know in reality it's never the same. 1s CAN'T NOT do this, can't NOT embody their ideals.. they would collapse if they stopped trying. this is why we integrate to 1.

@QueenOfNight
Feel free to react to this in your own words if you want  sometimes reacting to the ideas in your own words makes it easiest to find the trends in yourself, even if you feel like you relate to it. (That's my experience anyway.)


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Animal said:


> My close friend is a 6w7, and definitely an introvert.. and she would say she's self directed and her feelings come from within. She would probably identify more with the 4 portion of this statement, though she knows she is a six.
> 
> The projection for her is more like... well, I will put it this way - she wrote the exact same thing in a group chat today that @_QueenOfNight_ wrote here, in so many words - about, who she is, is non-negotiable, and those who try, "goodbye felicia" .. well she used different words (sort of)but pretty much said the same thing. She has strong Fi, strong inner vision, is self-directed.


I read everything you wrote, I just didn't want to put it in a long quote. Lmao.

Your friend and I do sound _a lot_ a like. Perhaps it's CP 6? I'm... pretty rebellious. Lol.

If this is what 6 projection is, then most certainly it is me. I think it's a 468 thing, too "The Truth Teller."

Nothing with me is hidden. Everything about me is all on the table. Take it or leave it, because I'm not going to change. Love me or hate me, I'm still here.



> Here is a great video about a 6's feelings on the line to 3, and authenticity. Amy Lee is a 6w7 with a 4 fix. The important part is the video not the song as much.


Oh God... of all the music videos you could have posted, it had to be this one...

This video/song and I go way back. Even now, I'm getting a bit emotional. This song captures me and my feelings so well.
I remember being 13 years old and watching this music video for the first time. I cried. I remember how it hit me emotionally when Amy stood in that elevator with those girls whispering about her, or her screaming into the mirror, eventually shattering it with her bare fist. Her viciously cutting her hair into a mess... yelling at the fake billboard image of herself. That imagery spoke so loudly to me. Music is such a powerful thing, as I felt like I really connected with her, what her meaning was through that song on a near spiritual level. I think that's what every artist tries to get out of their viewers/listeners... that understanding, that resonation...

I don't want to say I "idolize" Amy Lee, as that's not the proper word lol. But, I love her music, as I've always felt like I understood her music. I wonder what her cognitive type is? Hm.

Another one that speaks to me, Lithium. Sometimes it feels like I could have written it myself. Lol









> I'm not saying that you're a 6 or a 4, @_QueenOfNight_, just pointing out that anything you wrote so far isn't conclusive, and that my 6 friend with a 4 fix says the same things too (though you could argue that I do too, so again it's not conclusive).


Well, I'm certainly leaning 6w7 now. Especially since I think I'm misinterpreting what you're saying about your 4-ness in my reactive, head-like way.
@enneathusiast

Watched that video. I do relate to a lot to what she said. I'm always in my own head, always doubting, always thinking ahead to be prepared. And her part about doing things like working out to release that energy.... I feel that, too. Deeply. I've been down since December with surgery and recovery. I HAVE to do things to keep out of my head. I have had so much pinned up, nervous, reactive energy these past few months that I don't know how my family can live with me because I just... explode.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@QueenOfNight
You are awesome  It's really beautiful how well you know yourself. I wish I could have been that candid and genuine in my typing process. Ugh I was so fucked up, one image upon another, typing all my perceived flaws. I really admire your openness and candidness here. I think this is why I get along so well with head-types in general. I am so glad you took this well.. sometimes if I start drawing distinctions between types people get offended. I really love your last post!

You know, my husband is a 7w6, and he typed that way when we met, but we went through a few other types for him and then reached 4. We spent the last ... hmm... 5-6 months thinking he's a 4, and going over "what makes a 4." He's 4 fixed, and he opened my eyes to some aspects of 4 in such an open, honest, self-revealing way that I could never do.. but which were relevant. In other ways, I completely couldn't relate to his defenses & reasoning (or how much he thinks lol), but we chalked it up to Fi vs Fe as he is an INFJ. But, now he's back to 7w6 - with 4 fix - and his 4 typing, I don't know what it did for him, but I can say that what it did for me, listening to him compare the releavant issues to mine - even if our issues were different, that process really helped ME get to the core of my own issues. It's amazing how well head types can talk about this while my shame and image illusions just clogs me up. I see some 4w5s are better at this; with the 3 wing I can really lose sight of what the actual problem is, while still perceiving flaws and problems. Hearing head types talk about their flaws helps me so much to open up about mine. <3


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@QueenOfNight
I'd venture to guess Amy Lee is ESFP or ENFP. I will give it some more thought.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> You know, my husband is a 7w6, and he typed that way when we met, but we went through a few other types for him and then reached 4. We spent the last ... hmm... 5-6 months thinking he's a 4, and going over "what makes a 4."


Glad you're over typing him at 4. It seemed obvious to me that you were getting confused around it as you tried to expand you're understanding of 4 to accommodate him into that typing. I just didn't feel it my place to say anything. Glad you also learned a lot in the process.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Glad you're over typing him at 4. It seemed obvious to me that you were getting confused around it as you tried to expand you're understanding of 4 to accommodate him into that typing. I just didn't feel it my place to say anything. Glad you also learned a lot in the process.


Yeah. Well I was trying to get down to the basic principles which he did help me with, because there are things that are "me" (such as, for instance, my associations with the word "unique" vs someone else's) and things that are "4" - he did help me to clear away a lot of fluff but in that process we also realized he wasn't a 4. I think it helped me more than it confused me overall, but I am glad we resolved things. 

Also, feel free to comment on whatever. I know you don't know him or haven't posted with him, but both of us are extremely chill about typing suggestions. We appreciate all feedback whether we agree or not. Also, is there anything in particular about 4 you think I misunderstood by accommodating him? Like something I attributed to 4s that wasn't correct?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Also, is there anything in particular about 4 you think I misunderstood by accommodating him? Like something I attributed to 4s that wasn't correct?


Nothing I could see in your posts. What I saw was you just being more accommodating to things that you didn't identify with. Something to the effect of "I'm like this but maybe that's not true for all 4s because my husband's like this." I often thought you were describing something core to type 4 but you seemed to hedge yourself by trying to accommodate his type of 4ness.

I don't know if type 7 is the best fit for him or not but IME type 7 is equally as much an individualist as type 4.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Nothing I could see in your posts. What I saw was you just being more accommodating to things that you didn't identify with. Something to the effect of "I'm like this but maybe that's not true for all 4s because my husband's like this." I often thought you were describing something core to type 4 but you seemed to hedge yourself by trying to accommodate his type of 4ness.
> 
> I don't know if type 7 is the best fit for him or not but IME type 7 is equally as much an individualist as type 4.


Makes sense. He's definitely 7... he's been between 7 and 4 for years, but then he typed a few other ways. The reasoning was a bit obscured by events in his life and also being an INFJ and major introvert (though he's pretty fun and extroverted when he's out and feels comfortable with the people, and quite possibly more engaging than I am)... he had trouble typing at 7 because he's not as much of a 'doer' as some 7s. But, the core fears and etc. were always there. We never ruled out 7 for him. What put us over the edge with typing him at 4, was that he says he has always primarily been "looking for HIMSELF" by creating archetypes about the world, etc; which seemed to be an identity issue, though I look inward first for myself and he looks outward first (but we thought that was Fi vs Fe). I have always known 7s were the true individualists of the enneagram, and 6s were the true authenticity-seekers.  

I am going to write up a thread about 4s and 7s and how this mistake gets made. It has happened to me before, and some people on this board have taken me for a 7, even a very close friend of mine who is an excellent typer, although I think she changed her mind by now. But I think it's an easy mistake to make and I want to do some writeups about it. 

We talked to that same excellent typer in depth about the 4 and 7 stuff and it is very clear after that conversation that he is a 7, which is exactly how he was typed when we first met; just, I think he was attributing his identity-seeking to 4, and 7s do this more than most people realize (especially introverts) and not all of them are extreme active doers.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

I suspect I am Social first, possibly So/Sp. Why do I think this? 

It's the thoughts that pre-occupy my mind. What the world is coming to, and where the world is going. I must steer our course, because humanity is leading itself to disaster. I must serve as a voice of reason to this world, because there won't be another one besides me. I've seen falseness, and I'd like to be that hero who brings humanity to a bright age. To do this, I need to become influential and be in a position where others will listen to my visions. For that reason, I'm seeking music as a form of expression. 

The more I think about this though, the more I could see this as Sp/So. At no point is networking at the core of my motives, more that we're headed for the shadows and creating our disaster.

And I don't even know that I'm Sx-last. I'd like to hear your thoughts.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> I must serve as a voice of reason to this world, because there won't be another one besides me.


I find that's just type 5 in general seeing a lack of reasoning in the world and seeing a better way of making sense of things.

IMO, the instincts have more to do with how you specifically interact with your environment and others.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> I find that's just type 5 in general seeing a lack of reasoning in the world and seeing a better way of making sense of things.
> 
> IMO, the instincts have more to do with how you specifically interact with your environment and others.


There was a time when I was a perpetual follower in social situations. Whenever an individual interests me and I think they can teach me something, I effectively remove my presence and take the role of the observer. It's incredibly draining for me to be so silent, but ultimately it's a great way to learn. 

It's very difficult for me to try and observe my interactions with the environment. I'm quite easily overwhelmed by excessive sensory stimuli; but that I attribute either to having weak Sensing, or being a withdrawn type on the Enneagram.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Ztommi said:


> @Animal
> 
> I found this on a website:
> sx/sp seducer (weak sp) - sx in full command produces an active recruiter of potential mates; but being sx/sp this remains in the yin mode of seducing. charismatic and overtly sexualized, arguably the most purely sx of all stacks and ranges. draws from so/sx shadow to liven up sx into an erotic playfulness and to keep sx far ahead of their relatively nominal sp. an emotional yearning to their mating ritual; an inherently unstable range that can lead to a pattern of serial heartbreak. often confused for sx/so.
> ...


you're listening to typewatch too much =P


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@_enneathusiast_
I've thought for a long time that he's Sx second because it doesn't seem as much  like a neurosis as it is for me, but it's definitely there as a point of awareness and indulgence... I wonder if it's because he's not traumatized and I am, that I seem so much more extreme in that area, though I was like that pre-trauma, but then again I'm a 4..

Anyway, a funny thing about our feelings about other 7s in the past: both of us have admired other 7s, but his reason was that they would go out and DO things and live their life more and take life by the reigns; my reason was that they're so "splat" about their insecurities and flaws and assets; they don't seem so confused by their self image; they communicate in such a straight forward way. My 7 ex would cry at the bar, then be visibly embarrassed and self-conscious about it. I felt just as tortured inside but I felt like nobody could see it and it was my own fault for being too ashamed to show it; not being 'splat' enough. I was so jealous that he could wear his heart on his sleeve. Whereas @_Sun Daeva_ admired that they would LIVE more, DO more, etc. So even our reasons for admiring 7s.. mine was 4ish.. his was 7ish. I also have been envious of one other person, a fellow 4 who is "more me than me" in the sense of being so much more authentic in his writing, so insightful about characters, so much more self-aware etc. @_Sun Daeva_ has admired 4s for being so focused on their vision.

Anyway, things like that really show me what it is that each of us prioritize and what is fixated on. But you could still see why we would think we were both 4s because we both related to comparing ourselves to people who are "more me than me."


At this point we're both confused about his instincts. There was no way in hell we were both Sx 4s, but now if he's a 7 we're back to the drawing board. If he is Sx first then I'm going to be VERY awed by how he takes that by the reigns compared to me, and steadies himself and holds back from situations that could be destructive in his past..but when it's time to go for it, he is unwavering (like he was with me).  If he's Sx second that is easier for me to process, but Soc and Sp aren't quite making sense. I'll get him to post here a bit later. OF course I don't want to type him by comparison to myself if he's not even the same type. But I don't think I'm blind to it. My sx 7 ex had the same Sx-issues I do, and was just as fucked up as I was as I explained in my long post here; it's easy to see he's Sx first. And like me, he has no problem with work, autonomy and that kind of thing. I can easily see you're Sx, hard to explain why though, it's a feeling. But I guess I'm just too close to my husband.. he's part of me.. and there are too many personal implications to comparisons for both of us, so it's easier to ask others 


And of course, I'm still wavering on my second instinct which does not help my overall understanding whatsoever.


How does social awareness (or lack thereof) work for you personally?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@Philathea @Animal
it's true that all types get butterflies in their stomach when they have a crush on someone, but Sx doms are like "give me more!" while Sx-lasts are more uncomfortable with the sensation and would rather not focus on it.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> There was a time when I was a perpetual follower in social situations. Whenever an individual interests me and I think they can teach me something, I effectively remove my presence and take the role of the observer. It's incredibly draining for me to be so silent, but ultimately it's a great way to learn.
> 
> It's very difficult for me to try and observe my interactions with the environment. I'm quite easily overwhelmed by excessive sensory stimuli; but that I attribute either to having weak Sensing, or being a withdrawn type on the Enneagram.


WHat would make you turn away from Sp as your dominant instinct?


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> @_Philathea_ @_Animal_
> it's true that all types get butterflies in their stomach when they have a crush on someone, but Sx doms are like "give me more!" while Sx-lasts are more uncomfortable with the sensation and would rather not focus on it.


 @Philathea is this true? I can't really speak for what Sx lasts feel inside, but I know the Sx lasts I'm close to are both very very obsessive about their crushes, and overwhelmed, and yeah awkward.. but still obsessed, not "not focusing on it." They just don't have much confidence that they have any control in that arena, that the other person might respond teh way they want. Some Sx lasts read rule-books about how to approach men/women, or master techniques, or consider flirting with third parties to be "practice."


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> I effectively remove my presence and take the role of the observer. It's incredibly draining for me to be so silent, but ultimately it's a great way to learn.


The observer part is just type 5 but the second part about it being draining to be silent sounds like possible social. Is it a pull to participate? If so, elaborate.



Lord Fudgingsley said:


> I'm quite easily overwhelmed by excessive sensory stimuli...


That sounds like a type 5 thing as well. Self-Preservation tends to want to have its own space and do its own thing without being concerned about others, not getting caught up in what they want or expect. Social 5 would more enjoy participating in what others are doing as long as they could sit to the side and observe from time to time. The order of those two instincts has to do with which pull is stronger.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> The observer part is just type 5 but the second part about it being draining to be silent sounds like possible social. Is it a pull to participate? If so, elaborate.
> 
> 
> 
> That sounds like a type 5 thing as well. Self-Preservation tends to want to have its own space and do its own thing without being concerned about others, not getting caught up in what they want or expect. Social 5 would more enjoy participating in what others are doing as long as they could sit to the side and observe from time to time. The order of those two instincts has to do with which pull is stronger.


I'll reply to the rest in due course, but what about Sexual 5?


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

Animal said:


> WHat would make you turn away from Sp as your dominant instinct?


Okay, this is not an answer:

Probably because I am very focused on situations taking place around me. And because I feel like I'm poor at connecting with other human beings, and wish I could connect more closely. I also feel like my energy, though limited in the external world has a very intense quality. I think I've quite a magnetic and drawing energy; like others can see that I've a story to tell. I play the mysterious card all the time. I've met a girl who craves me, a rather lonely girl who feels like she needs me - she lives in a different country to me and has given me a surprise visit when I told her I was pre-occupied. I realized she wanted my heart... and that frightened me. It's scary to be so close to another individual, especially when she was so far away. There's a certain extent of claustrophobia; as you begin to feel like you can't hide. Like you're being laid bare and nobody is there to save you. There are no rules in the game of love; just feeling. I hate feelings... sometimes. It's so difficult for me to try and open up.

There is a rather interesting situation regarding myself and relationships: I loved a girl back when I was 10 (and I am convinced she loved me). We were of course, much too young but she was an amazing individual; I felt like she understood me - possibly the only individual I've ever met who did. She tragically died in a train crash, and at first I sought another to replace her. Putting aside that I was socially awkward and was clueless in faking connections. I never really understood what it meant to connect to another individual. Maybe because I ask for too much... but then why ask for anything but the best? I wrote many lyrics about journeys... without any context of what I'm searching for. I don't know what I'm searching for. I am a perpetual wanderer.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> The observer part is just type 5 but the second part about it being draining to be silent sounds like possible social. Is it a pull to participate? If so, elaborate.
> 
> 
> 
> That sounds like a type 5 thing as well. Self-Preservation tends to want to have its own space and do its own thing without being concerned about others, not getting caught up in what they want or expect. Social 5 would more enjoy participating in what others are doing as long as they could sit to the side and observe from time to time. The order of those two instincts has to do with which pull is stronger.


There is definitely a pull to participate. It feels like the closer I get, the more I can connect with those around me. I can draw closer and become one. It is like attempting to merge with another entity; you don't move into it until you take to its ways. When I feel I am losing touch with said entity, I pull myself out.

I feel ultimately like all the Self-preservation things simply come back to type 5. Of course, there could yet be a bigger picture.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Lord Fudgingsley said:


> I realized she wanted my heart... and that frightened me. It's scary to be so close to another individual, especially when she was so far away. There's a certain extent of claustrophobia; as you begin to feel like you can't hide. Like you're being laid bare and nobody is there to save you. There are no rules in the game of love; just feeling. I hate feelings... sometimes. It's so difficult for me to try and open up.


That's sounding SX-last to me. Especially the part about claustrophobia and hating feelings.



Lord Fudgingsley said:


> I never really understood what it meant to connect to another individual. Maybe because I ask for too much... but then why ask for anything but the best? I wrote many lyrics about journeys... without any context of what I'm searching for. I don't know what I'm searching for. I am a perpetual wanderer.


That's sounding like the search, the journeys are SP related. I don't hear anything about people in there.

On just the post I'm quoting I'd guess SP/SO. Remember it's just a guess on limited info though and only my interpretation.


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> That's sounding SX-last to me. Especially the part about claustrophobia and hating feelings.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, that's fair enough. I appreciate your time a great deal.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@Lord Fudgingsley
For what it's worth you strike me as Sp/So as well. The neurosis is about protecting yourself, but it seems like you're more comfortable being the outside observer with groups, whereas connections and feelings are just downright scary and overwhelming.


----------



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

I'm not sure if I've ever quite had that "butterflies in stomach" feeling, unless it's like that feeling of... getting aroused over something but then getting so excited I feel like I need to visit the restroom. >_>


----------



## Lord Fudgingsley (Mar 3, 2013)

Animal said:


> @_Lord Fudgingsley_
> For what it's worth you strike me as Sp/So as well. The neurosis is about protecting yourself, but it seems like you're more comfortable being the outside observer with groups, whereas connections and feelings are just downright scary and overwhelming.


I don't know... I thought so at first. But I read this and start to think; is that really so? It's like some detail here isn't right.

What happens when your own wavelength seems so far removed from any other person's? What happens when you long for further communication, but cannot comprehend what you see or hear? What happens then? Would any individual not fall into perpetual loneliness?

The next move is a slow retreat into fear. A hatred of loneliness, but seeing no way out; except by compromising your own identity. That's something I've far too much pride to do.

But no, sp/so does make sense. It's hard to see that I can trace my behaviour back to anything other than desiring to create a sanctuary.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Animal said:


> @Philathea is this true? I can't really speak for what Sx lasts feel inside, but I know the Sx lasts I'm close to are both very very obsessive about their crushes, and overwhelmed, and yeah awkward.. but still obsessed, not "not focusing on it." They just don't have much confidence that they have any control in that arena, that the other person might respond teh way they want. Some Sx lasts read rule-books about how to approach men/women, or master techniques, or consider flirting with third parties to be "practice."


in general, I've noticed that Sx-second is the least awkward while Sx-first and Sx-last are awkward for opposite reasons.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

My updated instinctual stacking:

Sx/Fuck you/Fuck you too


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Could anyone ask me some questions to confirm or disprove my sp typing?

I tried to just write about it but I got lost, mainly because I think the most significant part of my sp is general focus on conserving, rather than whatever's the opposite called in English.
If I were a wild animal I'd definitely be a sp animal over sx, I think that explains it well)
But when I talk about myself it's easy for sx to overshadow the sp :/


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Animal said:


> My updated instinctual stacking:
> 
> Sx/Fuck you/Fuck you too


after additional contemplation, I've realized I'm actually Fuck You-dom with strong secondary Sx


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Could anyone ask me some questions to confirm or disprove my sp typing?
> 
> I tried to just write about it but I got lost, mainly because I think the most significant part of my sp is general focus on conserving, rather than whatever's the opposite called in English.
> If I were a wild animal I'd definitely be a sp animal over sx, I think that explains it well)
> But when I talk about myself it's easy for sx to overshadow the sp :/


I'll throw something out there for you.
Which one would you prefer if you only had one choice?
a) a special place
b) a special someone
c) a special group of friends

No other considerations besides what special means to you.
Explain a little about the why in your answer.


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

Animal said:


> @Philathea is this true? I can't really speak for what Sx lasts feel inside, but I know the Sx lasts I'm close to are both very very obsessive about their crushes, and overwhelmed, and yeah awkward.. but still obsessed, not "not focusing on it." They just don't have much confidence that they have any control in that arena, that the other person might respond teh way they want. Some Sx lasts read rule-books about how to approach men/women, or master techniques, or consider flirting with third parties to be "practice."


Choosing not to focus on my crush is.. close to impossible. The number 1 reason I have tried to stop focusing on him in the past is because I miss feeling independent; like I don't NEED another person. I don't like feeling that _vulnerable_. But those attempts fail.

I think what I may feel at times is, when I am getting closer to a person, I feel.. inadequate. Like I am not enough. Like I lack something integral for a connection to be made. It's a mix of discomfort and insecurity.. so in that sense I can relate. And I do have this need to keep my distance when that happens. But it's less 'I don't want to focus on this/this makes me uncomfortable' and more 'I need to get away because I don't want you to see what's wrong with me'. =( I don't want them to realize they can't connect with me. (Which is NOT necessarily true.. I am human, and I can connect with others. But despite knowing this I still have massive insecurity in this area.)



> Some Sx lasts read rule-books about how to approach men/women, or master techniques, or consider flirting with third parties to be "practice."


I have never done this though, and I really dislike when people approach relationships this way. Something about it just doesn't jive with me.. maybe it's my Fi. I see people as INDIVIDUALS, so when people read rule-books, or even just ask general advice about the genders (a guy friend of mine used to always ask 'how he should talk to girls').. it pisses me off because one size does not fit all. Not all men or women are the same, and I feel like these people assume there is some general 'format' they can use to win someone over. As if people are not dynamic, and unique, and fluid and impossible to determine with any certainty.. I don't know, something about that just does not sit well with me. 

I do feel helpless when it comes to my feelings, though. I know what I feel. And I know how strongly I feel. But I don't know what to do. I don't have words for how.. incapable I feel, how much it feels out of my hands.

Edit: I just realized, I have probably read every thread about ESFP 7w6 so/sx's under the sun (his type)... so while I might not read rule-books or practice techniques, that may be my own way of feeling more confident and trying to get more control on getting him to return my feelings.


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

I was going to post this in the other thread on the 4 forum, but then I realized it would be more fitting here.
@enneathusiast mentioned that for Sx-doms, 'home' is not in a place, but in another person. And then it came up that for Soc-doms, home might be found in a society.

Whenever I see typical instinctual variant questions like, Which would you rather? A) A soulmate, B) To be popular, or C) A really nice house? (obviously I'm exaggerating a bit, they generally aren't this ridiculous xD) I always, always, always go with the Sx answer. And I think the vast majority of people would. Having one or a few people who you are closer to than anyone else is a human need. 

So if someone were to ask me which I would consider 'home', without any thought I would say to have one person who I love and am close to. But that doesn't change the fact that I am intensely aware of people wherever I go. I pick up social subtleties easily. I remember the names and faces of classmates from years ago who I never even talked to. When having a conversation in public, I am constantly aware of anyone around, anyone who might hear me, what they'll think, etc. I may not _care_, but that is where my attention NATURALLY goes. I'm beginning to realize instincts have very little to do with life experience and values. I may VALUE one special relationship more than I do anything in the social arena, but that is still where my attention will _naturally_ go. 

I think this is why so many people mistype as Sx-first. Having one, important person is something that everyone values.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

I agree, that it's mostly just a survival strategy. 

I *need* to feel like I have the resources to protect myself at any given moment. That can manifest in a number of ways. Largely, it means I'm pretty self-monitoring and careful about self-disclosure -- but why? I don't exactly know, other than that I don't want my emotions and vulnerabilities to be used against me. Yet it's not always like I made the wisest choices here-- sometimes I overshare. I usually make these decisions on arbitrary reasons that just "feel" right to me, but they aren't rational. I'm not paranoid, I don't think everyone is out to get me; and in fact, I'm pretty confident I can handle betrayal/stressful situations once they arise (whether or not that's true). But maybe that is because I hold this illusion that I'm more in control of my image than I really am. I am also definitely one to minimize my needs to keep them more manageable. 

Physical needs - it's very hard for me to focus on anything else if I'm in pain or don't have a secure idea of how I'll be handling the immediate future, yet I put things off and improvise constantly, anyway. Lol. But again, it's kind of a way of denying my mortality, which is a weird way to be sp-dom but it is sp-dom nonetheless. 

I will make big gambles to obtain whatever I'm prioritizing in the moment, especially if it's related to securing future resources. I'm also acutely aware that the gambles are gambles, and am constantly evaluating cost and benefit, pros and cons... what I can afford vs what I cannot afford. So it's less reckless than it seems on the surface. 


Before I can really invest in anything, I need to understand the situation and how I'm going to be able to survive it, should something go wrong. This is one reason why I commit to very little. Even simple social situations. I have little ability in my faith to properly navigate social norms, to succeed or excel by pursuing the standard hierarchical or networking strategies most seem accustomed to, so I don't bother. I'd flounder disastrously if I primarily relied on social roles or bigger social connections to ensure my survival. 

So, I don't. I utilize personal resources and one-on-one relationships instead.

I value interpersonal relationships more than anything, but it's not such a reflexive preoccupation.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> I'll throw something out there for you.
> Which one would you prefer if you only had one choice?
> a) a special place
> b) a special someone
> ...



Okay, here's the thing. I am pretty sure I'm sp-dom. BUt the funny thing is that I'm *consciously* focused on relationships more than most anything else. Romantic in particular, but any. One-on-one relationships. 

I'm not so *consciously* focused on self-preservation. If I had to choose between a "special place" and a "special person" I would choose the special person --- *assuming* that I had a place that was adaptable enough to inhabit. It doesn't have to be perfect or exceedingly safe, I just have to know I am capable of surviving any uncomfortable or unsavory thing that may happen. And I'm constantly calculating those risks.

I calculate my risks so quickly and so constantly, in fact, that my decisions tend to seem either very stalled or very reckless--- little in between -- yet there's so much silent computing underneath it all.

But my life would feel meaningless without interpersonal connections. I could survive without them, literally, like I could remain biologically alive and functional. But I would be emotionally dead, which to me is as bad as real death.

an amazing relationship + a mediocre living environment > an amazing living environment + a mediocre relationship.... 

...but I'm still pretty sure I'm not sx-dom.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> I read everything you wrote, I just didn't want to put it in a long quote. Lmao.
> 
> Your friend and I do sound _a lot_ a like. Perhaps it's CP 6? I'm... pretty rebellious. Lol.
> 
> ...


FWIW @QueenOfNight, I think you're a 4. Just because you relate outwardly to someone, and especially someone we hardly know anything about from a second-hand source, doesn't mean you're the same type. You have to look at your motivations when it comes to Enneagram. I see you looking for mirroring in your post, as I bolded above. And I think Amy Lee's a Type 4, too. How can anyone not think that after watching this video? Again, I'm confused why @Animal doesn't type her as a 4, when everything Amy says seems in-line with everything she's said about herself as a 4 throughout these threads here and elsewhere. I'll wait to be told how I'm over-typing everyone as a 4, and how I'm also a 6 lol.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@_Philathea_

I think you bring up a good point about how the Enneagram is approached as a whole. People tend to understand it in terms of words. Two people look at the same word, say "soulmate", they see the same word but the meaning for each person is going to be different. It's almost like asking "do you want what appeals to you?" because people are often going to think about what type of "soulmate" they find appealing and say "yes, of course I want that" (unless they're simply averse to the word, in which case they'll have a different response). What would be more useful with the word "soulmate" would be to ask what that means or describe what that relationship would be like or something much more revealing like that. 

It reminds of when people ask "do you believe in God?" That's a huge assumption that the word represents the same thing to everyone, but does it? I'd rather hear the question "what does the word "God" mean or represent to you?"

The biggest problem in relying on words to determine and understand things is simply that they mean different things to different people. They represent different experiences to different people. This is especially true of the Enneagram where a lot of the labels are set in stone (e.g, the passion of 4 is envy or the passion of 5 is avarice) but the meaning of the words get twisted and redefined and reinterpreted in all sorts of ways to fit the type and just compound the problem (especially when people take the word at it's literal dictionary meaning because the Enneagram types redefine most of the labels used so the labels no longer match the dictionary definition).

I feel the need to clarify my post where I offered the following (just in case you were referring to it).



> Which one would you prefer if you only had one choice?
> a) a special place
> b) a special someone
> c) a special group of friends
> ...


Well, that's just a conversation starter. The last line to explain the why is what's critical here along with exploring what the word "special" means for the person answering. The questions give me something to start a discussion to explore the subtleties that might offer more insight into instinctual preference for the person answering. I don't know what someone answering those questions without further discussion would come up with on their own.

This points to the problem I see with tests in general. Too often people take them as an end point rather than a starting point for further exploration. That doesn't work well with the Enneagram types.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Distortions said:


> But then I tend to prefer the idea of a sex slave or something along those lines rather than a soulmate.


----------



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

hope whispers said:


>


Is that too TMI?


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Distortions said:


> Is that too TMI?


Nah, I was just shocked/amused)) wasn't expecting that sentence)

Personally, the idea of having a sex slave is not appealing to me, even assuming a loss of all superego) just...unsexy to me)
in my imagination if it's the other way around it's not so bad, though it certainly isn't something I'd sign up for in real life))

but sorry, didn't mean to derail)

edit: With the money thing, for me it's less about being comfortable leaving money with someone, but more...being at a level where, if something needs to be bought, whoever has the money buys it, especially if it's not really expensive, not being kept up like a business) that might be part of it, not wanting a friendship to be like a business partnership.


----------



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

hope whispers said:


> Nah, I was just shocked/amused)) wasn't expecting that sentence)


Right, I just had to ask to be on the safe side. :tongue:



> Personally, the idea of having a sex slave is not appealing to me, even assuming a loss of all superego) just...unsexy to me)
> in my imagination if it's the other way around it's not so bad, though it certainly isn't something I'd sign up for in real life))


For me it depends on my mood, but... yeah, definitely not something I could deal with in reality. 



> edit: With the money thing, for me it's less about being comfortable leaving money with someone, but more...being at a level where, if something needs to be bought, whoever has the money buys it, especially if it's not really expensive, not being kept up like a business) that might be part of it, not wanting a friendship to be like a business partnership.


Makes sense.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Amy Lee is an Fe dom but ok. Fe and Fi express their feelings very differently.


----------



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

Entropic said:


> Amy Lee is an Fe dom but ok. Fe and Fi express their feelings very differently.


I could see that, but she also does seem 6 I think?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Distortions said:


> I could see that, but she also does seem 6 I think?


Not contesting the 6 part, but I do think it is fallacious to type her as an Fi ego type. I think in general, I see a common misconception going on here, where people think that a desire for self-expression equals Fi because one is true or authentic to one's values or something, which is flawed because it would suggest that Fe types would be unable to have values on their own. That in itself is a gross misrepresentation of Fe, since I would argue it's in a sense, the other way around; Fe is far more concerned about self-expression than Fi is, because Fe cares a lot about emotional expression and expressiveness in general. This would of course naturally include various forms of self-expression with regards to personal values.


----------



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

@_Entropic_
Right, I just wondered if it was in response to that because there was just talk about her being a type.

But yeah, I haven't listened to Evanescence in a while but the lyrics doesn't seem very Fi to me. At least going by Socionics, Idk about MBTI (don't like to treat them as separate things in my mind, but MBTI does portray types differently, making it harder for someone who isn't a sheep or whatever to relate to Fe).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Distortions said:


> @Entropic
> Right, I just wondered if it was in response to that because there was just talk about here being a type.
> 
> But yeah, I haven't listened to Evanescence in a while but the lyrics doesn't seem very Fi to me. At least going by Socionics, Idk about MBTI (don't like to treat them as separate things in my mind, but MBTI does portray types differently, making it harder for someone who isn't a sheep or whatever to relate to Fe).


Yeah, I haven't listened much to their music either, but I've seen some interviews with her and she doesn't strike me as Fi, like you say. I think the problem with the MBTI is that it has very unclear definitions of the functions in general, and people have a tendency to type more by descriptions than they do functions. Even if we go by the functions and all the way back to Jung, socionics is consistent on that Fe is about how you project emotions externally and one way to do that is via means of emotional expressiveness. MBTI isn't wrong in that Fi can be about personal values, but it defines it very poorly in terms of functional dynamics so people think that having personal values in general or being authentic is an Fi thing (I would argue that's more of a type 4 thing, which is why many Fe egos mistype as Fi when they are also 4s). It forgets the notion that Fi is also concerned about ethical consistency, which is why socionics stresses morality more than it does values in and of themselves. Being ethically true is something Fi stresses, and that means that one's ethical position needs to be consistent and applied based on principle; it takes on a much more holistic approach. Fe is dynamic and focuses more on expressiveness in the moment, so it doesn't appreciate that kind of reasoning, thinking it is much too rigid and inflexible.


----------



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

@_Entropic_
I listen to them sometimes, but I can't say for sure about type based on memory (it's more of a vague impression). Still, I think it's good to make those things about Fe vs Fi clearer if there's some talk about that. Especially since Fe can often be treated as being fake, etc (but that's not necessarily how Fe users experience it always) while Fi can get idealized in a way.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Distortions said:


> @_Entropic_
> I listen to them sometimes, but I can't say for sure about type based on memory (it's more of a vague impression). Still, I think it's good to make those things about Fe vs Fi clearer if there's some talk about that. Especially since Fe can often be treated as being fake, etc (but that's not necessarily how Fe users experience it always) while Fi can get idealized in a way.


Yeah, well Fe and Fi understand authenticity differently anyway. To Fe, strength of expression equals authenticity, that the stronger you express something, the more real and genuine it must be, whereas to Fi, it is more about your sense of inner conviction, which is entirely removed from any personal expressiveness. Fi can be pretty stoic in this regard, I think.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> Would this song be self-pres perhaps? -sp/sx? She's referring to the man she loves as her home sort-of but this being her frame of reference...? (I mean not in the context of the musical, just the song itself..."
> _
> Oh, what a melancholy choice this is,
> Wanting home, wanting him,
> ...


I think this well illustrates the point I was trying to get across with my questions. You have all three instincts active in you. The order of preference (stacking) is indicated by the struggle between them and which is more important or guides you most.

You could look at the lyrics and say they're about a struggle between sp and sx (depending upon what "home" means here).


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> Because this is the 4est theme ever and couldn't POSSIBLY be the experience of a 6 -_-


Why? Because it mentions fear? Every type can feel fear, which is even expressed as a universal sentiment in her song. It's a human thing, as you're fond of differentiating between 4 and other types. It also depends on what it is she fears, too. No, I don't find that song conclusive of Type 6, especially when this song is sx-4 to the max:








> Under your spell again.
> I can't say no to you.
> Crave my heart and it's bleeding in your hand.
> I can't say no to you.
> ...


Here's actual Type 6 (6w7 w/ 4-fix possibly) songs. Songs, but not necessarily his type, since I haven't watched any interviews of Billie Joe. Punk is cp6 as a genre:













> Average 6s are inable to connect the T and F modes. They have an inability to feel their own sense of objective guidance and support (T) in their hearts, their experience of the emotions of themselves and others (F). For the 6 F-processes manifest in the form of duty, causing loyalty and dependability, or obligation, guilt, and fear. *Without internal guidance when it comes to the 6's duty or fear responses, they can only submit to or react against these outer authorities.* Their reaction is irrational and fear-based or emotion-based, lacking objective guidance and inner direction. It has a lot to do with their extreme awareness of their own dependency, causing both phobic and counter-phobic reactions to their external sources of support.
> 
> Without access to inner guidance, they often seek some external-initiated sense of guidance as substitute for one of their own, from some authoritative source in the world. *This often causes conservatism or even rebellion against conservatism, but it is all a submissive/reactive relationship focused on the source of power itself.* This can make for a very passive or reactive individual, but most often one who is passive and reactive by turns, as their subjective Feeling Center shifts between assessing other's emotions as trustworthy or suspicious and betraying.





Animal said:


> @_QueenOfNight_ I'd advise ignoring this; he also types David Bowie at 4, who is an obvious 3w4, as well as Marina Diamandis, the 3est person on the planet.


Or, she can decide for herself what resonates with her. Marina the 3est the 3?? Marina's parodying Type 3 American pop culture. Lady Gaga is a better example of a 3 artist who looks like a 4, who I admit years ago I thought was a 4w3, and her tribute performance of Bowie is an example of a 3 trying to impersonate a true 4 artist. :bored: Looks like a little girl trying on her daddy's clothes haha.



Animal said:


> Also I find it funny that you wrote all these posts about how 4s have to be melancholy and she is spending this video talking about how she's happy, and you chose this as a reason why she's a 4... lmao


Did you listen to what she said? She said she's not usually like that. A 4 can be happy from time to time lol. Some quotes from the interview, which I thought you'd see the similarity between what she says and you.






"I've always been afraid to be happy...I'm not letting myself break through into the happiness because it's 'not cool.'...I won't be able to be an artist anymore if I'm happy...so it's this fight, do I do this and get happy or _do I wallow in it like I always do_." 

She's expressing Riso-Hudson's unconscious childhood messages:



> Type 4 - "It's not okay to be too functional or too happy."


or 



> Type 6 - "It's not okay to trust yourself."


"I write to get the insides out. It's all real. It's not like I wallow in fake sadness. _It's all very very real_."

"_The whole point of this band is expressing myself_ and what's real and what's true. And if I start changing that, then that really is the band changing, and I would hate it."

"_It's just not who I am._ I've always been fascinated with the darker side of things, death, the afterlife, sort of these things I don't really understand and maybe never will. It's part of who I am, but it doesn't mean I can't be happy."

"I don't feel like I'm a completely different person because of fame. I don't think it _means_ anything...What does it really _mean_ anyway? We're all just people. _I think I'm the same person I've always been really._" 

Ah, meaning! Significance! 4 perhaps?

She's 4w3 sx (and maybe even has a 7-fix instead of 6).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

@mistakenforstranger

That Evanescence song you quoted could equally be sx 6, though. 6s also think this way, so saying it's definitely sx 4 is a bit misleading, imo. I think the song is probably above all else just sx, not necessarily any particular type.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Entropic said:


> @_mistakenforstranger_
> 
> That Evanescence song you quoted could equally be sx 6, though. 6s also think this way, so saying it's definitely sx 4 is a bit misleading, imo. I think the song is probably above all else just sx, not necessarily any particular type.


As I was saying above, Evanescence and Green Day is the difference between Type 4 and Type 6.



> In either case, both tradition and reactions against it are an important aspect of their art. The themes typically found in the art of Sixes have to do with belonging, security, family, politics, country, and common values.
> 
> Creative Fours, by contrast, are individualists who go their own way to explore their feelings and other subjective personal states. The artistic products of Fours are much less involved either with following a tradition or with reacting against it. Fours are less apt to use political or communal experiences as the subject matter for their work, choosing instead the movements of their own souls, their personal revelations, the darkness and light they discover in themselves as they become immersed in the creative process.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> With the money thing, for me it's less about being comfortable leaving money with someone, but more...being at a level where, if something needs to be bought, whoever has the money buys it, especially if it's not really expensive, not being kept up like a business) that might be part of it, not wanting a friendship to be like a business partnership.


Could you just generalize that to you not liking things that depersonalize the relationship?


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> Could you just generalize that to you not liking things that depersonalize the relationship?


I think I could.

(Not hw but same feelings about money)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I dont even understand the concept of trust because it also feels too much like there's some sort of deal being made.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Some quotes from the interview...
> 
> "I've always been afraid to be happy...I'm not letting myself break through into the happiness because it's 'not cool.'...I won't be able to be an artist anymore if I'm happy...so it's this fight, do I do this and get happy or _do I wallow in it like I always do_."
> 
> ...


I'm not going to interject with any opinion because I don't want to disrupt the debate. I'm finding it very clarifying in terms of what people see as type 4 and how to make a finer discernment between types.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> As I was saying above, Evanescence and Green Day is the difference between Type 4 and Type 6.


And I was just saying I don't think that Evanescence song you mentioned as being so exemplary of 4 is necessarily 4 at all, as much as it could be 6?

To give a similar example of a song I think is sx 6 btw:








> Have you got colour in your cheeks?
> Do you ever get that fear that you can't shift
> The type that sticks around like something in your teeth?
> Are there some aces up your sleeve?
> ...


There's a reason 4 vs 6 is cited as a common mistype. 6s also fear abandonment, suffer from loneliness/loss, can idealize or long for the past and long for things in general which they don't have, can often also experience a great deal of envy, thinking they are different and misplaced, being moody in general etc. The difference, however, is that this doesn't stem out of a need to experience themselves as authentic or expressing the identity as they truly think they are. Both 4s and 6s often take the "submissive" role in their relationships, which reflects their attitude of often feeling internally inferior to other people.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Entropic said:


> There's a reason 4 vs 6 is cited as a common mistype. 6s also fear abandonment, suffer from loneliness/loss, can idealize or long for the past and long for things in general which they don't have, can often also experience a great deal of envy, thinking they are different and misplaced, being moody in general etc. *The difference, however, is that this doesn't stem out of a need to experience themselves as authentic or expressing the identity as they truly think they are.* Both 4s and 6s often take the "submissive" role in their relationships, which reflects their attitude of often feeling internally inferior to other people.


Yeah, isn't that what she says? 

"The whole point of this band is expressing myself and what's real and what's true. And if I start changing that, then that really is the band changing, and I would hate it."

Everyone can say my typings are ridiculous. Whatevs.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I dont even understand the concept of trust because it also feels too much like there's some sort of deal being made.


That's interesting because I've described before how type 2 sometimes creates an unspoken interpersonal transaction where they do something for someone as if there's nothing expected in return (often truly believing that). But, underneath that (often unconsciously) may be an expectation of appreciation or gratitude or level of connection or such that can surface when they get angry if they don't get that back in some form. They may then withdraw what they've been giving in response (in effect, puling out of the transaction because the other person didn't fulfill their end of it). I think sometimes, other types may pull back from type 2 because they feel these strings attached as part of the interaction.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> As I was saying above, Evanescence and Green Day is the difference between Type 4 and Type 6.


I don't know who wrote that quote, but they clearly haven't ever met a passionate sx 6 lol.

Some 6s find security and identity in themes of family and politics and duty. MANY 6s don't, because that is not the only way a need for existential security can manifest. Sx 6s are especially fiery and indulgent when it comes to the person of their dreams, or the ideal powerful image of their dreams. They focus greatly on attractiveness, chemistry, connection, and the powerful emotional bond between themselves and whatever their dream is (whether an image, an external goal, or a person). They can be filled with intense longing and creative urges as well.

The difference between 4s and 6s is the motivation behind that tendency towards longing, melancholy, and desire. How they approach the subject and what about it compels them to drive forward. For 6s it's a sense of safety and an unquenchable connection. They want to feel desired, attractive, and safe within that perception (stronger line to 3 in this subtype). Alternatively it could manifest as wanting to be tough, powerful, and an individualistic conqueror of obstacles. Either way, the sx 6 is intensely passionate like all the sx types, with the added bonuses of being reactive, on the alert for opportunities, and ready to fight whatever lies in their way to that connection they're seeking. 

6s don't hide from their emotions. We like to be transparent and real with ourselves, no matter how painful the experience is, and that often results in us having very well-developed emotional and introspective lives. (We do live in our heads quite a lot... I hope you understand we do a lot MORE than just sit there worrying ) Added with the intensity and roiling emotions of an sx type, and you get someone who is extremely in touch with the darkest parts of their soul. That can result in exactly what your quote described above for 4s. That quote gave me the impression that only 4s can express true longing and individualistic passion, while all 6s think about -- even the artistic ones -- is external demands and groups. Which is simply untrue.


----------



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

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I dont even understand the concept of trust because it also feels too much like there's some sort of deal being made.


Well, I already told you before, but while it seems weird to say I don't "understand the concept of trust," I also don't see how it's very... meaningful. I mean, it's a basic necessity in order to have a healthy relationship, but I feel like if I have to worry about whether I trust someone or not that gets in the way of focusing on more meaningful or interesting things, such as whether I actually like them or not. So I kind of hate that it needs to be a thing, it dirties the whole thing. Not sure if that's instincts-related for me, though.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Yeah, isn't that what she says?
> 
> "The whole point of this band is expressing myself and what's real and what's true. And if I start changing that, then that really is the band changing, and I would hate it."
> 
> Everyone can say my typings are ridiculous. Whatevs.


But I wasn't typing her as a person, I was just rejecting your notion that the song you cited as being examplary of sx 4 is not necessarily sx 4 at all. You wrote this:



> Why? Because it mentions fear? Every type can feel fear, which is even expressed as a universal sentiment in her song. It's a human thing, as you're fond of differentiating between 4 and other types. It also depends on what it is she fears, too. No, I don't find that song conclusive of Type 6, *especially when this song is sx-4 to the max:*


I am questioning the bolded; I don't care to enneagram type celebrities because I think it is a flawed approach in the first place, so what Amy Lee's actual core type is I wouldn't know nor do I care much. But I _do_ think you are on thin ice when it comes to the bolded sentence because what you wrote isn't true at all and this song could equally apply to sx 6 as it can 4, or probably a bunch of other types in general, because it strikes me as primarily sx, not necessarily enneagram-specific.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

myst91 said:


> I'm sorry but this is a ridiculous way of thinking. How the fuck does any of that undermine your "very serious battles"?
> 
> You are not simply sx-first, you are 4 sx. Of course there will be differences in how people experience things compared to you, then. Not everyone has the envy fixation linked to their sx, not every sx-first is like you.
> 
> I relate to quite a few things you wrote about but I cannot for the life of me relate to the 4-envy-heavy parts. Does that make me sx-second? :tongue:


That wasn't exactly my meaning. Of course there are plenty of Sx-firsts that I can't relate to on other enneagram themes. But, I have literally heard people say things like "I want to meet my soulmate, therefore I'm Sx first." You saw @Philathea's posts - she's Sx last, and wants to meet her soulmate and obsesses over men just as much. That was my point.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Everyone can say my typings are ridiculous. Whatevs.


Sometimes I wonder if you're just provoking people for your own amusement.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> Sometimes I wonder if you're just provoking people for your own amusement.


No, I actually believe everything I've had to say so far, but when no one listens or even tries to consider my "ridiculous" view, I have to laugh about it. You know, to not go crazy...


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> No, I actually believe everything I've had to say so far, but when no one listens or even tries to consider my "ridiculous" view, I have to laugh about it. You know, to not go crazy...


This actually made me laugh out loud. (Laugh _with_ you, not _at_ you, I swear!)
I know. I've had my "ridiculous" views scoffed at all my life only for people to agree with me later on almost everything that I stood up for alone (this is referring more to politics, predictions about politics, predictions about other people's relationships and who they really are, etc). Sticking to your guns is definitely not the path of least resistance. But it is honest, and forces you to examine your views and forces others to examine theirs if they wish to engage you. So, I doubt I'll stop any time soon. Cheers to that. :th_Jttesur:


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

myst91 said:


> I think your reasoning is faulty - since it's also a human need to have a place to survive. A stronger need biologically, actually, for obvious reasons. And I know quite a few people who would not go with the sx answer here.


I didn't think the implication was either a really nice home or no home at all- though even in that case, I would STILL go with the Sx answer :tongue:



> I like what you said about instinctual attention being different than "shoulds" kind of values, but I think you forget that these forums have more sx people than a forum that would be about non-sx topics. So just because quite a few people on here type as sx-first, it doesn't mean they all mistyped. And no, again, not everyone unequivocally values having one important person.


I was not trying to call anyone out or accuse anyone of being mistyped. But I disagree that this forum actually has more Sx-firsts. What Sx topics? There's the Sx vent thread, but aside from that these aren't necessarily 'Sx' topics. 

I think there's a lot of bad info on Sx (and the other instincts) out there and it has caused mistypes. Riso and Hudson have said the same thing. (In particular, introverted So-doms mistype at Sx often, or atleast that's what was said.)

And yeah, not everyone values having one important person.. but I think the _majority_ of people see value in that. Whenever I've met someone deadset against getting married or the whole concept of soulmates, they are generally a bit jaded.. though of course not all of them. Obviously not everyone wants a soulmate. But do _most_ people want someone who loves and understands them? I think yes.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Philathea said:


> I didn't think the implication was either a really nice home or no home at all- though even in that case, I would STILL go with the Sx answer :tongue:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly ! This is my point but you stated it better.
@_myst91_
Also, I want to add that my saying I want to punch people was just an expression of emotion; I was just venting frustration about the topic of what Sx dominance means, which I find to be drastically misunderstood. I know that not everyone will relate to my trials and tribulations; the hardest parts of my life are related to chronic illness rather than anything to do with enneagram or instincts; and that is the sort of trauma that pushes my Sx instinct over the edge; so of course people who aren't traumatized (and aren't 4s) won't react the exact same way. It was not about people misunderstanding me or being unlike me, it was just my expressed frustration at people over-typing Sx and for the wrong reasons ..

In my mind, it's basically what @_Philathea_ said.. that most people I've ever met want a soulmate. And like she said, when they're very jaded (like I was in trauma, despite being Sx) I didn't want a relationship or love or a soulmate, I needed to work on myself first... that is probably even more extreme for some people who were abused as children for example. So, just to be clear, I don't expect everyone to react to Sx just like I do; I just find it dehumanizing to say that Sx means you want to meet your soulmate...it's dehumanizing to Sp and Soc doms who also want to find love very much. The major battles in life for everyone are love (including friends and family), health and work. Nobody can exclude any of those battles just because of instinctual preference. So it would be faulty to say that someone wouldn't crave love because they're Sx last, just as it would be faulty to say someone wouldn't mind being poor and unemployed if they're Sp last... which is also bullshit. Most relatively healthy functioning people want to have money, a decent job, love, family, friends etc.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

P.S. I have the same annoyed reaction when someone types everyone at 4 just because they show interest in being an individual or being authentic. That is equally faulty reasoning to "everyone who craves a relationship is Sx first."

Plus, 4s are still image types, so if you want a more genuine strain of authenticity, look to 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 1 :ninja:


----------



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

Which types are most likely to not care about authenticity?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Distortions said:


> Which types are most likely to not care about authenticity?


To be honest, in general, I find that other non 4-fixed people don't seem to place much emphasis on authenticity of expression much, or a sense of being true to themselves. It's not so much that they overtly don't care, but it just doesn't strike them as something relevant to consider when it comes to their modes of self-expression. So more a sense of irrelevance, rather than a consciously felt disinterest.

I personally care a great deal about feeling and being authentic and true to myself, but other people don't experience it like that. Not that craving need to be and feel so, anyway, but are more willing to bend or shift their ways around other people in order to say, be more liked or appreciated. Stuff like that. I find that unimaginable. I would rather be hated by the entire world as long as it means I'm being myself since I intrinsically feel that if I am not appreciated for who I am, then I certainly do not value people appreciating me when I am _not_ feeling like I am myself around them. The person they like is an image then, something fake, which strikes me as being even further removed from genuine appreciation even if that may lead to some kind of appreciation.

Essentially, it becomes a matter of "who or what do they really like and is that actually me?" and the conclusion to that is negative, if I am not feeling like I am being myself around people. I am not sure if that's a flawed form of reasoning or not and typical of being caught in the enneagram trance of type 4, but that's how I experience it, anyway.



mistakenforstranger said:


> No, I actually believe everything I've had to say so far, but when no one listens or even tries to consider my "ridiculous" view, I have to laugh about it. You know, to not go crazy...


To be fair, you just misunderstood what I was saying in the first place, thinking I was asserting that your entire typing of Amy Lee was ridiculous; I just think that your example as to why so was very weak and not very thought through, however. So a big difference there. 

So if you can provide other examples that are more solid, sure, go ahead.


----------



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

@_Entropic_
Well, I dislike the idea of "being something" for someone else, but it has more to do with not wanting to be submissive than a concern with being true to myself or seen for who I really am. So I feel I care more about having the upper hand than being authentic. And generally, authenticity isn't a very interesting concept to me.

So yeah, I'm feeling unsure of my heart-fix.

(Not that this is the thread for that, but...)


----------



## Immolate (Mar 8, 2015)

Entropic said:


> I would rather be hated by the entire world as long as it means I'm being myself since I intrinsically feel that if I am not appreciated for who I am, then I certainly do not value people appreciating me when I am _not_ feeling like I am myself around them. *The person they like is an image then, something fake, which strikes me as being even further removed from genuine appreciation even if that may lead to some kind of appreciation.*
> 
> Essentially, it becomes a matter of *"who or what do they really like and is that actually me?"* and the conclusion to that is negative, if I am not feeling like I am being myself around people. I am not sure if that's a flawed form of reasoning or not and typical of being caught in the enneagram trance of type 4, but that's how I experience it, anyway.


Not part of the conversation, but, ah, jumping in to say this is also how I experience it. I'm quite sure of being 4-fixed at the very least.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

Distortions said:


> Which types are most likely to not care about authenticity?


 Stupid bullshit answer:










Hmm... I'd say the ones who care the least about authenticity are also the ones who care the most about it... To me, "authenticity" has an "accuracy" factor. Like, there needs to be a gray area to allow for differing subjective interpretations, there needs to be a gray area for other functional reasons, and there needs to be a gray area to "keep the peace".

In terms of shame, I believe that once someone has "served their time" in prison, they should be given adequate chances and resources to peacefully re-integrate into society, and I also believe that society should be more open and accepting to people who have rehabilitated. People change; that's also why I believe in a "statute of limitations". In my opinion, a society that's so lacking in mercy and forgiveness does not deserve to be saved. What kind of society are we that, if someone has messed up in the past, that we essentially remove their ability to peacefully and cooperatively function in society? I don't care that it could be "deceptive", sometimes that's the right thing to do.

And another example, those bullshit internet arguments whenever games from Japan gets translated for North American audiences. People argue if honorifics were stripped, if clothes were edited to covered up more, if jokes were switched into an American equivalent, some huge arguments about the differences between "censorship" and "localization". Like, to me, the fact that we're using a translation is already "inauthentic", but I don't give a fuck.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> Could you just generalize that to you not liking things that depersonalize the relationship?


I guess so, yeah) That would be simpler)



Moderately Nefarious said:


> I dont even understand the concept of trust because it also feels too much like there's some sort of deal being made.


Agree (obviously, if you remember my whole thing about it))


enneathusiast said:


> That's interesting because I've described before how type 2 sometimes creates an unspoken interpersonal transaction where they do something for someone as if there's nothing expected in return (often truly believing that). But, underneath that (often unconsciously) may be an expectation of appreciation or gratitude or level of connection or such that can surface when they get angry if they don't get that back in some form. They may then withdraw what they've been giving in response (in effect, puling out of the transaction because the other person didn't fulfill their end of it). I think sometimes, other types may pull back from type 2 because they feel these strings attached as part of the interaction.


Yeah, I don't know how to reconcile that. I _can_ relate to that actually. One of my go-to immature reactions when I feel a relationship is breaking down or I'm fighting is 'Give me my stuff back'. 

I also do the 'buying expensive things for people' thing, in my mind it's not buying friendship, but trying to make myself seem better (richer I guess), which is worse I guess...

So yeah, I don't know, I can't promise I'm not a hypocrite on this one))


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Hard to put into words (I guess most the questions here are)... but I'm wondering, like, how far the word "instinct" used in enneagram goes into one's actual biological instincts? 

For example, 

I identify as SP-last. Would this translate into me having a hard time at self-preservation - as in, I lack an instinct for self-preservation, and I am evolutionarily more driven to preserve the group (and reproduce, I suppose), and at a chemical, biological level I am geared towards that?

Or are enneagram instincts more... psychological and theoretical, not branching into deep-rooted evolutionarily developed motivations for a person? 

And if it is rooted in evolution, are there not more people who value all instincts well, and don't value two above the other? I have trouble imagining a genome being programmed for every person to naturally favor one instinct over another. I imagine some people - and a lot of people, actually - would be more equipped to be good at all instincts. (Or less, I suppose, now that we are not in the perilous situations our ancestors once were; but would we still be able to type historical figures as S_/S_, if this were the case?) 

A lot of questions, and more an idea to ponder than a set question to answer. I would be very interested in any thoughts one may have on the matter.


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

hope whispers said:


> Yeah, I don't know how to reconcile that. I _can_ relate to that actually. One of my go-to immature reactions when I feel a relationship is breaking down or I'm fighting is 'Give me my stuff back'.


 If it's a gift, then it's not yours to take back... that's how it was always taught to me. Like "lending money", don't lend it unless you are completely fine never seeing it back.

The worst that can happen is that they actually threw away that gift, and that's why they can't return it. I'd rather not ask because I don't actually want to know.

And at the end of a breakup, I don't even want my old shit back, that weren't gifts, that were at the ex's place. To me, those things would have a "contaminated" feeling that I don't want anywhere near me.



> I also do the 'buying expensive things for people' thing, in my mind it's not buying friendship, but trying to make myself seem better (richer I guess), which is worse I guess...


 Hah. I have a huge family, and there's usually some display over who pays the entire bill... Yeah, it does tend to be done by the richer ones... The people who don't make as much money just watch the show; they don't bother to offer because it's sort of "expected" that someone within a select few would pay.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

@Animal @enneathusiast

I had surgery today, so I'm still groggy and will be able to actually participate in conversation tomorrow when the anesthesia and heavy pain meds wear off. But I'd really like help on figuring out if I am Sx/So or So/Sx.

I've settled in 6w7 as my core type with a strong 4 fix, definitely 648 Tritype. Thanks Animal for helping me discover that


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> That's interesting because I've described before how type 2 sometimes creates an unspoken interpersonal transaction where they do something for someone as if there's nothing expected in return (often truly believing that). But, underneath that (often unconsciously) may be an expectation of appreciation or gratitude or level of connection or such that can surface when they get angry if they don't get that back in some form. They may then withdraw what they've been giving in response (in effect, puling out of the transaction because the other person didn't fulfill their end of it). I think sometimes, other types may pull back from type 2 because they feel these strings attached as part of the interaction.


Hmm, not a 2 and I don't have a 2 fix either. However, I do something similar. I'm very, very committed, dependable, and responsible -- not just in professional terms, but in relationship terms as well. By that I mean that I devote a lot of time and effort to people and their feelings when I like them. I'm loyal, steadfast, and willing to be vulnerable and share my heart with them completely honestly and in all its imperfection.

Yet, I feel like I never get that back. My loyalty and effort is often tossed aside and substituted by people's selfishness. I try not to let it make me jaded and cynical, but I can't deny that it does. I do expect that if I stand up for someone, for instance, they should be willing to do the same for me when the situation arises. If you truly care for someone you're there to fight for them, defend them, and carry them when they're down. Imo. But I've rarely ever met anyone who thinks that way -- not sure if I'm weird or unlucky. 

I don't engage in any manipulation or whatever though, it's just that if I feel people are disloyal I get dejected and feel like all my support and love was completely wasted.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

cir said:


> If it's a gift, then it's not yours to take back... that's how it was always taught to me. Like "lending money", don't lend it unless you are completely fine never seeing it back.


Thanks never heard that rule didn't realize that was rude 



> The worst that can happen is that they actually threw away that gift, and that's why they can't return it. I'd rather not ask because I don't actually want to know.
> 
> And at the end of a breakup, I don't even want my old shit back, that weren't gifts, that were at the ex's place. To me, those things would have a "contaminated" feeling that I don't want anywhere near me.


For the record, I didn't mean romantic -- friendships or even in my family, it's a bit strange though) And it's only happened like twice and when I took it back almost immediately)
I guess it's the same principle as destroying something someone gave me if I'm mad at them, that gift is like an extension of them, it's like cutting the ties more pronouncedly? idk


> Hah. I have a huge family, and there's usually some display over who pays the entire bill... Yeah, it does tend to be done by the richer ones... The people who don't make as much money just watch the show; they don't bother to offer because it's sort of "expected" that someone within a select few would pay.


Ah yes, watching battles over the check is fun))


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> @_Animal_ @_enneathusiast_
> 
> I had surgery today, so I'm still groggy and will be able to actually participate in conversation tomorrow when the anesthesia and heavy pain meds wear off. But I'd really like help on figuring out if I am Sx/So or So/Sx.
> 
> I've settled in 6w7 as my core type with a strong 4 fix, definitely 648 Tritype. Thanks Animal for helping me discover that


Awesome! Glad it could help  And thank YOU for being awesome/ not offended/ honest about yourself. It's so rare on this forum. 

Feel better soon from surgery!! Can't wait to see more posts


----------



## cir (Oct 4, 2013)

hope whispers said:


> I guess it's the same principle as destroying something someone gave me if I'm mad at them, that gift is like an extension of them, it's like cutting the ties more pronouncedly? idk


 Uh huh. Yeah, I tend to be on this end. Thankfully, in my family, the preferred way to give presents is just cash in a red envelope. Money might be the only thing I won't destroy... I also only lend money because I know the people who would ask would be too ashamed to face me again to say that they can't pay me back.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> That Evanescence singer is the most obvious 6 ever
> Marina...still not sure about 3, but definitely not a 4, her things that look 4 are actually 6, either core or line from 3 but definitely very 6.


Please tell me how she's the most obvious 6 ever. With, you know, reasons...I'm open to hearing it, but it'd be nice if people would explain.



Animal said:


> This, I know this album's context is that she wanted to avoid "becoming this," so in that sense it could be 6 looking down on their line to 3, but it's also hard to imagine anyone but a 3 writing this and performing it this way, like it's SOOOOOO easy to just be fake and project images to get what you want.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Let's hear what she has to say about it, since it's obvious you won't listen to me.

Go to 1:25 - 3:00

"With Froot, it's very very effortless, there aren't any kind of boundaries, so you're just being yourself."

3s aren't consciously aware of the "masks" they put on. It isn't "musical theater," as she says. For 3, the mask is who they are, and that recognition points to why it's more likely she isn't a 3 as one reason.






Go to 3:50 - 5:10

"I was really craving to make a sound that felt a little bit more real and human, so you have that kind of raw feel."

Didn't you say in another thread the art you create is raw/real??

"Whereas now when I hear Froot, it's a little bit more towards the music that I would normally listen to, and it's probably a purer representation of myself as an artist."











In that song, she's expressing the unconscious childhood message of Type 4, as I also pointed out that Amy Lee did in her interview video, as well. 

It truly baffles me that a 4 wouldn't connect to those lyrics, or see Type 4, in any way. 



> Type Three: It's not ok to have your own feelings and identity.





> Type Four: It's not ok to be too functional or too happy.


She's 4w3 so-instinct.

I do see some 6 in her, though. I'll give you that.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Thinking 6 now for Marina (don't know her music really well so I've hesitated to type her). I can't see 4 though, just some 4 influence. She has some 4 things but I don't see a 4 focus.

The 'Happy' song seems like it could be quite a good 6 song, looking at the line to 9. All about belief and peace...


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Thinking of how to word my thoughts on trust, it's hard because the point is I don't have many thoughts on it @enneathusiast yeah, I can be a bit hypocritical too, BUT, I don't think what I said about trust is example of that, I mostly used the word deal to show how impersonal it is.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@QueenOfNight I'd say 6w7 sx/so for you, I think being a 6 is what made you look more So compared to 4s.
(Just a vibe, I can't help much more with this)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

hope whispers said:


> Thinking 6 now for Marina (don't know her music really well so I've hesitated to type her). I can't see 4 though, just some 4 influence. She has some 4 things but I don't see a 4 focus.
> 
> The 'Happy' song seems like it could be quite a good 6 song, looking at the line to 9. All about belief and peace...


This new album feels pretty 6 to 9, from what I've seen.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@mistakenforstranger I don't wanna argue with you, but I am gonna say that if you honestly think those things make them 4s then you should stop obsessing over 4 descriptions and connecting everything and everyone to them and start reading up on some other types because your understanding of them is really, really poor, from what I've seen of it at least.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> This new album feels pretty 6 to 9, from what I've seen.


I guess it could also be 3 to 6 though?



Edit: sorry for so many posts in a row, didn't even notice!


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

I don't remember where I got these pics, but from my real life observations some don't hold. Although I just intuitively try to guess the instincts, nether have a taken the time to deeply investigate all the theories yes.
I guess I'm posting this for someone to give a good critique from the pics.

Since I see there is a good debate about SX I will put my experience in the spoiler, since it is a bit personal - entp-5-sx. Someone tell me if I have fallen into the trap of I'm sexual therefore I'm sx.


* *




Ever since I can remember I was an extremely sexual child, I loved to watch porn mags and porn videos (4 years +). At around age 5-6 I liked to make girls get naked and I pretended to have sex with them. In the span of those 2 years I have probably seen more girls naked than average guys see in their life time. I was always intense, always got deeply lost in everything I did, every person I met became a part of my self expression and intimacy.
After the age of 7 life started to get me down, I was only sexual in my mind, although still to the extreme. I fantasized about having a close relationship with someone without making any effort. I have lost the touch of how to connect to people. It used to be so simple, then everyone seemed too different from me. So I just hanged out with the outcasts and the stupid.
I am still horny as hell and used to like having multiple relationships at the same time, it seems I have unlimited energy for 1 on 1 interactions, while I get bored quickly when in a group setting.
The part in this topic about the instinct dom being a sort of neurosis, yes, I avoided close contacts with people but craved them at the same time.
Also, if relevant, both parents are also SX


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@jkp if you were exposed to pornography at the age of 4... I don't know, but I don't think that's usual and could probably affect your sexuality physically and psychologically (including later in life) without necessarily saying anything about your instincts. I don't know but I'd guess that's a separate issue, I wouldn't base an instinct typing on that alone...


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I don't know if some things I do are lack of sp or just a special type of sp.

Like...
For example in school I didn't take my grades seriously for myself and my future, I went to school for my father.
The transaction thing reminded me of how I kinda...played with my grades sometimes, I'd start getting bad ones just because good ones weren't appreciated without bad ones, things like that, or like, just being like "I'm gonna fail on purpose if I can't visit you in June"(was visiting my mother and she wanted me to finish the exams before coming, however I found it stupid because 1.who gives a fuck about exams, I'd rather fly to her asap
2. she'd have to pay way more money if I was to come later)

It feels anti sp because I always took money, food and such for granted, and I don't have a real plan of how I'm gonna survive but I always kinda felt like as long as I have parents who love me I won't have to worry.
I never had this pull towards independence like many kids and teens have, my cousin is 15 and already wishes she could move out lol
At that age I was telling my dad I wanna keep studying for as long as possible just to not have to live alone :laughing:


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

hope whispers said:


> @jkp if you were exposed to pornography at the age of 4... I don't know, but I don't think that's usual and could probably affect your sexuality physically and psychologically (including later in life) without necessarily saying anything about your instincts. I don't know but I'd guess that's a separate issue, I wouldn't base an instinct typing on that alone...


Why not. I have read somewhere that counter to your view, Sx/sp/so is something that comes from your early life experience (although its probably both). And I am not basing my instincts on that alone...

* *




I also liked peeping through the lock while parents had sex, also age around 4-6


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I don't know if some things I do are lack of sp or just a special type of sp.
> 
> Like...
> For example in school I didn't take my grades seriously for myself and my future, I went to school for my father.
> ...


I don't know  Maybe it is some appreciation image type sp?

I can kinda relate; for instance I would sometimes 'punish' teachers for... me not liking them..by getting bad grades in their class, thinking it would (fairly) lower their performance rating)

That's really mean in retrospect, maybe a 1 wing come rogue...

(When people asked me what I was going to dL I often said 'I'll marry money' as a joke but I think I kinda believed it...)

Still, your things seem like they could be...eschewing normal self-prws things but still with a SP goal? I don't know though, obviously the instincts are enigmas to me.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

hope whispers said:


> I don't know  Maybe it is some appreciation image type sp?
> 
> I can kinda relate; for instance I would sometimes 'punish' teachers for... me not liking them..by getting bad grades in their class, thinking it would (fairly) lower their performance rating)
> 
> ...


xD
Our teachers didn't get anything from our grades I think, so can't relate to that but yeah, I think general principle is similar)

Lol same with marrying money, but you probably know that already)


Yeah...
I also feel like it is sp in the end, but sometimes it feels weird.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Btw was remembering, awkward story, some friends (probably sp/so) and me talking about our future and such in high school, and to me they said something like, 'you need to get married and start having babies' or something and I protested and my friend explained, 'I'm pretty sure you're the kind of person who _ needs_ to have sex'

edit: this is an when more awkward story typed out han it actually was

It was from a person prone to giving such assessments of character, a very categorical ENTJ, I don't think she meant it in any strange way)
I don't know about the rest of the world but I think that particular friend group would type me sx-first, they think I'm their react friend (which is ridiculous: I am no one's racy anything)

Or last time we were taking pictures "ooh let's all look seductive! hope whispers, just make your usual picture face'

Idk, just thinking, i'm thinking about sp/so as a possible instinct stacking, sx-last might explain some things, but it's also a bit strange when I look at... how my friend view be, for instance)


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Pressed Flowers said:


> Hard to put into words (I guess most the questions here are)... but I'm wondering, like, how far the word "instinct" used in enneagram goes into one's actual biological instincts?
> 
> For example,
> 
> ...


This question is interesting to me, sorry of highlights my fuzziness about the instincts... What are they? Where are they? How do you identify them?

(Not that I don't like instinct theory... I do)

I seem to recall an article rich broke the stackings into even more categories based on strength of instinct (fire instance, near-balanced so and sx to overwhelming so and basically inferior sx and sp. This seems likely
If it's basically just a personality/instinctual thing then it makes sense that the would be ones that come to the forefront and others that aren't so well-developed, but maybe some people have fairly even instincts. 

And I mean, they have to be pretty subtle or they would have been immediately noticed and we'd have had a 3-instinct system throughout history.

Though there's always been things like the door humors, which definitely overlap traits 

Idk, i don't know if there are studies of anything about them


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Quernus said:


> I'm not so *consciously* focused on self-preservation. If I had to choose between a "special place" and a "special person" I would choose the special person --- *assuming* that I had a place that was adaptable enough to inhabit. It doesn't have to be perfect or exceedingly safe, I just have to know I am capable of surviving any uncomfortable or unsavory thing that may happen. And I'm constantly calculating those risks.


Choose the one you prefer more.
a) need a space where you can do what you want without having others intrude with their expectations or demands
vs.
b) merge with one person who you can share and appreciate your interests and they yours



Quernus said:


> But my life would feel meaningless without interpersonal connections. I could survive without them, literally, like I could remain biologically alive and functional. But I would be emotionally dead, which to me is as bad as real death.


What kind of interpersonal connection would you choose if only one?
a) one person I could share all of myself with and vice versa
or 
b) many different people that I could share different parts of myself with

---
Make your choices then explain your choices a bit.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> Choose the one you prefer more.
> *a) need a space where you can do what you want without having others intrude with their expectations or demands*
> vs.
> b) merge with one person who you can share and appreciate your interests and they yours
> ...


Something it took me a long time to notice in myself and accept (not that I haven't been doing it before accepting it, I was just very critical towards hermits)

This is the main reason why I think sp for myself, so many things feel heavy, people feel demanding, I just want my soulmate to like...come to me through my bedroom window one night and announce his love (hopefully not being creepy, somehow), and then we wouldn't have to see anyone else ever again.
There's more to it too but this sums it up.

Exaggerating a bit, I mean I am a fairly extroverted person in focus and behavior, in some ways (and I'm sure of being a cognitive extrovert) but I have this thing too.
Made me consider sx 5 for a while and it was a terrifying thought, I must say, but it did make me notice some parts of me I used to ignore.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Something it took me a long time to notice in myself and accept (not that I haven't been doing it before accepting it, I was just very critical towards hermits)
> 
> This is the main reason why I think sp for myself, so many things feel heavy, people feel demanding, *I just want my soulmate to like...come to me through my bedroom window one night and announce his love (hopefully not being creepy, somehow), and then we wouldn't have to see anyone else ever again.*
> There's more to it too but this sums it up.





Moderately Nefarious said:


> I used to cringe at the notion of a special place for some reason, but I realize I've been having special places my whole life)
> Just not like...sitting there and thinking "This is such a special place for me", more like feeling of rightness, like I naturally fit there.
> For example, beaches, and fairs, those are the things that make me feel like I'm going home when I'm going there.
> But I also get a similar feeling in a car just sitting and listening to music.
> ...


 Seems like SP is dominant to me. It may not be just a single place that appeals to you. It could exploring or finding different places as well (travel and such). I don't hear a lot about people in all this regarding place (except to add to the atmosphere of a place).

In the bold parts I notice some SX surfacing but there's not much discussion about it. Then again, it seems to be tied to SP when it's mentioned.



> What kind of interpersonal connection would you choose if only one?
> a) one person I could share all of myself with and vice versa
> or
> b) many different people that I could share different parts of myself with


This question is an attempt to try to determine a preference between SX and SO (though I don't know if it will apply to you). Making a choice and describing the why a bit may provide something useful though.



Moderately Nefarious said:


> ...actually I _wanna_ feel dependent in a way.


 What does this mean? Dependent on who or what?
I see the 2nd instinct as providing the resource so I'm wondering if answering this question will help determine whether that resource has to do with SX or SO.

BTW, from your posts and responses so far I'm getting SP/SX.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Most people seem like they have a more active engagement in life, I'm starting to notice. Even the 9s I know, they can act passively and be all meh but they still have this thing within them, all of them.
No one is quite as...idk, really can't find a word, but like, I used to talk a lot about my ambitions but it was more about showing what kind of person I am and my feelings rather than sharing my actual plans (or even real dreams).
Hard to explain. 
I feel like my first instinct is always to try to act like some sort of magnet for something through like...the way I look, things I tell people, things I say I want, rather than go after things. 
@hope whispers this quote you posted a while ago








:laughing:
Feels relevant.


Sp-ish? 2-ish? 7-ish?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I feel like my first instinct is always to try to act like some sort of magnet for something through like...the way I look, things I tell people, things I say I want, rather than go after things.
> 
> @_hope whispers_ this quote you posted a while ago
> 
> ...


To me, it sounds like type 2 seduction/drawing people in (not necessarily sexually but definitely emotionally). Still fits SP but may be SP/SO (pulling people in from the social).


----------



## Daeva (Apr 18, 2011)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> @_hope whispers_ this quote you posted a while ago
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol, for whatever it's worth, I've always seen Michael Scott as a 2w3


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> Seems like SP is dominant to me. It may not be just a single place that appeals to you. It could exploring or finding different places as well (travel and such). I don't hear a lot about people in all this regarding place (except to add to the atmosphere of a place).
> 
> In the bold parts I notice some SX surfacing but there's not much discussion about it. Then again, it seems to be tied to SP when it's mentioned.
> 
> ...


Second question, a.
I don't know if I can explain, b just seems like more of a fun experiment or something you do when you have to talk to many different people. 

Dependant on who...
Well like in that song I posted, I guess it's cute dependence of romantic type)
But generally, I was never ashamed of 'depending' on someone (at least my definition of it), dad used to call me "dadflower"(like sunflower, turning towards dad, sounds cute in my language ) and I fully embraced it.

It's definitely not about groups, I can't take groups (or even friends) very seriously.
I don't think my 'dark side' could ever come out in a group of friends or job or any social setting like that (unless there's something totally unrelated involced too), I think that's a good indicator of being social last?


Thank you btw!
That's exactly the type of questions I wanted, simply something to give me direction.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@Moderately Nefarious
I see you as Sp/Sx 2w3 now after this thread. I'd thought you were a 3 for a long time, mostly because of vibe and some 9ish themes on your typing thread, but now I'm really seeing the 2. That post about how you would use your grades as leverage over other people such as your father.. that is as 2 as it gets.  Specifically Sp 2. That type loves to be "daddy's little girl" or "mommy's little boy," like the eternal child in the 2ish sense. 7 is the eternal child as in idealistic, wanting what they want, not wanting to be serious or 'grow up,' but Sp2 specifically is the child of 2s, the one that wants to depend on others more openly and get their needs met through being adorable and being lovable. Soc and Sx 2s have too much pride about what they do for others; they often are unaware that they need something back from it,at least without self-work. Sp2s are more blatant about wanting to depend on others, and I remember that from your typing thread too.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I just want my soulmate to like...come to me through my bedroom window one night and announce his love (hopefully not being creepy, somehow)


How could that be creepy :laughing:



Moderately Nefarious said:


> I feel like my first instinct is always to try to act like some sort of magnet for something through like...the way I look, things I tell people, things I say I want, rather than go after things.
> 
> @hope whispers this quote you posted a while ago
> 
> ...


Relate to this (related to last post too, though I'm not sure of thoroughly, there might be a difference somewhere)... For instance I can sometimes relate to the soulmate live forget would thing, but more often if say I think of it in terms of...me and soulmate will take on the world, with soulmate world will be our oyster... Is that so/sx? For instance, a common daydream format is like... talking in public to some girl I'm fighting with or something, I'm looking like fool, everyone sees me looking like fool, soulmate notices, steps in and kisses me passionately, everyone is like... Well she may be a fool but he doesn't love any of us like that so she must have hidden depths that only he can see wonder what they are

Which is an oddly so-focused daydream fit what should be a SX theme)))

Though I also relate to this... wanting a space where no one will bother you, I'm not on for social interaction all the time, I always had a problem with sleepovers as a child for instance, they were so fun but not having the little liberties over when to sleep, when to use bathroom, when to brush teeth, etc., was really irritating to me, I was always so happy to get home to privacy and some space to be

(Once again my response is unhelpful and of-topic, sorry...)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Sun Daeva said:


> Lol, for whatever it's worth, I've always seen Michael Scott as a 2w3


Tbh I don't watch the office but he has the most amazing quotes xD

He worded my feelings about loved vs feared dilemma


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> How could that be creepy :laughing:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Haha I love your daydream there and how you say it's soc-focused.

I used to have this daydream that I would record a song about the guy I was crazy about and it would be played on the radio and he would hear it somewhere, recognize my voice and realize due to some hidden messages that it was about him..and then find me wherever I'm living,throw rocks at my window and when I opened the window, he would play me a song back in return, carrying a guitar or something. I would have made this into a music video but I don't have the health, budget or time to do the video the way I want now. Soon hopefully. It's for the last song on my first album which is already recorded.

It was so hot when @_Sun Daeva_ told me here that he had listened to my music and connected to it so strongly.  And in a way, it made it even better that he knew me from forum and thus spied on my music; like he wasn't in love with my art, but rather, interested in me as a person and thus checked out my art. That is very in line with the fantasy about previous crushes hearing my song on the radio; I wouldn't want someone to fall in love with me just for my art, but I'd want someone I already know to hear my songs about them and for it to melt their heart.

In an indirect way, my songs were about @_Sun Daeva_.... they were mostly inspired by another 7w6, but I changed up things a bit and made a male alter-ego, who I now know is an INFJ 7w6 , just like @_Sun Daeva_, whereas my ex was an ISFP. So I had created an alter-ego/ lover based on my ideal mate (and some aspects of myself) who shared some aspects with my ex too, and @_Sun Daeva_ felt like the songs were speaking straight to his heart. It's as though I was waiting to meet him. That is very close to my fantasy 

But it's so withdrawn somehow.. like I'd pour so much passion into my music and then it would translate over to someone who heard it privately, without me, without a crowd. I have also sang fuck-you songs to exes straight into their eyes from the stage with my band behind me - WHAT A GREAT FEELING :jedi-lightsaber:

But it's like vengeance, for me, is a public ordeal, whereas romance is a one on one ordeal.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Phone overheating, will respond/add things later!


----------



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

I actually don't have romantic daydreams much. Plenty of sexual (in the more literal sense), but those don't involve me. The ones that do are more about me interacting with someone (usually a fictional character) in a platonic way. For example, I used to read Animorphs when I was younger, which has these aliens named andalites and ever since I've often daydreamed about meeting an andalite/alien and showing him things. Say I have a song I'm currently listening to, or I'm watching a movie, or whatever, I like to imagine how a character would react to it. Varies which. I mean, depending on the theme or whatever, it might be more relevant to show it to a particular character. Either way, the idea of introducing someone to "my world" arouses me. (I would say I like the idea of introducing someone to something new in general, but of course I rather it be something I'm interested in myself =P)

So yeah. >_>


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> Choose the one you prefer more.
> a) need a space where you can do what you want without having others intrude with their expectations or demands
> vs.
> b) merge with one person who you can share and appreciate your interests and they yours


A!!!!! "A" sounds heavenly. Besides, the whole idea of "merging" kinda freaks me out, and I like having separate interests (so long as there are similar passions and cores). My projects are mine, don't touch. Even science experiments and logic puzzles I want to do on my own because 1. I don't like getting distracted 2. I don't want to seem like an idiot when I reveal I'm stuck or solving things unconventionally 3. I don't want to be held back by other people being idiots 4. I like the revel in the pleasure of learning and having new realizations dawn upon me, but its kind of a private experience.

And I don't want to have to worry about pretending to like some BS thing my partner likes. It's good if they like something I don't care about so they can go preoccupy themselves and not get in my way! We can share the outcomes and stuff, talk about it, enjoy each other's work... I Don't wanna keep everything to myself, and I want to enjoy what other people create... it's a way of understanding people and being understood... but that initial space you outline in "A" is critically important.





> What kind of interpersonal connection would you choose if only one?
> a) one person I could share all of myself with and vice versa
> or
> b) many different people that I could share different parts of myself with


Well the first one is automatically most appealing. But I'm not sure having *only* A is the healthiest thing, or if I could justify that from an existential standpoint. Life is already pointless enough to me, I keep myself going by thinking maybe one day I can actually be of use or contribute something. Like not just in some sort of "oh I'm so helpful/altruistic" kinda way - like I literally see no point otherwise, there is so much beauty here and so much to learn but if I'm keeping it all to myself, that seems self-indulgent and like a stark reminder of my mortality and my pointlessness as an organism.

Maybe if I could have that one strong bond... but then travel the world making contributions or *something* without actually developing friendships, I would do that. 

Or maybe I'd have to suffer symbolic death and give up my deep desire to bond closely and share everything with a single person, to be able to still appreciate and love and enjoy many people individually. I like that I know some great people and I get a lot of pleasure thinking about my bonds to them, even when I'm only sharing parts of myself. 

But I really want "A"... that is a very comforting idea and brings me much meaning too... especially since I kind of have it. To give it up forever the idea of finding it (or in my case now, preserving it)... what grief, such tremendous heartbreak... 


I DON'T KNOW

Anyway, reflexively the answer is A. Taking a step back to really analyze it, is less certain. If I have only one bond and nothing else as basis for comparison, it also starts to lose some meaning and perspective. Like, logically, functionally.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Animal I love this whole story; sound like a really cool music video too)

Very different from my way of thinking though... it's always baffled me how musicians can write songs about real people... and perform them... If course it's probably different when your there, writing and performing music... Still, I can't imagine it; it seems unbelievably brave)

My internal reaction to imagining someone hearing a song is written about them, even on the best of circumstances I think, is just _pure terror_) for some reason it just makes me shrivel up inside) though I like the idea, outside myself)

But yeah, that's a much more personally focused daydream than mine ( which is seems indicative (of instincts, probably)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> @_Animal_ I love this whole story; sound like a really cool music video too)
> 
> Very different from my way of thinking though... it's always called me hour musicians can write songs about real people... and perform them... If course it's probably different when your there, writing and performing music... Still, I can't imagine it; it seems unbelievably brave)
> 
> ...


Yeah also my identity and niche has to be part of the daydream or else it feels like it's lacking something. Probably a good indicator of how I operate - like there's something severely lacking and the only way to make up for it is to express myself, my feelings, in a way that is completely MINE and which nobody can take from me. :sad:







Edit @hope whispers :

For me, getting on stage and expressing myself isn't exactly brave - though it was brave when I was speaking in a whisper and couldn't rely on my voice.

What's brave is just being... _me_... with no glamor, no art. I don't mind being physically naked, but being laid bare without all the things that make me _me_ is.... nearly impossible for me. I wouldn't feel comfortable being loved "just as a human" or "just for my image and art and beauty" - I need to be loved and SEEN for both, because I'm not fully myself without both components.


I'd rather the world would love my image and not see me at all. And the one special person would see both, and love both. Even if my image is a projection of my perceived "authentic self," it's still not the same thing as being 'just one of many' or 'merely human,' if that makes sense.

I explained it best here, I think.

http://ericaxenne.com/2016/04/q-what-are-your-self-limiting-beliefs/


Socially (as in the wider social sphere) I've always daydreamed that they would just see my work, my image, my music/ art/ writing; but not the person behind it, which would be reserved for The One, or the very few. That's my ideal self and my ideal life.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> FWIW @_QueenOfNight_, I think you're a 4. Just because you relate outwardly to someone, and especially someone we hardly know anything about from a second-hand source, doesn't mean you're the same type. You have to look at your motivations when it comes to Enneagram. I see you looking for mirroring in your post, as I bolded above. And I think Amy Lee's a Type 4, too. How can anyone not think that after watching this video? Again, I'm confused why @_Animal_ doesn't type her as a 4, when everything Amy says seems in-line with everything she's said about herself as a 4 throughout these threads here and elsewhere. I'll wait to be told how I'm over-typing everyone as a 4, and how I'm also a 6 lol.


Not just with Amy Lee though. What @Animal said about her 6w7 friend and the interview that @enneathusiast posted. I'm pretty head-type honestly. My 4 fix is probably just strong.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Animal said:


> Awesome! Glad it could help  And thank YOU for being awesome/ not offended/ honest about yourself. It's so rare on this forum.
> 
> Feel better soon from surgery!! Can't wait to see more posts


Oh certainly. I usually don't have a problem with people giving reasons as to why they question my type. What I DO tend to have a problem with is when people come at me with disdain or arrogance when doing so, which you did not. Rather, you two were very helpful.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Sun Daeva said:


> Just because a girl dyes her hair black, doesn't mean that she's a 4, mate. :wink:
> 
> ...
> 
> And yes, you are over-typing 4.


I had someone tell me that because I was into Gothic fashion and was pretty melancholy I must be a 4. Such a 4 stereotype, lol.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Animal said:


> Yeah also my identity and niche has to be part of the daydream or else it feels like it's lacking something. Probably a good indicator of how I operate - like there's something severely lacking and the only way to make up for it is to express myself, my feelings, in a way that is completely MINE and which nobody can take from me. :sad:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah, I can understand that!
This article is beautiful - towards the end you had a line, something like ' I don't lie intentionally but I lie to the world by telling them truthfully what I believe about myself' (you phrased it better; can't copy and paste though on phone) which is really an interesting (and relatable) observation.


----------



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

Might as well.

*So - I can get ahead by forming relationships and navigating social groups
*Well, I realize it could be useful if I was better at doing that. I wish I could be that pragmatic when dealing with people. =P Instead I get like... too sentimentally attached, while also having a hard time keeping up with much.

*Sx - Need to love and be loved
*Don't like the idea of love. 

*SP - a motivation of having a safe place in life
*Yes. At the same time I end up feeling trapped too, because I can't just leave behind everything to pursue whatever I feel like, I need that "anchor."

Could probably go more in-depth, but it's what I can formulate for now.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Hm, I don't know if this is related to being soc last or sx/so or what, but I figured I'd mention it.

I've had a repeated theme in my life where I am friends with a few people, I'm mostly obsessing over a crush or relationship in terms of people and putting the rest of my energy into writing and music and work, though I do take my friendships to heart and will try to fix any problems that come up. Although taking up all my time or demanding too much of me is non-negotiable, even in relationships; I take my art seriously and don't want to be overwhelmed by people's demands, and this is not something that I've ever felt "torn up" about, I simply don't allow it to happen, period, even if it means losing people.

But, a lot of people in social situations project things onto me. Like on perc, at school, in college, in my music scene, apartment.. really anywhere that I've been part of a social scene. I talk to a few people, and the rest I might engage with when they're there but I don't give it much thought otherwise. On perc for instance I might think of someone as a certain type or enjoy them or not enjoy them, but I don't have vendettas or organize any arguments against them, I just argue my point and thats it. Then, other people might, by their own choice, jump in and argue the same points, or they might argue against me or whatever. Next time I encounter those people, if we had argued, I don't think about it; we can agree on a different point. I don't carry hatred around about those; I don't carry grudges, unless someone betrayed me VERY severely, which is a very short list of people throughout my life, I could count on one hand.

I don't particularly LIKE or LOVE most people, but I'm empathetic towards everyone in the moment, but then when they walk away I am thinking about myself and maybe those closest to me.

Anyway.. I'll use perc as an example - let's say a bunch of people agree with me on a point. Then, other people assume that these people are my "crew" and we all talked about this outside or organized it, like created a unified groupthink opinion and jumped in to defend each other. That's not the case. It's usually people I don't even talk to outside public threads. Those I talk to in private, with the exception of my husband, mostly don't post anymore, or they don't jump into my arguments because they know I can handle myself and I don't really like group pressure. My husband and I do work as a team and I love that, but its still our own choice; we don't agree to gang up on someone, we're just very much "part of one another" and so we watch each other's posts and thank them and tend to talk over our opinions in a general sense so we are very much on the same page (in fact, we were on the same page before we met, so that is not something that's forced or enforced).

But then people project onto me that I'm controlling a bunch of people, asking them to stand up for me, that I have some great influence. I've received hate-mail about this on perc, and it's absolutely untrue. I've had people ask me in private why I did that, and tell me to stop getting my followers to agree with me. People I don't even know outside, and they assume those people can't think for themselves, simply because I have strong opinions and state them strongly.

This is not exclusive to perc. It has happened my whole life, even though I am_ very obviously_ mostly a loner. People just assume that I have some great influence or master plan that I have no fucking clue about, and the people they seem to assume are following me are VERY independent and usually not even in close contact with me. It's so strange.. I wonder why I come off that way?? And I am genuinely not even aware that i do. So I .. don't know what that means in terms of instincts.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Animal said:


> There is a lot of debate about what instincts, and stackings, _actually mean.
> 
> _For instance some people would say Sp means managing your finances and health, but some people who overeat or overspend are Sp-firsts who are unhealthy and triggered in that area. Others would say Sp is about personal fortitude, self-possession, knowing when to shut up, etc.
> 
> ...


Did they not go over this subject in 10th grade biology? Instict is basic survival motivated behavior. 

Urge to mate 
Urge to eat 
Flight and fight response 
Fear 
Bonding/desire for companionship 
sleep 

These are all instictive and the bodies naturual built in response in order to keep us from dying or well keep the species from dying in general. Insticts are never learned, so they are often present in young offspring regardless of expirence. Its pre-programming. 

Urge to mate is so you make babies, which helps the specia grow. Urge to eat and how your brain processes sugar and various foods is again instict.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

MisterPerfect said:


> Did they not go over this subject in 10th grade biology? Instict is basic survival motivated behavior.
> 
> Urge to mate
> Urge to eat
> ...


It may be simple in principle, but how it comes out in people is more complex because we have access to all three instincts, and dominant e-type may change its manifestation too, as well as experience and what we're forced to focus on. (Like an Sp-last person with a chronic illness has to focus on it or die, or a Soc-last person in a war torn country that is racist against them, etc) .... 

Anyway.. the point of the question isnt to say I don't understand the basic principles behind each, but rather how they manifest in the human psyche, which is more complex and nuanced.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> So I .. don't know what that means in terms of instincts.


I think what you're seeing is other people's assumption that the social instinct is involved (doesn't matter where that instinct falls in their stacking, it's still there). You on the other hand seem surprised about it because it didn't come from any social instinct on your part. It brings up two interesting points (for me at least): 1) we can be aware of all three instincts when we look outside ourselves (our preferences simply color our attitude about it) but our preferences become more obvious when we look at which ones influence the way we engage life, 2) I'm surprised that you still consider SX/SO a valid option for yourself.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> I think what you're seeing is other people's assumption that the social instinct is involved (doesn't matter where that instinct falls in their stacking, it's still there). You on the other hand seem surprised about it because it didn't come from any social instinct on your part. It brings up two interesting points (for me at least): 1) we can be aware of all three instincts when we look outside ourselves (our preferences simply color our attitude about it) but our preferences become more obvious when we look at which ones influence the way we engage life, 2) I'm surprised that you still consider SX/SO a valid option for yourself.


The reason I still consider it a valid option is based on how I reached the conclusion in the first place, after typing for Sx/Sp for years.. it was an "Aha!" moment with a long conversation involved on a facebook forum, which really touched on some sensitive points that could have pointed to Sp last. I am going to try to dredge it up so I can see if I still consider it valid. It was the kind of conversation that was revealing and deep and I couldn't just discount it; but I would like to read it with a revised perspective if I can find it. After that, if I still see Sx/Sp I'll be settled.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

MisterPerfect said:


> Did they not go over this subject in 10th grade biology? Instict is basic survival motivated behavior.
> 
> Urge to mate
> Urge to eat
> ...


That's the thing about taking this simply as survival instincts. Humans don't live in survival mode like wild animals. This is probably a good time to bring this into the picture (Maslow's hierarchy of needs).









When the lower level survival needs are taken care of, the instincts move more away from the animal focus towards a more human focus

Note that I'm not associating these needs with the instincts but only the idea that I just stated. I don't want to debate whether Maslow had the needs right. I think the needs he proposed were partially influenced by his own bias regarding his enneagram type and instinctual preferences.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Apple Pine said:


> Quoting and commenting.
> 
> *So - "I can get ahead by forming relationships and navigating social groups"
> *
> ...


I think I can see So now)
I don't think it's necessary to relate to every word of Chestnut's description and fit the stereotype perfectly to be that subtype.


Btw my answers:
1.Nope, I sometimes admire the idea though
2.Ofc
3.Not that consciously but yeah, obvious from everything I said


Also, changed my mind about Lana Del Rey, sp/sx


(Omg omg so hard to type with short nails, please excuse my brief and cold-ish comments, hope I get used to this soon)


As for daydreams...
I think mine are pretty sp/sx-ish, or So last
A bit of an embarrassing example, but a good one, I often think about a guy being in love with me, but thinking I'm too pure for him and he loves me too much to do something dirty like have sex with me, but I know he wants to, and it's _us_ therefore it can't be bad, so I don't give up and I finally convince him it's ok to do to me whatever he wants. And then it gets to things that aren't appropriate for enneagram forum :fox:
But even then he's still holding back and I try to make him realize he doesn't have to.


It might be one of my least realistic fantasies, ever, it's so impossible on so many levels.

There's just bunch of 2-ish and 3-ish stuff, I never had a daydream exactly like the one you described @hope whispers but something similar is a common theme, it just includes less people, not sure if it has to mean anything.
In my case it's usually about one girl dying of jealousy, sometimes literally))


@Animal strong presence, people can see it as many different things depending on who they are and what they want to see. 
Don't think it means you have So, but I'm also not sure if not doing those things they think you do automatically makes you So last.
Idk, I like the stacking in your signature)


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Animal said:


> Hm, I don't know if this is related to being soc last or sx/so or what, but I figured I'd mention it.
> 
> I've had a repeated theme in my life where I am friends with a few people, I'm mostly obsessing over a crush or relationship in terms of people and putting the rest of my energy into writing and music and work, though I do take my friendships to heart and will try to fix any problems that come up. Although taking up all my time or demanding too much of me is non-negotiable, even in relationships; I take my art seriously and don't want to be overwhelmed by people's demands, and this is not something that I've ever felt "torn up" about, I simply don't allow it to happen, period, even if it means losing people.
> 
> ...


Thank you for sharing this. I find it insightful. There are people I've come across throughout my life that you remind me somewhat of, and I've had the same thing where I see them having a "group" (and being popular, exerting a lot of social influence, which as a heavily SO person I can't help but notice), and yet they are nonetheless independent. It's interesting to think that they may be like you in not realizing the stretch of their influence or attempting to have it. Really changes my perception and understanding of them to know that may potentially be the case. 

As a rather introverted and socially small person (in all honesty), I notice what could be described as "social spheres of influence" around each person, even though typically I don't have one around myself. I remember my mother telling me the mother of one of my seventh-grade classmates expressed that her daughter felt "so left out, like no one likes her, like she's an outcast." To which I responded, "Why? That girl is one of the most well-liked people in the grade, she has quite a few friends and isn't outside any social circle." I would say I have a knack for seeing social relations... but it doesn't even feel like a knack or a gift. It's just an aspect of the observations I naturally take in. In chat a few months ago I was discussing the social scene at my high school, which groups were on top and which were closer to the bottom and something about the drama (we were discussing the musical Heathers I think, and I said something about how it reminded me of my own high school), and someone said that they never noticed such things at their own high school. It was a little shocking to me. I thought everyone saw such things and noticed such things, who was up and who was down and where this person and that person stood socially. 

And yet that person identified as being SO-dom as well, and I believe that's a correct typing. I think perhaps for me individually it's a combination of Fe aux filtered through Pi with the strong SO influence. 

I also find it interesting what you say about a small group of friends. I know many people like that as well, who have close friends, a small group, who they care deeply about... but usually the circle remains small (perhaps because closeness and depth are difficult to stretch far?) I think I read one description call the SO Nine "everyone's friend"; that's a description many would use for me, I think. When asked how many friends I have, I'm really at a loss. How to count? Certainly I consider at least hundreds of people to be my friend. I see someone, I want to befriend them. Granted, these, by nature, are not _deep_ friendships. I hardly know the surface of their lives, beyond what I sense of their person. And I often forget the names of people, to the point where I'm out and about I'll see people who will run over and hug me and call my name and say that they missed me, how am I doing, and I will smile and return the gestures but be admittedly at loss as to who they are or where I know them from. I care about them, and am interested in what they have to tell me and am genuine in my departing well wishing for them, yet I am pressed to remember where I made their acquaintance. 

It is insightful as well to hear that perspective of wanting small friend groups (or perhaps not wanting them, but naturally maintaining them). I've since grown much more understanding, but throughout my adolescence I was puzzled by people who weren't interested in being my friend... not that they were rude to me, but they just didn't return my natural friendliness in a way that I found affronting and somewhat confusing. Couldn't we all just be friends? What was the harm? I'm not sure that this is the case with you, but it does better help my understanding of other people (especially people different from me in this way) to realize that it's not done at all with malicious intent... that it's largely just their natural way of having friendships just as much as my natural way of having friendships is to seek to have friendly contact with everyone I meet. 

As I said, I think it probably has something to do with instincts, type (and subtypes), and function strength. It's probably specific to a person's multi-faceted type.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@Pressed Flowers
I'll admit something kind of embarrassing, but, what the hell..
I prefer being seen as a loner. It's not that it's untrue, but, for instance, if I have a crush on a guy in town, I will make a point to go to town by myself, looking good (or, rather, asserting my personal style) but not looking like I'm trying too hard to do so, carrying a book or appearing as an independent entity. Whether he is a loner or a guy with a lot of friends, I want him to know that if he talks to me, he's talking to ME, not to a clique. I don't need backup, I don't need to appear surrounded by love... I want him to see me as a separate, independent, autonomous alien rather than just one of the many. Maybe it's a 4 thing, though I'm sure there are 4s in the world who would be embarrassed to be seen without friends around them (in fact I've met one), but this is part of my specific identity. It's not false or put on; I really am independent.

I do have close friends and I'm very proud and intense about all of them. I know their flaws, I argue with them, they know my flaws. We fight, argue whatever..but they are part of me, just as my husband is, just not quite on the same level (or even close lol). I don't consider it a 'group' however. I have one close friend I've known since age 5 (my co-author), one since 2nd grade (though our friendship has been "off" for long periods when we both got busy), one I met at 11, one at 15, and one at 24. Those are my closest friends irl. Then I met two more very close friends around age 27. The rest I met on perc.

These are people I will eventually check up on if we haven't talked in six months, but I don't feel cut off, or unhappy, if I don't hear from them, nor do I feel rejected; I simply become curious to know how they are doing.

I've formed "groups" by introducing those people together. I also have other acquaintences/friends that I've made over the years but werent' quite as close, and I would pull them into those groups too. There's only been one occasion in my whole life where I became part of a group that I didn't personally pull together through my own one-on-one connections, and that was because I had an Sx obsession with a guy who was the leader/center of this group, but he was a loner/leader type like me, so he didn't feel the need to answer to them. They were also musicians and so am I, so I really loved playing music with them, but I wasn't unhappy when the group eventually dissolved; I missed my crush/ex and the music, but not really the group. 

As for the close friends I mentioned, I keep in touch with all those separate friends separately, and those who know each other I might organize a get together when we're all in the same area every few years, but it's really the last thing on my mind, and while I love to talk to them about ideas , writing, music, enneagram, feelings online, I kind of cringe when even the closest of friends says "hey I'm in town for the weekend, let's hang out!" like I really want to see them but I also don't want to drop my alone time at the drop of a hat yet, how can I say no when I'm not going to see this person for another year potentially?? I have fun at get-togethers, but I feel overwhelmed easily by too many social expectations at once. This is part of why I pull groups together; it takes the pressure off me. But I see each friendship, nonetheless, as a separate entity. I don't want friend A to feel like if I go out with friend B and don't invite them, it's an insult. It isn't; I just want to talk to friend B about something specific and tht's that. I don't like to form groups that are too cohesive or 'necessarily must be groups' because thn people start projecting shit onto me, like I'm the leader, or I caused two people to hate each other, or I was insensitive to something or the other.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Pressed Flowers that wasn't me, was it?) I almost remember a similar conversation... Probably wasn't but it sounds like something I might say somewhat...lazily, maybe, so I'm going to expand on it anyways))

A lot of times in the past, for instance. I've really thought that things like cliques were made up, and I can say honestly that I don't think my high school had anything you see in crappy YA fiction like... a popular kids table. No real clannishness. 

That said, I definitely was aware of things like you mentioned... I knew who the popular kids were, I knew where my own friend group stood socially, I could tell who had influence and who didn't, not that I thought about it a lot... but I knew intuitively that for instance Of tried to have some sort of big classroom party, no one would have come, not because people didn't like me but because I didn't have that sort of... gravity to pull any crowds. 

Don't relate to what you say about friendships though. Gosh I have three friends. And I was friendly with other people, of course, but, I mean, that's Facebook friend level stuff. I'm not invested in these people, I just want to hear their gossip))

I think that could largely come down to 9 vs 2 though)

PerC is a bit funny by the way. I hate it when I start agreeing with someone all the time or something. I don't want to seem to fee part of a posse; I don't want people to feel obligated to take my side next time round or something; I try to neutralize things) I think it happens in real life too) it's actually strange, come to think of it, when I notice someone taking my side on a lot of arguments I start contriving disagreements or something, trying to give them an out so they don't get stuck as my yes-man/Lohengrin) As a result I have no yes-men or Lohengrins)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> PerC is a bit funny by the way. I hate it when I start agreeing with someone all the time or something. I don't want to seem to fee part of a posse; I don't want people to feel obligated to take my side next time round or something; I try to neutralize things) I think it happens in real life too) it's actually strange, come to think of it, when I notice someone taking my side on a lot of arguments I start contriving disagreements or something, trying to give them an out so they don't get stuck as my yes-man/Lohengrin) As a result I have no yes-men or Lohengrins)


Lol, it might do me some good to actually try to prevent such things before they happen.  I forget to worry about it and then I end up with someone being stuck to me or expecting me to defend them and I'm telling them off and going "WTF is wrong with you!?!!! Why should I defend you or agree with you? Now that we agree on something you expect me to no longer have a mind of my own? SERIOUSLY dude, get a life, this is pathetic." And then I make people cry and lose friends or sometimes make enemies who then rally up with others against me, and I find it flattering or entertaining sometimes, or occasionally upsetting if one of them is a person I once cared for.


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

I'd say 3 Sx is more like me, than 3 So. If we look at subtypes. Tho, no. I don't know. So and Sx equally. Maybe So actually.

I do also have daydreams from time to time. It's either testing how I would do in certain difficult situations, testing my abilities, or Sx-ish stuff...Talking to people. 1 on 1. Somewhere, in a perfect place, alone, deep night...And I am doing all I can so it can happen in real life. How? Remember that So description. Making connections. lol

Now why I am not Sp. SP - security. My sleeping patterns have always been random, I often forget to eat, or eat too much. Taking care of my body is equal to 0. Tho, my weight is perfectly normal, so that's good. Next. Security of resources? I often run out of the money, even though I know I have to save a little. lol. I sometimes end up going to the kitchen at night, and find out I don't have any food. I starve then. Or eat an apple/pear/whatever else I have. But fruits is not "serious" food. lol. There was a month, when I drank at least 2L of cola daily. I didn't have a single thought about the consequences. lol
My future is unpredictable. I don't like the idea of working at something for a long time, just because I might become financially secure. I've been asked few times "what are you going to do? You don't know...What are you doing? You should enter uni at least, so you can do whatever you want while there, and if doesn't go as planned, you will at least be in uni, you'll be fine". That makes sense, right? But I am not listening to them. I don't need to feel "safe". I can enter uni later. I have perfect scores, and I am adaptable. 

I currently have 4 euros in my pockets. I am fine. And at risk of parents finding out I am not in uni. They can simply check my medical insurance. lol.

That's 3 Sp :



> With the self-presentation instinct of material security, your image energy gets channeled into material things, position and possessions. Sometimes this means endlessly working very hard to earn money far beyond what you really need. You manifest self-deception or deceit by identifying your self-survival with externals such as wealth, assets, occupation, and even simply “doing.” You feel reassured when you are busy, active, moving up, succeeding and aligning with the company goals. You gain material status that you believe will assure you and important others survival and satisfaction. Your success also must match your image of approval and therefore may take a modest form, such as having an older, inexpensive car because it’s the “right” kind of automobile. At your worst, there is no end to activity directed at both acquiring objects and completing projects that you believe will bring security. Others can become obstacles that elicit your impatience and anger.


See the difference?


----------



## Apple Pine (Nov 27, 2014)

how can 6 be Sp last? lol

Btw, as Sp last, I do care about Sp stuff. Still. Like, now I stopped consuming caffeine, tried to change my sleeping patterns etc. But, it's not so natural to me, and I find myself thinking about it much less often than So ~ finding connections, navigating social groups, or Sx ~ connections, people, friendships etc

Like cmon, it's similar to those articles, saying that NTJs are emotionally stupid, often cunts. lol. I am not. And I do think like Fe sometimes, in a bit easy going fashion. Possibly even more often than in Fi way. I AM ABLE TO UNDERSTAND YOU CAN'T LAUGH AT THE FUNERAL.(Even though I think funerals are stupid). But you read those articles and you get an impression types with such low Fe are not able to do that. They are, but it's harder for them to follow such thinking process. So, for me, it's hard to accept the idea of funeral. As well as "rules" of what to do there. 

It's harder for Sp last to be act like Sp. But, I think they do understand sometimes that they have to. But they fail. Why? Because as soon as they get distracted, they once again mainly focus on Sx and So.
@hope whispers

Your rome trip. Think about it. It's basically a proof you are not Sp first. Wait. Your whole situation...Not Sp at all. You're ignoring chances to be "safe". You like the idea, but you don't seek that.

But then, it would follow with @Moderately Nefarious not being Sp first too. Maybe Sp second. You relate to 2 Sp, but not Sp itself, I think? Perhaps you're Sx/Sp. But at least you are not Sp last for sure. Hope whispers...Posssibly Sp last. lol


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Apple Pine true (though, I mean, I was living in an apartment in Rome, it wasn't some sp-defying Into the Wild venture...)

I guess my concern with not typing sp-first is that I'm not sure that I don't keep myself purposefully incompetent and unable to fend for self so others have to...not abandon me) I would rather have a savior than not need a savior)

But, idk, I'm also genuinely useless)) and I don't relate to, for instance, 6ish sp.

To consolidate, you think I'm sp-last, @Scarlet Eyes thinks I'm sx-last...anyone think I'm so-last?)


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

lanturn said:


> @_QueenOfNight_
> 
> I'm not Animal, but I think of Lorde as a 9. Not too set on it though, if other people give good reasons for another type, I'm all ears. She's pretty cool, I agree.


Too reactive to be a 9. Probably a 6 or a 4. I lean towards 4w5 lol. "Royals" sounds like 4 counter-envious so-instinct.



Animal said:


> Amy Lee is such an obvious six.. I am literally ready to bang my head on the wall here.


If she's a 6, then you're a 6 because almost everything in that interview I posted sounds like it could have been coming from you. It baffles me that you don't see the similarity between yourself and her when she says how her art/band is an "expression of herself and what is true and real..." 



Animal said:


> I am getting flashbacks of a user who types himself at 9 and AGGRESSIVELY marches around the forum typing everyone else at 9. I think I am the only person on the forum who he didn't type at 9, or even 9 fix, because I'm just the least 9ish thing that ever touched the earth. So I am happy at least he didn't go that far, my GOD, at least the man has limits. But isn't it a bit odd that a 9 would be so aggressive about that??? Just like, it's kind of odd to me that a 4 would be able to relate to SO MANY PEOPLE on SUCH A PROFOUND LEVEL as to type all of them at 4, and he wouldn't see the humanity in other types at all (as in, the grass is only green if you're the same as me) .. that is a bit strange for a 4. And to relate to so many people so deeply.. man, most 4s would kill for that.. being as isolated as we are.


I know who you're talking about, and I'm not that bad, am I? He didn't have a sense of humor. :sighlol:.

I don't relate to all of the ones I've typed (I only said that about Marina's "Happy" song, and not myself specifically but that 4s would relate), but I can see what's 4 about them expressed in their own individual ways. I don't even listen to any of those artists I've mentioned in this thread. I'm not saying that other types can't be "deep" or an "artist," but their themes will be very different. Like the example of Kendrick Lamar I gave for Type 6. He can be quite deep and dark, but he shows connections to 3 ("King Kunta") and 9 ("Alright"). It wouldn't surprise me, though, that there would be a ton of artists that are Type 4, and as many Type 4s who also wouldn't be artists, too. They have an artistic orientation to life.

The Type 6 Song:








Moderately Nefarious said:


> _______________________________________________
> Saw Lana Del Rey being mentioned, 2w3 sp/sx or sx/sp(I've been liking sx first for her lately, not sure why, will try to think)
> Anyone who sees her as a 4 has no clue what 4 means.


Yeah, because she's such a shining example of the Positive Outlook Group...

Look at Taylor Swift for a perfect 2w3.

And anyone who can't see David Bowie as a 4 doesn't know what a 4 is.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@mistakenforstranger
Every artist's art is an expression of themselves and what is true or real. That is not type related. It is a similarity that every artist shares, period.

I'm not going to argue with you on the rest because it's a waste of time. Everyone here can see how off-base you are.


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

Bowie is certainly a 3w4.... LOL.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

QueenOfNight said:


> Bowie is certainly a 3w4.... LOL.


I see they've brainwashed you too. I'm sorry.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> I see they've brainwashed you too. I'm sorry.


That's quite insulting. She is an intelligent woman and can think for herself. You know... "we" have literally never discussed Bowie with her because we don't care about him.

But, the fact that you'd interpret her posting her own opinion as "brainwashing" says more about you than it does about her or "them" (probably meaning "us" ).

Is that how you work? You try to brainwash people? Or do you get brainwashed yourself, by others?

I wonder, is this generally your assumption about how opinions form?


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> I see they've brainwashed you too. I'm sorry.


I could wash your brain, if you'd like. It might look really pretty afterwards


----------



## SheWolf (Apr 17, 2015)

mistakenforstranger said:


> QueenOfNight said:
> 
> 
> > Bowie is certainly a 3w4.... LOL.
> ...


Brainwashed? Absolutely not. I've always thought Bowie was a 3 long before I even knew who "they" were.

This is very insulting. Before, actually, I kind of viewed the harshness that people were giving you as unjustified. However.... This proves I was wrong.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> @_mistakenforstranger_
> Every artist's art is an expression of themselves and what is true or real. That is not type related. It is a similarity that every artist shares, period.
> 
> I'm not going to argue with you on the rest because it's a waste of time. Everyone here can see how off-base you are.


Agreed, but you were using that argument for why you were a 4 in the other thread because of how everything in your art is an expression of your AUTHENTIC SELF. I don't have time to go through the posts to find where you said that exactly. 

If you could provide a reason for why you think she's a 6, I will gladly change my perception of her type, but I haven't seen anything in her music or interviews that suggests it's her type. Yet, you all say "She's a obvious 6," while giving absolutely no justification. And yet when I give "poor" reasons, I'm seen as misinformed and ridiculous. The group-think going on in here is unbelievable.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

This "They brainwashed you" is exactly what I was talking about in this post, a few pages back......


* *








Animal said:


> Hm, I don't know if this is related to being soc last or sx/so or what, but I figured I'd mention it.
> 
> I've had a repeated theme in my life where I am friends with a few people, I'm mostly obsessing over a crush or relationship in terms of people and putting the rest of my energy into writing and music and work, though I do take my friendships to heart and will try to fix any problems that come up. Although taking up all my time or demanding too much of me is non-negotiable, even in relationships; I take my art seriously and don't want to be overwhelmed by people's demands, and this is not something that I've ever felt "torn up" about, I simply don't allow it to happen, period, even if it means losing people.
> 
> ...






I'm flattered by the amount of power people attribute to me, or "They" as in some imaginary crew of mine, but at the same time, I'm insulted on behalf of those people because I respect them as individuals and they do not deserve to be regarded as my "minions" or "followers" ... they have their own substance and life and it is very insulting to THEM, flattering as it may be to ME to think that I might have SUCH POWER in the minds of others, that they'd assume the whole forum is under my spell.

Thanks @mistakenforstranger, this is a really good example of what I meant there.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Agreed, but you were using that argument for why you were a 4 in the other thread because of how everything in your art is an expression of your AUTHENTIC SELF. I don't have time to go through the posts to find where you said that exactly. Even I'm not as crazy as @_mimesis_. No offense, mimesis.
> 
> If you could provide a reason for why you think she's a 6, I will gladly change my perception of her type, but I haven't seen anything in her music or interviews that suggests it's her type. Yet, you all say "She's a obvious 6," while giving absolutely no justification. And yet when I give "poor" reasons, I'm seen as misinformed and ridiculous. The group-think going on in here is unbelievable.


I'll do that another time when I have time. It's very obvious to me, and it takes a long time to make a type case. I'll be writing up some type comparisons soon, you'll have to be patient. I explained it to @QueenOfNight privately because it was easier to do it in that environment.

But that aside, this thread is not about celebrity typings. It is about instincts. I don't want to derail it too much with celebrity typings. I brought it up for ONE example for a woman who was looking for her correct type very open mindedly, and she decided on her type herself; I offered cases for both options. Then after her mind was made up, you kept coming in saying she was a 4 unsolicited, and challenging me on my celeb typings, which was not the point of this thread. So, let's return back to topic, shall we? And stop attributing super powers to me and idiocy to others. @QueenOfNight has a great mind. She would take me down in a heartbeat if she disagreed with me. She's not one to be brainwashed or fucked with.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Agreed, but you were using that argument for why you were a 4 in the other thread because of how everything in your art is an expression of your AUTHENTIC SELF.


This is misinformation. It has nothing to do with why I type at 4. That has always been the case for me, that my art was my expression and my everything, and yet I mistyped at 5 for 12 years, 8 for almost a year, and 3 for a month. How could that happen if art was my driving force the whole time? Nope, I don't link my passion for art and honesty in my art to type 4. I link it to a deep desire to be myself in ways far beyond art. Unlike Amy Lee who boasted in the video that she is a happy person, not the dark miserable goth taht she presents in her songs. She said it's not unauthentic; it's just not all of her; she also has a happy side, and the stage is where she lets out her demons. For me, the need to be myself at all costs is pervasive. Of course I'm not saying I don't have various sides or moods, and I am not saying that all of hers isnt genuine. It's just, she is not saying the same things I say, by a long shot, in that video, regarding authenticity and art, though I do agree she's authentic. Anyway, like I said in my other thread, the four fixation is about significance and origin, it's not about art or being true to yourself in art, which is just a universal reason why people do art. For me , my whole life is art.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> That's quite insulting. She is an intelligent woman and can think for herself. You know... "we" have literally never discussed Bowie with her because we don't care about him.
> 
> But, the fact that you'd interpret her posting her own opinion as "brainwashing" says more about you than it does about her or "them" (probably meaning "us" ).
> 
> ...


"Truth alone will endure, all the rest will be swept away before the tide of time. I must continue to bear testimony to truth even if I am forsaken by all. Mine may today be a voice in the wilderness, but it will be heard when all other voices are silenced, if it is the voice of Truth."

-Mahatma Gandhi

No, I'm not Gandhi, but I do have the soul of an adorable old Indian man.



Animal said:


> I could wash your brain, if you'd like. It might look really pretty afterwards


Haha, I'm glad to see you're finally playing along! I genuinely mean that. No snark.

You're not as funny as me, though.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> "Truth alone will endure, all the rest will be swept away before the tide of time. I must continue to bear testimony to truth even if I am forsaken by all. Mine may today be a voice in the wilderness, but it will be heard when all other voices are silenced, if it is the voice of Truth."
> 
> -Mahatma Gandhi
> 
> No, I'm not Gandhi, but I do have the soul of an adorable old Indian man.


I have the soul of "be the change you wish to see in the world." I strive for it, anyway.



> Haha, I'm glad to see you're finally playing along! I genuinely mean that. No snark.
> 
> You're not as funny as me, though.


The funniest thing about me is my kitty. But he doesnt want me to take his photo right now.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> But that aside, this thread is not about celebrity typings. It is about instincts. I don't want to derail it too much with celebrity typings. I brought it up for ONE example for a woman who was looking for her correct type very open mindedly, and she decided on her type herself; I offered cases for both options. Then after her mind was made up, you kept coming in saying she was a 4 unsolicited, and challenging me on my celeb typings, which was not the point of this thread. So, let's return back to topic, shall we? And stop attributing super powers to me and idiocy to others. @_QueenOfNight_ has a great mind. She would take me down in a heartbeat if she disagreed with me. She's not one to be brainwashed or fucked with.


Ok...

As in, I'll stay on topic if that's what you want. 

Any guess on my instincts? I still say sx/sp for you. Sp, because I don't see much of the 4 shame/embarrassment in you, or even the feeling of disconnection from others. You said earlier in the other thread that you also don't have a problem "co-existing." I also remember you were saying how you worked very hard to be where you are at, among other things of that nature, that it seems like the dauntless/tenacious flavor of sp 4.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Totally against the stream of this conversation (but maybe that's a good thing?), I'd like to revisit something from a good ten pages back:



Pressed Flowers said:


> Hard to put into words (I guess most the questions here are)... but I'm wondering, like, how far the word "instinct" used in enneagram goes into one's actual biological instincts?
> ...
> And if it is rooted in evolution, are there not more people who value all instincts well, and don't value two above the other? I have trouble imagining a genome being programmed for every person to naturally favor one instinct over another. I imagine some people - and a lot of people, actually - would be more equipped to be good at all instincts. (Or less, I suppose, now that we are not in the perilous situations our ancestors once were; but would we still be able to type historical figures as S_/S_, if this were the case?)


When I was first really getting into Enneagram, and started looking at the instincts, one of the first sites I found discussed the instincts in very evolutionary terms, talking about the broad development of these instincts in humanity. The writers claimed that sp came first, and then sx, and then so was a (relatively) recent development, and by extension, the largest portion of people were sp-first, then sx-first, and then the smallest amount was so-first. (They didn't speculate about distribution numerically, so so-first could be 20% or 2%, idk) I never really liked this approach, but I do think it's interesting. (If they're right, then that would mean some fun stuff about perceptions of dominant instinct typings here on PerC.) Generally, I do think the understandings are more psychological than biological, but I also think E-types aren't biological, so maybe that's related.

Now to add my own request. Considering these:



Pressed Flowers said:


> I identify as SP-last. Would this translate into me having a hard time at self-preservation - as in, I lack an instinct for self-preservation, and I am evolutionarily more driven to preserve the group (and reproduce, I suppose), and at a chemical, biological level I am geared towards that?





Apple Pine said:


> Now why I am not Sp. SP - security. My sleeping patterns have always been random, I often forget to eat, or eat too much. Taking care of my body is equal to 0. Tho, my weight is perfectly normal, so that's good. Next. Security of resources? I often run out of the money, even though I know I have to save a little. lol. I sometimes end up going to the kitchen at night, and find out I don't have any food. I starve then. Or eat an apple/pear/whatever else I have. But fruits is not "serious" food. lol. There was a month, when I drank at least 2L of cola daily. I didn't have a single thought about the consequences. lol
> My future is unpredictable. I don't like the idea of working at something for a long time, just because I might become financially secure. I've been asked few times "what are you going to do? You don't know...What are you doing? You should enter uni at least, so you can do whatever you want while there, and if doesn't go as planned, you will at least be in uni, you'll be fine". That makes sense, right? But I am not listening to them. I don't need to feel "safe". I can enter uni later. I have perfect scores, and I am adaptable. I currently have 4 euros in my pockets. I am fine. And at risk of parents finding out I am not in uni. They can simply check my medical insurance. lol.


1. Are these getting at the same thing? Could Apple's habits be understood as lacking a biological instinct for self-preservation?
2. Are Apple's habits indicative of an sp-last stacking, or are the two completely unrelated? 
3. Kind of going off a thing Animal mentioned earlier about sp and disability (by which I mean she mentioned them in the same sentence, whatever) - if a person does have a disability, should that be taken into account when dealing with the sp instinct? For instance - NOT DIAGNOSING APPLE PINE IN ANYWAY, JUST AN EXAMPLE - a person with depression may experience disturbances to sleep, eating, money-saving, future-planning, etc. Does this mean all people with chronic depression are sp-last? Or am I just making too much of this?

the instincts are haaaaaaarrrrrd i can't do itttt  :sad: :bored: i'm really tired so i get long-winded and ranty, sorry, hope this was clear, also hope i didn't offend anyone? lmk if i did?


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> Unlike Amy Lee who boasted in the video that she is a happy person, not the dark miserable goth taht she presents in her songs.


She didn't say anything near to that, though. Quite the opposite.

Here's the quote, which I posted earlier but I guess you missed the point:

"I've always been afraid to be happy...I'm not letting myself break through into the happiness because it's 'not cool.'...I won't be able to be an artist anymore if I'm happy...so it's this fight, do I do this and get happy or do I wallow in it like I always do." 

Or do I wallow in it like I always do...She's seeing that it's a choice. She is saying she thinks she'll lose her artistic identity ("I won't be able to be an artist anymore") if she becomes too happy. Her view is actually one of a healthy 4 who is realizing that one's feelings do not equal one's identity (i.e. artist), as in you can also be happy and an artist (i.e. who I am). They aren't mutually exclusive.

As she says later, 

"*It's just not who I am.* I've always been fascinated with the darker side of things, death, the afterlife, sort of these things I don't really understand and maybe never will. *It's part of who I am, but it doesn't mean I can't be happy.*"

From Riso-Hudson:



> Fours are in the same predicament. As long as they believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with them, they cannot allow themselves to experience or enjoy their many good qualities. To acknowledge their good qualities would be to lose their sense of identity (as a suffering victim) and to be without a relatively consistent personal identity (their Basic Fear). Fours grow by learning to see that much of their story is not true—or at least it is not true any more. The old feelings begin to fall away once they stop telling themselves their old tale: it is irrelevant to who they are right now.


And as I said before, here's Riso-Hudson's unconscious childhood messages. I'll let you choose which one is more in line with her view: 

Type 4 - "It's not okay to be too functional or too happy."

or

Type 6 - "It's not okay to trust yourself."



Animal said:


> For me, the need to be myself at all costs is pervasive. Of course I'm not saying I don't have various sides or moods, and I am not saying that all of hers isnt genuine. It's just, she is not saying the same things I say, by a long shot, in that video, regarding authenticity and art, though I do agree she's authentic.


"The whole point of this band is expressing myself and what's real and what's true. And if I start changing that, then that really is the band changing, and I would hate it."

I honestly don't see much difference. 



Animal said:


> Anyway, like I said in my other thread, the four fixation is about significance and origin, it's not about art or being true to yourself in art, which is just a universal reason why people do art. For me , my whole life is art.


Let's just take "significance" and "meaning" to be the same, as you do in the other thread:

"I don't feel like I'm a completely different person because of fame. I don't think it *means* anything...What does it really *mean* anyway? We're all just people. I think I'm the same person I've always been really."

What was your point about Alanis Morrissette's quote ("Fame is hollow") earlier and the idea of fame? Which again is the same viewpoint expressed by Bowie in the song "Fame," ("Fame puts you there where things are hollow") yet somehow Alanis is expressing a distinctly 4 viewpoint to you while Bowie's is 3 or Amy's is 6, but they're all saying the same thing. No that doesn't determine their type, but if you're going to hold up Alanis as a 4 using that as one of your reasons why doesn't it apply to others who say the exact same thing but in different words?


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@mistakenforstranger
Sorry, it mgiht have been a different video I was thinking of because I watched a few in a row.
Anyway, like i said I'll get to Amy Lee a different time, and not here, because it's a derail. Six is also about authenticity or else it wouldn't be an integration point for type 3.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

I'm considering being 6 actually, rather than 2, so take my posts with a grain of salt please...

Under spoiler because I realize this is not the thread for it, but some posts from the Fairy Tales thread I made about instincts, also video, so if anyone has thoughts here...I thought they might be relevant to instincts thread

Sorry if this is an annoying thing to do, I thought it might help to consolidate conversation :/

* *







hope whispers said:


> Watching HIMYM. Something that interests me -- I guess -- is this moment in TV shows (like this one) where the guy zeroes in on the 'perfect' girl. I know I'm supposed to assume -- Ted's feeling something special -- but still, these scenes...they confuse me, I guess) Didn't used to, I would just try to mimic something, but I've discovered that I can't really tell what it is) I think I've been mimicing the wrong things)
> Does that make sense? I've been considering a sx-last typing, I wonder if that could be part of it...
> 
> For instance, Victoria. I don't get it.
> ...





hope whispers said:


> <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<span class="highlight"><i><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=262690" target="_blank">Scarlet Eyes</a></i></span>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> ah yes)
> Though, that's not really what I meant; don't think I explained it well at all) and I don't know how now)) Mm... It wasn't about the West Side Story soulmate camera zoom, but the...'there she is she's perfect'camera zoom out sometimes montage) and the Rhine that eludes me here... Well, I'm not sure) it eludes me) but I suspect over been projecting things onto these things that are not intended)
> ...





Scarlet Eyes said:


> Ah, I think I get what you mean here. It sounds like it says a bit about your stacking, so I'm willing to bet sp/so or so/sp. And you do seem to vibe like a 2w1 to me, but then again, that's just my opinion. :encouragement:
> 
> (And call it a simple vibe, but I always thought you and <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<span class="highlight"><i><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=63254" target="_blank">Moderately Nefarious</a></i></span>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> have the same type. Both of you appear to share the same values, but the differences are pretty clear. And those differences seem best illustrated with your wings and stackings.)





Moderately Nefarious said:


> <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<span class="highlight"><i><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=164034" target="_blank">hope whispers</a></i></span>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> I think that could be sx last
> I find that my idea of sexiness, attractiveness and such is conventional and probably based on some things I saw, but it feels more natural than what you seem to be describing, I think,I don't relate to your thing.
> But my So can work in a similar way, lots of mimicking and not being able to decide what parts actually matter, it all feels the same.





FearAndTrembling said:


> People have discussed the differences between you two and I will add to it. I saw Nefarious typed as sp. She is more serious and goal orientated than you and I. Do you have any clue how to survive by yourself? I don't. lol. Of course I am exaggerating a little but it does seem like she is more "adult" than us in that way.
> 
> 
> "they are the most practical in the sense of taking care of basic life necessities—paying bills, maintaining the home and workplace, acquiring useful skills, and so forth."
> ...





hope whispers said:


> I'm a 1-wing, right?
> * Cutting unnecessarily specific and unrelated story*But of reminded me, I've always felt birthdays to be a big deal) With someone else, of course, I just want it to be as nice as possible, showing appreciation and such, but my own birthdays I always interpreted as Opportunities To Be Perfect, I would Scott my room clean the days before, settle all drivers, try to resolve any arguments, apologize for any things left unapologized for, etc., and then attempt to be..perfect, perfectly good, perfectly beautiful, my mind unmarred by ugly or ungracious thoughts, seeing the whole world with total beauty, etc., not pretty to any vices)
> 
> But I noticed my extreme emphasis on the birthday was interpreted by -mostly my dad - as entitlement, in the sense of 'I want people to do things for me' which or was actually the exact opposite of, but I can understand how he would see it that way, if he was not paying attention)) Same, btw, with the Disney princesses -I would always watch their movies or at least one on the night before on my teen years (not in childhood hahae), and I always strived to be like them in terms of VIRTUE and BEAUTY and GRACE but my dad (and I've since learned, this is how others will take it as well without clarification) would take it as 'I want to be a princess and be waited on hand and foot' - which noooooo they are hardworking and humble (
> ...





Pressed Flowers said:


> <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<span class="highlight"><i><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=164034" target="_blank">hope whispers</a></i></span>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> I've always been convinced you have a 1 as the gut fix. Overall I think you aim for perfection and hold yourself to standards to reach that perfection, and just how you see things as how they "should be," like how you assign morals to activities like playing video games, it all seems very One-ish. Not sure if it would be core - 2 or 6 still seems right there - but I am sure (personally) that it's your gut fix.
> 
> ...





Moderately Nefarious said:


> @hope whispers I don't get the not sp part of the birthday story.
> To me the whole thing feels kinda sp-ish, in way you focus on developing traits and such, very focused on self, improving yourself by yourself, in 'isolation'. Hard to explain exactly what I mean, but this feels more sp than any other instinct (why would it be so or sx?), and I feel like you focus on that kind of thing a lot so it's probably significant.
> Sp 2 is not just about wanting people to be your slaves, especially w1)
> I also sometimes genuinely want to _be_ certain way.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

I can relate to your "Victoria" thing but in more So/popularity way.
Like, in school I'd see some girl who is popular and then imitate random things about her, also envied things that I now realize don't actually make anyone popular.
I guess I didn't understand what popularity actually meant and what's behind it, it all seemed random so all of popular girl's traits seemed equally (in)significant.
I talked about it in FT, for example in middle school I liked saying I'd want to be a cheerleader if we had them, I thought it would make people wanna be my friend, obviously, because cheerleaders are popular)
And wanting to be popular is such an attractive trait that it automatically makes you popular.
I thought I was way cooler than girls who didn't admire cheerleaders)
Seems a bit silly in retrospect but there are many examples like that, even worse.
And most of my attempts at popularity ended like

* *
















It seems similar to sx last sx described many pages back, or?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> I can relate to your "Victoria" thing but in more So/popularity way.
> Like, in school I'd see some girl who is popular and then imitate random things about her, also envied things that I now realize don't actually make anyone popular.
> I guess I didn't understand what popularity actually meant and what's behind it, it all seemed random so all of popular girl's traits seemed equally (in)significant.
> I talked about it in FT, for example in middle school I liked saying I'd want to be a cheerleader if we had them, I thought it would make people wanna be my friend, obviously, because cheerleaders are popular)
> ...



My school was like bizarro world. The cheerleaders were mocked and ugly. lol. The popular and hot girls played sports. No popular girl would cheerlead. But that is just one exception, the cheerleaders the next school over were hot and popular and same with most schools. Our school was just weird. We're a bunch of fuckin haters. 

Popularity is an interesting concept because many "popular" kids are not well liked. I was more well liked than in the elite class. I was knocking on its door tho or maybe had my foot in. lol. Like I don't think I could get the hottest/most popular girl in grade. The real popular guys got to date hot women a few years ahead of them. That was out of my league. That is elite level popularity.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> My school was like bizarro world. The cheerleaders were mocked and ugly. lol. The popular and hot girls played sports. No popular girl would cheerlead. But that is just one exception, the cheerleaders the next school over were hot and popular and same with most schools. Our school was just weird. We're a bunch of fuckin haters.
> 
> Popularity is an interesting concept because many "popular" kids are not well liked. I was more well liked than in the elite class. I was knocking on its door tho or maybe had my foot in. lol. Like I don't think I could get the hottest/most popular girl in grade. The real popular guys got to date hot women a few years ahead of them. That was out of my league. That is elite level popularity.


We dont even have cheerleaders in my country, I just know the movie ones lol

True)
I was never focused on it enough to know all the little details about popular people and their social dynamics, I just knew there's some girl and she's treated like a goddess, and I tried to figure out why. 

I find it a bit sad that an introvert 5 was probably more popular than I was :laughing:


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> I'm considering being 6 actually, rather than 2...


For my 2 cents, I'm seeing type 2 as dominant.

Regarding the HIMYM clip, I simply see that as you applying the social instinct in trying to understand the sexual instinct. The social instinct would focus more on outward appearance to others. The sexual instinct is more about an internal experience within the person that has the attraction. There's something that clicks within for the sexual instinct. It has nothing to do with what everyone else sees. It has to do with something that connects with the individual emotionally and often unconsciously but can sometimes be conscious as well (she reminds of someone else I had that spark with, something about her just tells me we can connect at some deeper level no one else can see, or whatever creates that spark for that individual). You can't really mimic that because it's something intangible that only the person with the attraction can sense. This concern with presentation or mimicry is one reason SX may experience SO as superficial (it may more specifically be SX/SP that experiences SO this way - not sure).



hope whispers said:


> _but my own birthdays I always interpreted as Opportunities To Be Perfect, I would Scott my room clean the days before, settle all drivers, try to resolve any arguments, apologize for any things left unapologized for, etc., and then attempt to be..perfect, perfectly good, perfectly beautiful, my mind unmarred by ugly or ungracious thoughts, seeing the whole world with total beauty, etc.
> _


This sounds like an SO focus to me - a concern for how you appear to others in terms of social expectations.



hope whispers said:


> _But I noticed my extreme emphasis on the birthday was interpreted by -mostly my dad - as entitlement, in the sense of 'I want people to do things for me' which or was actually the exact opposite of, but I can understand how he would see it that way, if he was not paying attention
> _


This is sounding like in your mind SO was more important than SP. As I've said before, I think the 2nd instinct is used to support your movement toward the first one. In this case, that says SO/SP to me (SP is supporting your movement toward SO concerns, your dad may have just been seeing that SP aspect and your SO focus was internalized where he couldn't see that).

Overall, I'm leaning toward SO/SP 2w1 for you. That's just from your post that I'm quoting and after looking at the first few minutes of your video (I didn't see anything to the contrary). If I get a chance to watch the whole video then I may have a different opinion.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> We dont even have cheerleaders in my country, I just know the movie ones lol
> 
> True)
> I was never focused on it enough to know all the little details about popular people and their social dynamics, I just knew there's some girl and she's treated like a goddess, and I tried to figure out why.
> ...


Seriously, one of the main things is money and looks. If you show up in a new school and you are really attractive and your parents have money, you're gonna be popular. That is a winning combination. You're gonna have haters too but popular people aren't really popular like I said. You can be dirt poor and popular too, it is just harder.

And there is always the athlete route. If you're part of a team the school cares about and play a large role in, you are gonna be popular. Like basketball at my school. Whole school and large part of the area would watch. These guy were stars. The fuckin point guard. Are you you kidding me? lol. All eyez on them.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The 80s movie Can't Buy Me Love. About this nerd who has been mowing lawns and shit for years to save to up to by a telescope but instead uses it to pay a popular girl to date to him. To make him popular. And it works. lol. Good movie. The Breakfast Club is another classic that explores this dynamic.

I think men are less socially orientated. Men social circles are more enforced by violence. I ran into my first bully in kindergarten. lol. He was older and bigger than us. He had been held back or something. Dominated the toys. Beat on us in gym. One day my best friend punched him in the face and that was that. Social dynamics have now shifted. Everyone in the class was much happier. lol. It was like an exorcism. Men are more likely to get physical quicker. And that tends to settle things quick. I think women may have it worse because it is more emotional/verbal. It is more complex and subtle form of bullying. Men tend more to bully more physically or respond to it by getting physical.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think men are less socially orientated. Men social circles are more enforced by violence.


I don't know if I'd say violence specifically, but I do think it may be more physical such as team sports and all that goes with that. At least when I was younger. I wonder if it's changing these days with more girls involved with sports at an earlier age.


----------



## garcdanny26 (Mar 4, 2016)

After reading some info on here I really view myself as sp/sx, just as I initially thought.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@NylonSmiles @Moderately Nefarious @Scarlet Eyes @hope whispers @Distortions

Or whoever else was asking me about 4s and envy...

The best short-cut explanation of what I meant, that I can come up with, is this: I taught my friend enneagram a few years ago when I was mistyping at 8. She is a 1 and has known me since age 7. I hadn't seen her in years because adult life drew us apart so I was explaining the concepts I had learned over the years to her for the first time.

She told me at the end of the conversation: "You know how you said some sixes can be very fearful, while other sixes are afraid of their fear, insisting they have no fear at all? Well... you are ashamed of your shame. You always have been. I think you're a 4 with an 8 fix instead."

That really hit home. I'd been typing at 8 for several months and received many 4 suggestions, some from enneagram experts who nailed me to the wall.. and I argued and argued about not being a 4. But when she said that - having known me all my life - what could I say? She's right. My fixation is around shame; I'm _ashamed of my shame.
_
It's no secret that 6 is one of my favorite types, and some of the closest people in my life are 6s. So I don't want to malign type 6 in any way by bringing this up as an example, but I think it's a good example because the whole enneagram community seems to be familiar with it.

We all learn that some sixes - "Phobic sixes" - are fearful, or in touch with their fear. While others, "Counter-phobic" sixes, are so used to their fear that they can't even feel it, and they truly believe they have no fear at all. I have argued that both types of sixes could be prone to feel fear at some times and not feel it at others; I don't think the divide is that 'clean.' But, that said, we all understand the concept that if your mantra is "all we have to fear is fear itself" or someone is insisting "I have NO FEAR, I've never felt ANY FEAR IN MY LIFE" .... on an enneagram questionnaire... they're likely to be a 6. (Of course not all sixes are this way; many are very self aware and have a full spectrum of awareness of their emotions, but I'm talking about fixated, deluded or traumatized sixes.) Some sixes have built such a complex around their fear, that if someone else shows fear in front of them, they become uncomfortable, and call that person "weak" or "pussy" or other names, because what is really happening, is that person is showing fear which forces the six to confront HIS OWN fear.

A similar phenomenon happened with me and 4 when I was traumatized. Before trauma, I sang and wrote about my envy or shame, I was not quite like this, though I still was very ashamed of it so most of my disclosure was in my music or diaries, and I honestly can't remember if I ever spoke of it directly since I was only 16 when I got sick and lost everything. After that, I built a complex around it, where I found other people to be "weak" and "pathetic" for being envious, jealous or possessive, for "lacking an identity of their own" and trying to "steal someone else's identity" or "control someone else." Of course I've never stolen anyone's identity (though that is arguable, given my experience with introjection, but I won't go into that here) .. I am not particularly controlling except when it comes to DEMANDING that I have my own space, etc. But, someone else's envy or possessiveness in a relationship would literally result in me slapping them or calling them pathetic. Why?? You might ask. Well obviously, it's because it made me uncomfortable to have to confront that in myself.

I lost my first boyfriend because we were both traumatized; I also lost my singing voice around the same year. I really loved him, but he was a possessive and traumatized Sx 8 and I was a traumatized Sx 4 who just lost my means to express myself and my sense of identity and music.... what we went through is beyond what you might believe if you saw it in a movie. But it left me promising and swearing up and down that I would never need anyone again, that I would never accept anyone "owning" me or being possessive of me, that I would never be jealous (he had instances with another virgin after me, and he was my first everything) ... I cried for almost six months straight after we broke up; could not converse with anyone without bursting into tears, had to lock myself up at home.. then I started taking LSD and trying to reform my brain so that I would no longer feel possessiveness, envy, shame, etc... I am talking about a very extreme case, but this is what I was intent upon "weeding out of myself." Then when other people showed such traits, especially directed at me (like men who were into me)... I would become so angry and bitter that I would slap them, or I'd use them and then kick them out for being pathetic. My case is extreme, and I would not expect even another Sx 4 to relate to it.

But this is what I mean, a type X will have complexes around that fixation. That doesn't mean every 4 is going to have gone through a period as dark as I did, or has tried to weed these traits out. 4s most deeply want to be THEMSELVES and that is all I wanted all along; I just thought those traits were corrupting me or making me something different than I really was, that it was stopping me from loving "purely," though this was a huge inner conflict for me "which is the real me?"" ... because as a child, I was excruciatingly envious and jealous of my younger brother, who my mother loved more than she loved me.. and I was mean to him because of it until I was 8.. this was the most horrible thing I ever did in my life really; how I treated him. I was otherwise a very good kid, great in school, great on stage, practiced my lessons, but when it came to my envy of my mother's love for my brother I was a hideous monster. I also felt like that corrupted my true soul.. I didn't want to compete with him, or with anyone, anymore; I needed to be myself, to embody my own dreams. And I did with my singing , until I lost my voice and autonomy (I was ready and had the money to move out at 16 when I got sick) and any chance of ever being independent or following my heart again, and at the same time, lost my first love.... I then wanted to get back the "innocent" person that I was when I was singing, before my losses; but I was also aware of the jealous monster that came before her, and I knew that was the truth of me, and in some ways I wanted to kill BOTH sides of myself, or let them fight to the death until one would win. 

Anyway that was a long ramble, but my main point is, your fixation will be around your type's problem or paradox; it will be different for each person. In many cases it may manifest like mine, or the "afraid of fear/ ashamed of shame" type paradox.


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

@Animal I greatly admire how self-revealing you are with your posts. I can only imagine how turbulent your past was, yet your resilience really shines through. If you don't mind, I'd like to answer back with some of my thoughts on shame tomorrow. :tranquillity:


----------



## Pressed Flowers (Oct 8, 2014)

Animal said:


> @Pressed Flowers
> I'll admit something kind of embarrassing, but, what the hell..
> I prefer being seen as a loner. It's not that it's untrue, but, for instance, if I have a crush on a guy in town, I will make a point to go to town by myself, looking good (or, rather, asserting my personal style) but not looking like I'm trying too hard to do so, carrying a book or appearing as an independent entity. Whether he is a loner or a guy with a lot of friends, I want him to know that if he talks to me, he's talking to ME, not to a clique. I don't need backup, I don't need to appear surrounded by love... I want him to see me as a separate, independent, autonomous alien rather than just one of the many. Maybe it's a 4 thing, though I'm sure there are 4s in the world who would be embarrassed to be seen without friends around them (in fact I've met one), but this is part of my specific identity. It's not false or put on; I really am independent.
> 
> ...


I actually find it very... _enviable_ isn't the right word, ha, but rather admirable to be a loner. To be independent, and especially independent of spirit. And in assertion of oneself. (As a Nine I know that's something I very unabashedly struggle with- having a presence, being as real as other people, feeling myself as as real as other people.) It's incredible to me when people can come off as... loners, that may be a self-identification, but to me it feels,like coming off as... a person. A person who is plainly and obviously and strongly themselves. That's something I thirst to be, I suppose. Just to be as much of a person as other people are, but especially to be like people who are even stronger in identity that they seem - from my perspective - to master it. 

I'm somewhat the same with friends actually... the friends I am close to, at least. I have a few close ones, and then so many others that I see as friends that, being a withdrawn Nine and a way too self-conscious (if that's not a paradox) person, it's hard for me to keep up with them all. And even my closest ones slip away from close contact due to spreading myself too thin, I suppose. (Even on here that happens. I can't even answer the simplest PMs quickly, much less a lot of them at once... Just imagine how bad I am at text and Facebook messages.) This does rather inspire me to hold tighter to the friends I know to be my friends, though. To have an inner and an outer circle of friends; and to keep close to inner circle, and not feel so bad about differentiating time spent with them from the outer circle. 

I also find it interesting that you say you would rather not be identified as a member of a group. Honestly I have such a hard time getting a group to be seen as apart of... but certainly I feel more present in a place when I have a few friends around me. And people I can reference that other people know, like, "oh, Sara and I were just talking about that yesterday." Too frequently in my life have I had to be the "loner," or at least the unattached and friendless (because that's what I think I come off as, more than an independent figure)... It's much better for me, now that I'm not too afraid to be ridiculed to reach out to people, to have people to laugh and talk with (even in the smallest and most casual settings). I'm not like a lot of my friends who are ashamed to sit and eat in a public place by themselves (why? I don't understand it, plenty of people do this, and it's so _nice_ to be able to be alone with one's thoughts for a while, especially with the contrast of a public background), but I'm still not yet as filled with my identity (in my eyes) to sit without drawing awkward attention to myself in a bus, or to walk alone and seem as if I belong on a city sidewalk. But of course social anxiety comes into this as well, both making me feel as if I can't do things well and making me not do them well due to the extra lack of social cautiousness. 

But I do like to be associated with a group, especially in public. Especially when it comes to my family. Growing up it was the best thing to go to the mall with all my cousins, or spend a weekend with my extended family. I loved the community aspect, of course... but it was also nice for people to be able to see, look. There's a person who fits into this family dynamic. Maybe it's petty; I suppose it is petty. But safety in numbers is something I feel. (So long as those numbers aren't too big that they grow anonymous.)



hope whispers said:


> @Pressed Flowers that wasn't me, was it?) I almost remember a similar conversation... Probably wasn't but it sounds like something I might say somewhat...lazily, maybe, so I'm going to expand on it anyways))
> 
> A lot of times in the past, for instance. I've really thought that things like cliques were made up, and I can say honestly that I don't think my high school had anything you see in crappy YA fiction like... a popular kids table. No real clannishness.
> 
> ...


No, it wasn't you, though you probably did participate in the discussion. Not that I think she would mind, but for purposes of mild privacy I'll just say that it was in conversation with the person on the thread you would expect to discuss Heathers with) 

I noticed "cliques" from a very early age. Heck, even as a four year old I was telling my mom about who the three popular girls who could do anything were and then how my friend group was about two tiers below them, sort of the same sort of group but with less social influence for whatever reason. I really hated the idea of cliques growing up... because I couldn't see why we weren't all just friends with each other, and to me it seemed (and was) that I was never ranked up when it came to cliques and of course that'll make a little girl bitter. (I think I was accepting of them as a young child, but going into pubescent years it began to bug me.) In college though I don't notice that stuff at all... Either because there isn't really popularity in college (except in some situations) (mostly you have like the group of students who have their friend group in the class and then sometimes you have the students who are the class smarties who exert influence in the classroom, but it lasts little beyond that), and everyone has their own friend group like they say, or because we're all done with that to care about it. And I think anyway I've come to be at peace with how society works, our society at least. Some people exert more influence than others. Complaining about that is about as pointless as trying to convince the sky to attract you rather than the ground. I still can't stand bullying, but "cliques" participate in bullying behavior less than little me once thought. in college, at least. 

And yeah, I agree that a lot of it is Nine vs Two. (And at the moment I'm pretty solid on you being a Two in core. Sorry for no evidence, but thought you would want to know about the shift. You know my opinion is literally worthless [really] but just my thoughts rn) 



Scarlet Eyes said:


> @Pressed Flowers @hope whispers
> 
> Sorry for the slight delay. I'm going to turn in after I post so take your time with any responses if you wish.
> 
> ...


Hmm... I have really complicated thoughts about Society that I think are simple but which I think I'll botch up explaining nonetheless. I see Society and Humanity as two separate things. Humanity is... beautiful (I'm afraid to say more positive things about humanity as a Christian, but honestly I see Humanity in such a positive light.) I see Humanity as maybe the conglomeration of... humans, but like in one tiny cup of it... and of course humans are bad, we do bad things, we love bad things, but I still see Human as having a positive connotation. Humans are capable of growth and love and compassion and change and creativity... Humanity has such a light... and that's what I think of when I think of Humanity. Like a word that makes a ball of all these great things Humanity has going on... not without regard for the worse parts of Humanity, but with the light of our positive qualities overpowering our more notable, darker nature. 

And I love Humanity. Which means... I don't know, I love people. I love being around people. I love thinking about people. I love what people do for one another. I love thinking about cities, and countries, and the world. And I love helping people. And I grow disturbed when I hear about one thing happening to a person, when I see anything referencing war on the news or when I see a discontented child in the store. Humanity is rad. And just... pulls out my heart where I can't help but love us, feel my heart tugged by us, be unable to be anything but effected by Humanity. 

However, I separate Humanity from Society. My views on Society are shifting. I once believed Society was inherently neutral. Society could be used as a force to do good things - like rallying together against injustice - and also do very terrible things, like witch hunts (and all sorts of atrocious modern variations of the witch hunt we have today). I retain that perception, I think. But I once thought all societies were innately prone to the same faults as the next society, that all societies were equally neutral and none was innately more prone to being ethical than others... and that we had to accept that Society will act as it does. We all just have to do what we can to push Society towards good rather than evil. I've recently begun shifting that attitude. I am unsure if I believe that societies can become inherently better than they presently are - with better ethics at its core as opposed to a neutral center - but I do think it's somewhat clear throughout history that certain societies carry better ethical impact than others. 

Regardless - I don't love Society. I love Humanity. I love people. I love it when people come together. But Society... as a concept, at least, it's more a law of nature than it is something that can be really loved. It's not people, it's a process. And not a process I always like. Even as a Socially driven person, often there are things in Society that make me disgusted, disgusted with the society of the environment I'm in or in societies or just the too-frequent sour nature of societies in general. 

I bring this up because specifically what I can say that I think may be more representative of other Socially driven people is that I love a third category, which I deem Community. I love to be apart of other people, to work with others, to feel that sense of, well, _one-ness_ with others and to flow with them. I crave friendly but potent group dynamics. I love to be surrounded by people, especially people who I am in a community with. 

And being without Community... It really is a devastating thought to me. I believe I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but I couldn't be on an island without other people. I was watching 2001: A Space Odyssey the other night and I couldn't understand why that one character was trying so hard to survive. There was no human life around him. He'd never be on Earth again. What was the point? At all? In the same way I didn't understand what the antagonist was aiming for. Freedom? But what would be the point of life? Life to me is something deeper than coexisting with others... but an essential part of it for me certainly is existing with others. Living in isolation from other people is one of the most chilling and disorienting thoughts for me. 

These are points I've made before, so forgive me for reiterating them. But I do think that it is telling to know these things... Could you survive on your own? If only your life remained in the universe, would you keep going? What would you need to survive o a deserted island? These questions are close to the core of instincts, I think, if one can answer them honestly to themselves. 

I will say I agree about self-promotion. It is extremely dehumanizing how we have to market ourselves to get a job, to survive. I am perplexed that we regard it as so normal and don't ponder it further, how we accept the stipulation that to survive one must make oneself appealing to the workforce... and especially how many people go to college now _just_ to be more attractive to employers. It seems to make us all meat, somehow. I am admittedly pretty decent at marketing myself, but when I step back and think about it it does make me quite sick.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Pressed Flowers said:


> I also find it interesting that you say you would rather not be identified as a member of a group. Honestly I have such a hard time getting a group to be seen as apart of... but certainly I feel more present in a place when I have a few friends around me. And people I can reference that other people know, like, "oh, Sara and I were just talking about that yesterday." Too frequently in my life have I had to be the "loner," or at least the unattached and friendless (because that's what I think I come off as, more than an independent figure)... It's much better for me, now that I'm not too afraid to be ridiculed to reach out to people, to have people to laugh and talk with (even in the smallest and most casual settings). I'm not like a lot of my friends who are ashamed to sit and eat in a public place by themselves (why? I don't understand it, plenty of people do this, and it's so _nice_ to be able to be alone with one's thoughts for a while, especially with the contrast of a public background), but I'm still not yet as filled with my identity (in my eyes) to sit without drawing awkward attention to myself in a bus, or to walk alone and seem as if I belong on a city sidewalk. But of course social anxiety comes into this as well, both making me feel as if I can't do things well and making me not do them well due to the extra lack of social cautiousness.
> 
> But I do like to be associated with a group, especially in public. Especially when it comes to my family. Growing up it was the best thing to go to the mall with all my cousins, or spend a weekend with my extended family. I loved the community aspect, of course... but it was also nice for people to be able to see, look. There's a person who fits into this family dynamic. Maybe it's petty; I suppose it is petty. But safety in numbers is something I feel. (So long as those numbers aren't too big that they grow anonymous.)


It intrigues me how differently we think, reading this whole post) Particularly because I feel like on the surface we come across quite similar? I certainly thought of us as very similar at first but now it's very difficult to reconcile your way of thinking with my own (even though I like many of the things you say)

Anyways, I can lightly relate to this paragraph, although I'm surprised I guess by people who are actually ok eating by themselves in a public setting) I - first of all, I just don't like it - it's so darn boring) And secondly, I just feel humiliated, like everyone's looking at me, like waiters are feeling sorry for me, like I'm taking up space) The actual process of like...eating, in public, by myself, is so weird to me) I remember trying to find an empty space on campus during some college terms and it would just be - weird) and awful) I remember eating in some abandoned hallway that like a few students and my French professor would walk down and I would always exchange an awkward 'Bonjour' with the professor and I could tell that he was just pitying me more and more throughout the semester))

And like, pretending to read) Cause it's not like I can actually concentrate in such a scenario) 

But, probably just me being neurotic, not especially type-related)

However, I love being seen with people, like friends or whatever, in public) Like walking around with them) I feel like...when I was little I'd see in movies or irl teens and young people walking around in groups of friends and so if I do that I feel like a Real Young Person)) Or social media, I always hate it, I'll meet friends and they'll take pictures at our gatherings but they'll not post them on FB or other sites; just send them privately or like print them off and use them in a scrapbook/collage years later :angry: In high school I would vainly attempt to encourage people to not just send messages, I had a small campaign of "we need to write on each others' WALLS" but no one was on board)

Though, this is a total digression; my apologies) I guess my point is that it's imagey) But almost too imagey)) I mean, I _did_ wake up one day and say "I want to look cool on Facebook")




> No, it wasn't you, though you probably did participate in the discussion. Not that I think she would mind, but for purposes of mild privacy I'll just say that it was in conversation with the person on the thread you would expect to discuss Heathers with)


I keep hearing about Heathers but I have no idea what it is still) Guess I could google but the plural annoys me so much. Oh well, I've guessed who)



> I noticed "cliques" from a very early age. Heck, even as a four year old I was telling my mom about who the three popular girls who could do anything were and then how my friend group was about two tiers below them, sort of the same sort of group but with less social influence for whatever reason. I really hated the idea of cliques growing up... because I couldn't see why we weren't all just friends with each other, and to me it seemed (and was) that I was never ranked up when it came to cliques and of course that'll make a little girl bitter. (I think I was accepting of them as a young child, but going into pubescent years it began to bug me.) In college though I don't notice that stuff at all... Either because there isn't really popularity in college (except in some situations) (mostly you have like the group of students who have their friend group in the class and then sometimes you have the students who are the class smarties who exert influence in the classroom, but it lasts little beyond that), and everyone has their own friend group like they say, or because we're all done with that to care about it. And I think anyway I've come to be at peace with how society works, our society at least. Some people exert more influence than others. Complaining about that is about as pointless as trying to convince the sky to attract you rather than the ground. I still can't stand bullying, but "cliques" participate in bullying behavior less than little me once thought. in college, at least.


Oh -- I was aware of this too, I knew who was popular and who wasn't...I never really understood the 'clique' concept, I guess. Mostly it seems like just a group of friends.
It might just be chance though. The popular girls at my school were actually really nice people and invited me to a bunch of stuff (which I never intended because I guessed they were hollow, though well-meaning, invitations) I think different schools and such are just going to have different dynamics) 

Honestly I would have welcomed a bit of genuine cliquery)



> And yeah, I agree that a lot of it is Nine vs Two. (And at the moment I'm pretty solid on you being a Two in core. Sorry for no evidence, but thought you would want to know about the shift. You know my opinion is literally worthless [really] but just my thoughts rn)


!

What changed? Have I even made any new posts (that weren't complaining about fictional characters looking 'weak'?))
(but thanks for the update either way)



> Hmm... I have really complicated thoughts about Society that I think are simple but which I think I'll botch up explaining nonetheless. I see Society and Humanity as two separate things. Humanity is... beautiful (*I'm afraid to say more positive things about humanity as a Christian*, but honestly I see Humanity in such a positive light.)











(sorry couldn't find a more amused/friendly-looking gif)


> I see Humanity as maybe the conglomeration of... humans, but like in one tiny cup of it... and of course humans are bad, we do bad things, we love bad things, but I still see Human as having a positive connotation. Humans are capable of growth and love and compassion and change and creativity... Humanity has such a light... and that's what I think of when I think of Humanity. Like a word that makes a ball of all these great things Humanity has going on... not without regard for the worse parts of Humanity, but with the light of our positive qualities overpowering our more notable, darker nature.
> 
> And I love Humanity. Which means... I don't know, I love people. I love being around people. I love thinking about people. I love what people do for one another. I love thinking about cities, and countries, and the world. And I love helping people. And I grow disturbed when I hear about one thing happening to a person, when I see anything referencing war on the news or when I see a discontented child in the store. Humanity is rad. And just... pulls out my heart where I can't help but love us, feel my heart tugged by us, be unable to be anything but effected by Humanity.


See...I don't relate to this at all, honestly. I feel sad about tragedy _sometimes_ but not really genuinely...I have to make myself try. Humanity, I see it as a positive thing I guess, though obviously humans are capable of terrible things, but...it's not something I find especially interesting. I do like people. I like walking down a busy street rather than an empty one; makes me feel closer to the flow of life I guess) But I guess my interest is more on individual people, though it merges. For instance, a while ago I was working on some poetry 'collection' which btw I think I found out had been done before, an account of various prayers that some old chapel had heard) I was excited about the project because I planned to show humanity from many angles -- hearing the prayers of kings, knights, widows, maidens, children, foreigners, etc., but...that's a cacophony of voices rather than a choir) (Literal choirs bug me along the same lines. Without individual character, I just don't have any investment. Which is pretty common to human nature I think: it's been pointed out that '12 million dead' doesn't affect uninvested people as much as '12 people and dog dead'. 



> I bring this up because specifically what I can say that I think may be more representative of other Socially driven people is that I love a third category, which I deem Community. I love to be apart of other people, to work with others, to feel that sense of, well, _one-ness_ with others and to flow with them. I crave friendly but potent group dynamics. I love to be surrounded by people, especially people who I am in a community with.
> 
> And being without Community... It really is a devastating thought to me. I believe I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but I couldn't be on an island without other people. I was watching 2001: A Space Odyssey the other night and I couldn't understand why that one character was trying so hard to survive. There was no human life around him. He'd never be on Earth again. What was the point? At all? In the same way I didn't understand what the antagonist was aiming for. Freedom? But what would be the point of life? Life to me is something deeper than coexisting with others... but an essential part of it for me certainly is existing with others. Living in isolation from other people is one of the most chilling and disorienting thoughts for me.


I relate to the Space Odyssey thing -- in any case I'd rather live than die but there's still almost no point in living, if no one else is alive. Though I don't know about community. I almost actively hate community  It's one reason I haven't gone to church for a long time, for instance, I feel like there's always this push to include me in the community, people who are going to remember my name, ask after me, notice if I don't show up -- I hate that; I hate feeling like I'm being kept tabs on. I hate the feeling that there's some tag team of people who are going to be noticing what I'm doing. I want, like, freedom to do my thing and leave. I can be purposefully anti-social meeting new people just because it's a real strain for me to try to keep up with them, to feel always...idk...accountable to them? Needing to explain myself? Is this self-pres?

Though, I'll say, I loved it when I was a little kid and going to church with my parents and going to their friends' houses for dinners, and such. I genuinely miss that kind of social network. It was kind-of...idk, a chance to talk to people and put on my best manners/impress them without having any obligations to them, no one expected any kind of self-standing action from me) No decision-making involved) I guess that's my problem with community) It feels suffocating) I don't think it would if I had a core group of people jointly choosing these things; I just _hate_ making decisions for myself)

(That could be 6 but it could also be sp 2 or 9 :/ It's a little shame-based -- if I don't make a decision, then no one can judge me on said decision, it's out of my hands. I would like for life to flow naturally around me without taking an active part; taking an active part ruins it. I'm very anti-3 in that way I guess)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@Animal love the long post, generally love your posts on this subject)
And no, I didn't get offended or anything, wording it is hard, sorry if I sounded offended)
I understand what you meant, I just have almost the opposite problem-_pride_ in my shame, in my desire to be things I can't be, I'd rather die from self hate than stop caring, I'd rather hate my body and hide forever than say something like "My body is not here to please men" 
(which ofc doesn't mean what some would assume it means)
As a child the first thing I'd say about myself when asked would be that I'm shy, I'm sensitive.
I talked about it in that 2s and narcissism thread too.

And my relationship to jealousy...
It can be similar to what @hope whispers mentioned too, how she saw it as proof of her love.
But also, I just remembered a song about jealousy, I liked it when I was a child, it says "Jealousy, jealousy, that's love, that's how it must be" (in my language it's actually word play, "jealousy" has "love" in it)
So...


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Have mentions always looked like this (blue and bolded) or is this new?


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Have mentions always looked like this (blue and bolded) or is this new?


I think it's new; they used to be orange and shiny)
Hadn't exactly noticed until you pointed it out but i thought something was funny :/


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

hope whispers said:


> I think it's new; they used to be *orange and shiny)*
> Hadn't exactly noticed until you pointed it out but i thought something was funny :/


I really hope you're messing with me)

But yeah, they are definitely different


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

something i was just thinking about Sx vs So: 


i was going to say that So-valuing in terms of relationships is more "valued for your interconnected place in any given sphere", whereas Sx-valuing is more "valued for what you mean or represent to the viewer". 

i think this more or less being a base of sorts of interaction and attraction, combined with an entire human attached to this mechanism, is why you cannot use "intimacy" or even "amount of people involved in an individual's life", as some kind of distinction between the two. 
people can grow to love others and it can be just as real as any other stacking (of course), just as you may have a really extroverted, outgoing Sx dominant who may be spread pretty thin--who may even come across as kind of vapid or even shallow, as opposed to a deep-whatever, or a deeply introverted So-dominant who greatly values her friendships. 

i think all emotion can be felt by all, but if i was asked what the key differences would be, it would have to do more with direction of placed value (it will all be subjective and coming from the viewer, but is it taking into account where 'the viewed' falls into place within one sphere or another, or is it coming the feeling inspired by 'the viewed'?). 
also, a difference may be in how 'union' occurs (purposely vague and broad as the level of interaction or relationship does not matter, in my opinion, when distinguishing the two). if there are unspoken "appropriate avenues" that must be waded through, or if things can be "organic" within their own process. 


and just speaking specifically of Sx and sex: i don't think it necessarily is linked to sex as much as varying forms of intimacy, based on what a person or movement or act or hobby/etc. personally represent to an individual. 

personally: closing distances is not an action that only occurs when in the pursuit of sex. when i have a crush on someone, i usually don't even really think of sex as much as i do, maybe, laying with them in bed and talking or making each other laugh--finding out what someone's overall "shape" is, wanting to connect, because they stood out to me. 
most people i do kind of ignore, because if it's going to be small talk i feel like i either have to be disingenuous (which makes me cringe), or that i'll offend them by being myself while forced to hear something neither of us cares about. 
my roommate actually brought this up last night. she told me that i have to make at least one friend in our apartment complex. it's funny, because she knows most of our neighbors and a little about their lives, while i'll just put my earphones in while walking our dog and completely ignore people beyond a quick head nod so they'll quit looking over at me (probably wondering why someone else is walking Loki). haha, i treat the place or my surroundings like i'm just visiting for the weekend, even though i've probably lived her for about 2 years now.

granted, she works from home and sees these people 5-10 times a day most days of the week, but even then, i don't think i'd be that sort of person who would want to engage in conversations and get to know random people just because we live close to one another. it sounds dickish, but if i can't see it being something where we would actually hang out/etc., i'd rather just be on my way. i don't like feeling like i have to be "fake"--i know that sounds like an immature thing to say, like "ooh, i'm just so deep and into myself", but i actually have an internal repulsion (it makes me want to shiver, or drink and go crazy lol). 

but i still understand So-things quite a bit. my job is nothing but the So-sphere and perception and in what kind of image you have to portray. so, i have an awareness--a good one i'd say--but an internal conflict of not wanting to to let it shape me; there very much are two different worlds in my opinion: there is one where you have to alter yourself in order to pay homage [at least it feels this way] to a great protector, that protects you from itself, and only exists due to the homage already paid to it--lol--and then another where you are just allowed to be a fairly feral human being (note: not bad or dangerous, but just the kind of wild people are when they are totally themselves). 
one of those worlds is the 'outside' that i have to be involved in, the other is when i'm with the other feral people i've picked out among those i've come across. 
i don't know where this would place So in my stacking--1st, as in the type that is aware but wants to exclude based off of their own personal take, 2nd-somehow, 3rd or blindspot as in i'd rather not look at it, and it may cause me problems, but i'm not neurotic over it like i am in... other arenas of life, hahaha. (a question for anyone that's made it this far, ).


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Donovan said:


> i don't know where this would place So in my stacking--1st, as in the type that is aware but wants to exclude based off of their own personal take, 2nd-somehow, 3rd or blindspot as in i'd rather not look at it, and it may cause me problems, but i'm not neurotic over it like i am in... other arenas of life, hahaha. (a question for anyone that's made it this far, ).


Personally, I find your explanation of the social instinct one of the better ones I've read. I'd guess from just your last post an so/sx stacking (for whatever that guess is worth).


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@Pressed Flowers
Wow..that was an amazing long post. I'm going to need to percolate before I could even respond to it - which is a feat - I am usually pretty immediate. That was really...deep. :happy:


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> @*Animal* I greatly admire how self-revealing you are with your posts. I can only imagine how turbulent your past was, yet your resilience really shines through. If you don't mind, I'd like to answer back with some of my thoughts on shame tomorrow. :tranquillity:


Aw thank you 

I worked really hard to be able to communicate like this. It did not come naturally. I've been writing very self-revealing songs since I was young, but I also love to write novels and I come up with good characters and plots (according to agents who have taken me on, publishers who have rejected me but wanted to see the next draft etc)... but where they said I was lacking was that the main character whose point of view it was from, was always unrelateable. I had a hard time expressing something from my own, or a main character's point of view; revealing shameful things in plain words. I've worked on it really hard through my 4 years on the forum and it also helped me to re-write my "magnum opus" novel and make it more relateable and bring the main character to life.So it means a lot to me that you say this  it is basically my goal in life right now to continue getting better at this.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on shame


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@hope whispers I can relate to your community hate I think
Even the kind of community you'd expect me to like
Like, the gym for example, bunch of men expecting something every time, coming when they know I'll be there, asking about me when I'm not there, 'helping' all the time, etc. And I don't like them, no interest in them. Yet, it's exhausting, to be nice, always try to look good (well you know me), and then next time it's even worse.
I just don't like consistent expectations from just people, bunch of people I barely know.
And hm...I used to blame it on sp/sx, but I still think your So is higher.


----------



## NylonSmiles (Sep 19, 2012)

Animal said:


> It doesn't automatically mean "not 4" ... it's very contextual. I might have put that too simply. When I see envy or jealousy thrown around in a specific way I see "not 4," but the post that I'm quoting doesn't necessarily read "not 4" to me... I'd have to see you in graeter context to actually have an opinion on your type. I can't quite relate to it, but I can on some levels....
> 
> I mean my father recently gave me this thing which he found stashed away among my stuff from my teenage years, and this is my handwriting on it:
> 
> ...



Yes, I thought it may have been contextual but I was still curious as to how you felt and if you had any more to add.

I had to chuckle a bit because your poster and what you say about desire being synonymous to hate brings to mind when I was about 10 or 11 and on the car radio this song started playing and it kept saying "I hate you because I love you!" and my self typed 9 mom was like "That makes no sense at all!" And in my head I'm thinking "That line is brilliant! It makes so much sense!" before she even opened her mouth to make that comment. How at 10 or 11 I intuitively knew this, I do not know but I've always strongly resonated with that kind of sentiment. There was another instance around the same age and my mom was watching tv and the girl slaps the guy and then they start to kiss passionately and again mom's like, "Why would she do that?!" And I'm thinking, do I really have to explain this to you? 

There are ways I can appear very 7'ish but I too envy and admire the real 7's. I used to hate my younger brother growing up, a self typed 7. Now he's like one of my favorite people but when we used to fight as kids you'd think I was trying to murder him, and you'd probably be right. We've grown up since then and have mutual love and appreciation for one another, though I still envy his ability to go from crisis mode to crisis averted in the blink of an eye and not hafta pour over it and process for ages like myself. Also my brother KNOWS he's enough. He doesn't question it. Where as for me this is what feels like a core issue. That or either being too extreme. There's no middle. In my last relationship I was terrified this was going to come into play and it did. Somehow it seemed like I was both at the same time, too little and too much.

Trauma does indeed fuck the brain. I tend to be pretty self aware myself though I haven't always listened to my inner guidance much to my detriment.

So obviously I can relate to this "not enough" feeling, but for me I wonder, "Why?" Why am I not enough? Because of my learning disability? PTSD?? Illness? I'm damaged too but I don't look at others who have been through similar and think, "Not enough." What is that exact thing that separates you from the rest of the humans and thus renders you not enough? I don't even know if there's an answer for that. For me it just becomes all meta and just leads to the trap of more and more questioning. I just know it's a core feeling, this, "not enough."

I've been considering 7 fix for a while now. I realized I was typing a trauma reaction when I thought I was triple withdrawn. I just thought it was strong Sx that made me a different kind of breed of 459 lol


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Is it 2 or sx 3 to feel guilty for not giving people what they want?
Like...in situation such as gym, part of me would be the happiest if I could just have sex with everyone. But I wouldn't really do that, for various reasons. 
So it's very uncomfortable to just be there with them, trying to talk to everyone but knowing it'll always be the same conversations, the same expectations and it's all going nowhere.
I can't tell what would help me with this. Higher sx maybe? 
But as I said, part of me would like to be devoid of some of my feelings so that...you know...
Although a healthier solution would probably be something entirely different :tongue:

(Asking about 2 or 3 because I've 'settled' on type yet I _still_ don't know what really separates 2 from 3, and what w3 does for me. I mostly base my 3 understanding on sp 3 btw because I feel like it describes the core of it the best, precisely because it's counter type. But sx 3 seems like someone who might focus on being pleasing)


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

I have a question about sx instinct. I know very little about instincts.

Is it related to deeply wanting to connect with another person--but in a way that makes one feel alive? I find myself desiring to connect with the world and others in an authentic and raw way that almost feels as if there is little distinction between myself and my environment or myself and another. It's like taking the covers or boundaries between myself and them off and being able to really feel what is underneath and the ways we connect, or also discovering what is different and new.

But I also find myself feeling completely numbed at times and it's a restless, unsatisfying feeling. When my life feels dull like this, I try to force myself to feel about it but it doesn't come. I enjoy those special connections that make me feel alive (literally at times).

I also find myself sometimes just too isolated without them, and I begin to feel as if it's possible that the rest of reality and other people do not really exist until I find a connection that cuts through that, and I suddenly feel present and as if I am absolutely not alone. And it's wonderful, perhaps because it's a loss of self. Such as when you get really involved in an activity like art and you lose self-awareness and track of time. Same thing with specific relationships.

When I feel disconnected, I function at a lower level that can dip into dangerous depths. When I feel connected with an activity (like with figure drawing) or with one of the rare people I really feel close to then I feel like I want to live and am living.

So is that related to sx instinct? Or is it something completely different?

I would guess my stacking is so/sx or sx/so.

I took the instinctual variant test and got 67%sx, 27%so, 7%sp.

I like the idea of accepting that perhaps I just need connection and freedom of expression to be happy. 

I would say that I don't see my need for connection as a 'survival' strategy in a physical sense--but it does almost feel like an issue of life or death. Like the difference between being an individual or completely isolated with only projections of myself around. And so a person I feel connected with 'saves' me from this isolation by cutting through the boundary and feels like one of the only other people on earth at the time.

I feel like sx and so are at war--because so is aware that there are lots of others and it's not my place to disrupt everything with them, and that there are milder loves of something larger. I really admire activism etc. I think sp just shows itself sometimes when it's like 'don't die...you almost died there, you better cut it out' though I do spend a lot of time trying to improve survival instincts for the benefit of those who care about me and depend on me, though I find intimate connections can be more conducive to actually improving in that area.

These are just some thoughts--if anyone wants to offer suggestions or observations of my enneagram type (or question it), feel welcome.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

enneathusiast said:


> Personally, I find your explanation of the social instinct one of the better ones I've read. I'd guess from just your last post an so/sx stacking (for whatever that guess is worth).


maybe. i'm not sure at this point how to distinguish between either as each scenario--and pretty much all of the enneagram--rests on shifting paradigms; "is a sign of a lack of interest in the social field a lack of focus paid, or is it a sign that you are at comfort and ease?"; "if you are at ease, is it because you don't care and are relaxed or because you flourish in your environment naturally?"; "if you are ill at ease, is it because social-things make you neurotic, is it your introversion--and what does neurosis really prove here? you could have it in either situation". 


i think that's one of the irritating and also interesting/beautiful things about enneagram: there is so "set of logic" that can then be applied to any situation. it's made to shift and to be true depending on the validity of one's perception, and so you cannot ever really find something out about it--as no standards actually exist (i believe)--as much as its basic design forces your focus back onto yourself. like an exercise to get you in the right state of mind. 


so, i can see your argument that i may be social-first (one those that is misaligned with the social sphere in a way, but because of the very 'misalignment' a large focus of energy is paid to the social field), but that's not how it feels to me. granted, my awareness may be so blind that i do not take notice of what is every day life for me--that would make sense--but all i can do is describe how i feel, or from my own vantage/behind my eyes. everything else really seems to be more mired contradiction (that is, making myself "fit"). 

so, "how i feel": to me, all social things i can either take or leave. if it's going to be too much trouble, i'll drop it. if changing my opinion will sacrifice my own sense of self but keep me as "part of the group", i'll voice it and just wait for others to get over a difference in perception (i mean, they don't really have a choice, unless they want to stay mad at me lol--and if we're not already close, especially if this is some sort of work environment, they kind of have to be around me, so...). 
i don't flock towards or attempt to be involved in the things around me, unless i'm 1) already amped up, or 2) someone i like is a part of the festivities, or 3), i'm trying to get "amped up" so i'll have energy to do my job. other than that, i have a secret-not-so-secret amount of disdain at what i see as disingenuous or even "self-lowering" behavior (though, i'm sure a lot would think of my own behavior as "self-lowering", different opinions and all)... 
i really don't feel all that alive or like myself unless i'm infatuated with another person. it's like pure-life force. there are different levels of infatuation, and not all of them linked to the kind of relationships that lead to sex--i can have minor levels of infatuation for other guys (without wanting to sleep with them of course), and it's the same as i can have for women that i don't want to fuck with, but instead would like to still touch and tease... on up to the most "uplifting" or invigorating... _surge_; the kind that despite my earlier saying of "Sx not being linked explicitly with sex", _sex_ is one of the most intimate things you could do with another person, and you just feel things ten times more than you normally do in your own life. 
when i don't have this i just kind of keep to myself and keep things short with other people. 


even that though, at which point is it Sx facilitating Social needs or vice versa, and what is the thought behind this facilitation? what is the concept at its base that causes us to view behavior in such a way as attempting to see gradients of one action relative to another (in this case: Sx vs So), that tell us which is beholden to the other? 
because even after getting into how i see Sx manifesting within myself, one of the hallmarks of a So-dominant (as well as a social-last, or even a very introverted So-midline) is to kind of find oneself turned off by that sphere entirely...?

edit: but then, it can also be a "hallmark" if they were also acting the opposite--so all are potentially true and false in lieu of other factors... it may seem like i'm thinking myself in circles, but this is a very paradoxical concept lol, .


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@Meltedsorbet don't know you, but based on this I wouldn't say you're So first, seems sx
Curious about what others think


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@Meltedsorbet

My dominant type is sx/sp 5 and I experience sx very similar to how you describe it. I don't agree with your interpretations of sp and so though.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@Donovan
I'm not an expert on instincts (hence why I started this thread), but just my two cents..

In your post you mentioned wanting to basically block people out so they don't take over your identity (you worded it differently, but something like that)... drawing boundaries between you and them.. etc. It sounds like you could indeed be social first but the anti-social variety of social; aware of it, but not wanting to allow it to take you over.

I don't know if you've seen this, or how much stock to put in it, but..

Socionics - the16types.info - The Three Ranges of Instinctual Stackings



> The three ranges for so/sx:
> 
> the so/sx version is what I call lightside (soc as unquestioned dictator, just as in warmside so/sp), and on the other end is the darkside (soc as chairman, sx as vice chairman who sleeps with the chairman). and the midrange, that lovely muddy area in between where soc is the boss but sx at least has its own corner office.
> 
> ...


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Donovan said:


> edit: but then, it can also be a "hallmark" if they were also acting the opposite--so all are potentially true and false in lieu of other factors... it may seem like i'm thinking myself in circles, but this is a very paradoxical concept lol, .


Well, I've got no guess as to your instinctual stacking after that post. I'll just throw some personal thoughts out there.

The first instinct is what you seek and are picky about. Not just any group, or individual, or place will do. So there can be a push/pull around this.

The second instinct is what you fall back to and feel comfortable dealing with but when in it you eventually look to your first instinct.

The third instinct is what you don't notice much or care about or even avoid for various reasons.

Anyway, that's my take on instinctual preferences for what it's worth.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> @hope whispers I can relate to your community hate I think
> Even the kind of community you'd expect me to like
> Like, the gym for example, bunch of men expecting something every time, coming when they know I'll be there, asking about me when I'm not there, 'helping' all the time, etc. And I don't like them, no interest in them. Yet, it's exhausting, to be nice, always try to look good (well you know me), and then next time it's even worse. *
> I just don't like consistent expectations from just people, bunch of people I barely know.*
> And hm...I used to blame it on sp/sx, but I still think your So is higher.


Exacy, that was a short easy of putting what I was trying to get at)
Maybe it's just sp? Or some counterintuitive 2 thing?

I still don't really relate to self-pres though, or get what it is...
If it's just a tendency to, idk, do things on one's own or something, like seeing personal goals, then I guess...??


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

enneathusiast said:


> Well, I've got no guess as to your instinctual stacking after that post. I'll just throw some personal thoughts out there.
> 
> The first instinct is what you seek and are picky about. Not just any group, or individual, or place will do. So there can be a push/pull around this.
> 
> ...


based off of this, what i have the most push and pull around--or problems in general--i think would be Sx. 
comfortable around, but not my first avenue for happiness or pleasure: So? maybe even in Sp when it comes down to it...
i might avoid Sp and So equally--hell, for that matter i also sometimes "avoid" Sx, but that's the only one that makes me feel badly for avoiding. and all the rest, if i'm purposefully or even on accident, taking my attention away from them, i only feel badly for doing so if it causes problems for me in my Sx-pursuits. 

but even still, none of that may matter even if it all is true. things might just not be clear right now, or i may not be all that healthy (in fact, i know that i'm not). following your schema it would be more "Sx + so/sp".

in a few years i might be on a different track (finally get my first stepping-stones out of the way, more on towards a career or at least to the traveling aspect of the stones themselves), and i might have a much clearer view. and by the way, i'm not asking or posing all that rhetoric in the hopes of confusing or giving someone too much of a broad question to answer. i'm doing it because it sticks out to me as relevant if we are going to think about the subject/that's what sticks out to me immediately. 


@Animal 

ooh that is interesting, and again, going with what i've been saying to enneathusiast, it may actually fit. though, i wouldn't say that i have a problem with my identity be occluded, as much as that's how i see society functioning overall: the pitfall of interacting with it, is that you have to take on characteristics of the environment in order to function along with it. 
i usually find my own niches, or make things work for myself in such a way as to ride a more grey line as to what is expected of me professionally or person-wise. but i don't really do this through anything other than being more outspoken or stubborn, and then still showing that was what was necessary still got finished. 
but even that is more of a cursory take on a part of my life. almost like, "well, if i have to be a part of it--if i have to be taken from what i wanted to do or be with for a small fraction of the day--this is how i will deal with it". it's not an overt focus in comparison to the people who stand out to me; the focus of each arena does not appear equal from my own perspective. 

but again, i could easily have a different opinion and agree with y'all a few months from now after things have settled. feel free to give your opinion, i'll be getting wine-drunk with the roomie and watching "real sightings of fake stuff!" on youtube.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

I relate much more to Sp 4 descriptions than Sx 4 descriptions, I notice; yet I don't relate to the depth of Sp as a neurotic focus (ie, an "attack on the self," etc)

It makes no sense conceptually that I'd be anything but Sx first, yet some aspects of Sp 4 descriptions are like quotes out of my life or anecdotes describing my life.

Sx descriptions on their own, and 4 descriptions on their own, suit me better than descriptions of other types, and some aspects of Sx4 descriptions fit, like the love = hate parts.. but I find the combination descriptions for Sx 4 are a bit too melodramatic to describe me in ways, whereas I relate more to the "striving," "aggression" and "sacrifice for art" associated with Sp 4.... 

I wonder if anyone else experiences this, where their instinct and type are pretty obvious but the instinct/type description doesn't fully work?

I'm not a big fan of clinging to descriptions in general, but I'm just curious.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> Exacy, that was a short easy of putting what I was trying to get at)
> Maybe it's just sp? Or some counterintuitive 2 thing?
> 
> I still don't really relate to self-pres though, or get what it is...
> If it's just a tendency to, idk, do things on one's own or something, like seeing personal goals, then I guess...??


I just read an Sp 4 description and it explained something about Sp that I think is relevant (though keep in mind it's an Sp 4 description so it's 4-based)



> Most Self-Preservation types have a paranoid streak somewhere. That's why their concern is Self-Preservation. The self is under attack in some way. The specific way the self is under attack in the Four strategy is through dull, unimaginative, unrelenting ordinariness. One might as well be dead as stuck here in this (small town, boring relationship, monotonous job) environment. Life without emotional intensity is not really life.
> 
> The worst case scenario of a depressed Self-Preservation Four is, of course, suicide. Read Hamlet's soliloquy from the point of view of a Self-Preservation Four and it is quite enlightening. The fundamental question of a Self-Preservation is being: how to be, and more radically, whether to be or not to be.


(To be clear, that is a part of the description that I really don't relate to. Which is why I say the underlying themes of Sp really don't apply to me even if the descriptions of 'sacrificing for art' and 'your art living on beyond death' etc do apply to me.)


But, it's generally an attack on the self. In the context of Sp combined with a type, the type will basically dictate what constitutes "sense of self" and the Sp instinct will make it feel like that is being attacked. 

The 2 and 6 descriptions don't have anything as conceptual as the SP 4 description, where Sp is concerned, but in essence if Sp neurosis is about focus on a perceived attack on the self, then if the "self" is one who earns love (like with a 2) then someone else receiving more love, or the 2 not being appreciated, would be an attack on the self, etc...

This is the site.. though I think it's oversimplified and not very useful, but for whatever it's worth..

Enneagram Central - your online Enneagram resource


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@*hope whispers*
I really hate descriptions though. The thing about "life is boring/ monotonous" being an attack on the self, I know @*Sun Daeva* can relate to, but it could just as easily be interpreted as a 7 issue, feeling like life is boring , monotonous, without excitement... which is how we got confused on his type. So I wouldn't put too much stock in descriptions; I don't even know why I repost them lol... but I do understand what it says about the Sp focus being "an attack on the self," I just don't know how easy or obvious it is to interpret what that means in relation with each type.

Feeling like life is boring, monotonous, and that is an attack on the self.. could be ANY type of 7, I'd imagine, or maybe 6w7s as well, or.. I don't know who else. It is really not a concern I can relate to at all... I don't mind monotony as long as I am living in service of my ideals, actualizing myself, etc. For instance I hate most jobs but I work without much complaint because I know I'm making that "sacrifice" to support my art. I love writing 400-500 page novels, which is hard work, and I'll spend years editing them. It's monotonous, but I don't care because I'm expressing myself. The Sp 4 I know would agree with that. Which is why descriptions are kind of dumb. But the principle of "attack on the self" makes sense....


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

@Animal


okay, so my mind is more lubricated now: 


i want to preface everything with the fact that i'm a big believer in the idea that a snapshot in a person's life can only yield what is the greatest importance in their life thus far. if they are young, this may not be the totality of their lived experience as they cannot (i believe) account for it all in tandem, in cumulative view. 
i also believe that we may narrow into ourselves, so that in any given time frame before we are older, we do not fully express ourselves as individuals. we may even misrepresent ourselves, in our attempt to portray what we are, because we are just living out a natural phase of life. we may have been different in years proceeding and we may be different in years to come, but it is the synthesis of those combined experiences that are telling of our natures. 

it is because of this belief that i have always been wary of any sort of typology (since i've gotten into them--they all have the same faults: you're dealing people, lol). but, i also have to recognize that while the cumulative experience of ourselves may be a mystery to each of us, to other people the "what came and will come" may be glaringly obvious. so, i'll chime in, with the expectation that i'm held to nothing, in an attempt to be honest, even if i feel that my current self is radically different in presentation than my earlier life. 



i can see an So-typing for me. i could even see an Sx-last typing. it would explain my complicated relation with the Sx-field; my "very hot or cold" relations with my environment, since i've been alive (that one's been a constant that has only become more pronounced as i've lived; one thing that i can count on as i think about all of this). 
it shows in how i interact with people of the opposite sex that i believe, or am unsure of, whether or they are with the person they're hanging out with. i'll usually make sure to "make friends" with each of them, as a principle. this almost makes me look at the other (the person i'm attracted to) as "someone that makes me like things more". i don't even try to find out what the situation is, as doing so seems "bad" or "not my business" (even if i think about it a great deal); instead, i'll just let that come about naturally, and may or may not miss an opportunity. 

like i've said i'm aware of the things around me, but i usually don't want to take notice of them. i think this ties into the depression i had when younger, when that's kind of what "i did" (and all to my advantage). after a while, and this is weird in my memory, i felt--and this is completely unrelated to myself in recollection but looking back on it, it seems to be tied--horrible. now, i see the opportunity of sorts and ignore it altogether. or i try to close myself off from it, by not being apart of what is around me. and this part isn't even on purpose, but just a natural response. 
what honestly makes me comfortable (and this may contradict my earlier response to enthusiast, if we're to apply this to a stacking), is bypassing that sphere and being drawn to whoever is around me. 


i'm sure i have more to say on this, but i'm not exactly on the ball. but i either don't understand the theory, i do and it's use by myself is the major "fault" in any typology (we examine it, instead using it to examine us), or i am just a little bit of everything in a way (maybe that in itself is a type or stacking? something that either appears that way, or is experienced in such a manner?). 
all people are to a degree, but maybe that's kind of what makes me "me". i mean, just comparing this to my last two posts seems to paint things differently from this one, not to mention each other. but at the same time it all makes sense to me, and i can even see the distinctions i place within myself in other people. i don't think i could make a system out of it like the enneagram, but it is a working rendition of my inner take on things that relates accurately enough to the outer world, that it allows me to function "properly".  
so i don't think i'm crazy, but trying to fit myself into it all almost makes me want to say "this or that" or to find it in myself (i notice, when my writing style gets restricted; when the thoughts feel clunky). i know 'me', good and bad, but i don't understand how it's supposed to fit into something that separates my actions into instincts.
there's always a perspective that undoes the other in my mind. it makes me want to use it as a back-burner of sorts, as opposed to something that i have to explain myself to. 

sorry for the wall.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Animal said:


> I just read an Sp 4 description and it explained something about Sp that I think is relevant (though keep in mind it's an Sp 4 description so it's 4-based)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Think I get it, I mean I always understood it as something similar. 
And strong boundaries, of some sort, although it's hard to describe...since both @hope whispers and I relate to not understanding boundaries. But I feel like for me, on emotional level it's "Let's just love each other instead of loving ourselves separately", and like, I don't understand the separateness in sense of having to have your own money, or like, until I started living with my stepmother I barely spent any time in my own room, my mom is baffled by how I don't want her to make a separate room for me when I visit, she says I'm similar to her dog in that I love being where everything's happening and secretly keping track on what family is doing :laughing:
which I guess might also be sp-ish, although maybe 2 too because she's probably sp/sx too and doesn't leave that kind of impression (although I don't really actively keep track either, but I do like being where everyone is and just knowing what's going on with people)
But at the same time I can't really see anything but sp working as my first _instinct_, and I feel like there's also a boundary aspect, of some sort.
I think lots of what I said in this thread is sp-ish even though it doesn't scream stereotypical sp?
I also have pretty stereotypical sp too, like low key hedonism and such, but I don't think it's really sp, it's just caused by sp.

As for relating to subtype descriptions, well my final type switch did happen after I've finally read all Chestnut's descriptions, but the thing is, I was trying to understand everything through them, see what all subtypes have in common and what the instincts add to them. Reading sx 3 and sp 2 was weird, because I felt like I could be both but they seem to be describing different things, if that makes sense. They felt lacking in different areas, sp 2 felt very deep, 3 one felt like an overly specific image.
Anyway, I read further, sp 3 was another one I was considering so I contrasted it with sp 2. What a contrast)))
Something about that situation made my heart switch to "Not a 3".
Even sx 3 stops working when I try to connect it to basic 3 concepts, separate doer and such. It just doesn't feel right at all.

I relate to all 2s, sx 3, somewhat so 3 with popularity, anger parts of sx 4 A LOT, wanting toI remember once going through sp 4 and relating to many things too, including the art thing you mentioned, even though I don't make art.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

(These aren't my complete thoughts, just want to put up this screenshot which is impossible on phone, not convenient to use computer though)

About attack on self...I guess I can relate, though I wouldn't think of it as an attack...I'm not sure of the difference between feeling attacked and just feeling a negative emotion, for instance, if it came to pass that someone I loved loved someone else instead of me, I would obviously be sad, but my main reaction would probably be to go on a mad quest to improve myself (something I put a lot of stock in no matter the situation) and become _better_ than the other person, I take it I guess really 'personally' like that)

Actually, link too, this is a song that in the past I've listened to religiously, under threat of unrequited love, the first two lines of the chorus specifically (not really a fan of the last two, lol):





"I will be better, better, better for you
I will be better, better, better than you
But it would have been better, better, better for me
Never to have known you"

Still, I'd imagine a lot of people would have similar reaction, not just sp 2, so...

...anyways, I wrote this scene a long time ago, not really that monumental but this idea came as something Completely New and Very Wise to me, the idea that...well, what is said in it)










So maybe that's self-pres?


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Sorry, not trying to clog thread

But this link @Animal posted seems to have Evita as a self-pres 2...not social?(unless I misinterpreted)

Is that correct?

Edit: posted link to Madonna singing Don't very for me Argentina which is what the link was talking about but I like Sinead O'Conner' version better, not that everyone doesn't already know this song

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2shR99NnwCA


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@hope whispers
Feel free to clog the thread! Hehe. Love your posts.
I'll look into that. I don't know if I agree with those typings. I haven't thought about it enough, and I haven't settled on anything for Madonna. My gut says 3 or 2, but I'm not sure.


----------



## NylonSmiles (Sep 19, 2012)

Animal said:


> I relate much more to Sp 4 descriptions than Sx 4 descriptions, I notice; yet I don't relate to the depth of Sp as a neurotic focus (ie, an "attack on the self," etc)
> 
> It makes no sense conceptually that I'd be anything but Sx first, yet some aspects of Sp 4 descriptions are like quotes out of my life or anecdotes describing my life.
> 
> ...


It's a bit like you read my mind because after you posted that socionics link for the three ranges of the instincts, I found myself identifying both with" The Seducer" Sx/Sp and "The Decadent" Sp/Sx equally. I've seen the link before but I most likely never looked at anything other than Sx first for myself. My first real introduction to the instincts was from the 'On All Fours' workshop recording and I found myself furiously writing down what was being said and after learning about the Sx 4, feeling like I had just heard my blueprints read aloud. What a rush! I've seen other descriptions of Sx/Sp 4 that I strongly identify with albeit with a little tweak here and there but it's pretty much describing me, like this description of the Sx/Sp in the following link...
Information On the Instinctual Variants : I Am a Four On the Enneagram Story & Experience

I got a little tripped up about the part saying how if this variant meets it's other half it's without fanfare and they strike a secret bond, which sounds like Sx 5 to me?.. But then we get back on track when it says "formalities are an afterthought." Yeah, that's an understatement in my case. Ha!

Like you said, conceptually it makes no sense that I'm anything but Sx first. For myself Sp always gets scrapped for Sx needs and Sp (before I got sick that is) was pretty much only called on because of Sx. For example eating cleaner because it will benefit my appearance rather than my health. But that "Decadent" Sp/Sx sounds like me as much as "The Seducer" except that quote "I can't live without the things I love." I've gotten rid of many "things" for the ONE I love and would continue to do so. 

I doubt I'm saying anything new with this statement, but if everyone had to match the descriptions to a tee to qualify as a certain type then no one would be anything.


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

I apologize if I didn't get to this sooner. Studying for finals isn't going as good as I planned. 

Anyway, on to some free writing about shame. 


* *




What strikes me as funny about shame is that before writing this, I drew a huge blank. Admittedly, it was difficult to conjure up specific events where I felt the emotion. Yet, when I took a step back and looked at the whole picture, I realized that shame has been a recurring theme in my life for as long as I can recall.


Normally, I'd be berating myself for not arriving to this conclusion sooner. But no matter. I think when I was little, I must've tricked myself into thinking that shame = humility. In my viewpoint, it wasn't right to feel too happy, too optimistic, too _confident_, because I feared that it would lead me to become even more damaged than before. Maybe that's why I've envied people who have such boundless self-assurance and optimism in themselves. They had it so much easier than I did, and they seemed so _blind_ to the darker sides of the psyche. If I focused on my flaws, I'd be more modest and accept it as a part of my being. The latter has definitely happened more than the former, but it took me awhile before realizing that...these mantras were toxic to my self-esteem. 


I don't feel shame every single day, but it shows up in small moments. Such as the days where I could barely communicate with people my age because of how different I felt from them. Or when the teacher asked us to pair up in class and no one would ever choose me. Just today I felt two instances of shame; the first was when this girl kept glancing back at me during a movie. Suddenly, I felt the familiar rush of painful self-consciousness. I _know_ I didn't do anything wrong, but that moment made me feel so embarrassed and angry at her for making me feel it. Or when I ended up cheating on my diet, and I immediately felt disgusted at myself for submitting. Or when I keep telling myself that I'm _nowhere near_ who I want to be, due to my continuing spirals into depression.


In my more turbulent experiences of shame, I'd literally feel sick to my stomach. Or my heart would feel like it's being stabbed by a thousand knives. The pain would be almost unbearable. Then, I'd have a compulsive need to...purify myself. I'm not too sure how to expound on this more, but feel free to interpret this in your own way.


After writing this, I'm sure that the best solution for this is to achieve a sense of balance. I know that fixating on my flaws has greatly damaged my sense of self-worth, and I should start putting more faith in myself. But...I've identified with my flaws for so long, that it would be hard to break out of these fixations. 

But it would definitely be a long, rewarding journey.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

I think it is pretty obvious everyone has all three instincts, which means each instinct will make itself seen in certain situations, the questions then are: 
What is your "natural" inclination of instinctual type. 
Which instinct dominates in your interactions with people and is therefore percentually the most often used. 
What is it that your mind craves concerning the energetic focus towards life.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Shame's a bit funny for me, I don't ever let it fully set in as an emotion, though I'm usually aware of it. When I first decided on 2, a long time ago (since then I've become less sure obviously) I would play a little game to try to work on the 2 things, pride and such, I would, in my imagination, go all around to people I knew and told them (true) things that I didn't want them to know irl, for instance of is less to then and why, if I had a crush on them or whatever, also just things about myself that I wouldn't have revealed. I think it was a partially effective exercise since I got to the point where I could do these things in my imagination without it being too terrible and I think it gave me an idea about 2s Holy Freedom, which has never struck me that much. The concept 'you're only get when you have nothing left'. Obviously I would never want to do that in real life but being willing to do so would be ideal. That said, throughout my life I've had a tendency which I think I'd I'm 2 ish, of doing that on a smaller scale irl, for instance, just spontaneously destroy good image with...truth, I would for instance in the past make quite long Facebook statuses complaining about my life, whose purpose wasn't really to complain but to, idk, be honest, to say 'this is how pathetic I am' which...idk if that's tired to disintegration to 8 or integration to 4... assuming I'm even a 2, I feel like these two things combine with me, don't feel like my 8 line is totally, when it comes out it makes me more bold and sort of willing to dive into life but it feels tied to line to 4 too, I don't know how to explain it...I feel like with disintegration some typical 8 things happen like...aggression and such happen but I also feel more attuned to the world and have a higher poetic sensibility, it feels slightly 4ish, idk...

Anyways, shame... I think I feel a lot of shame derivatives but I avoid feeling pure shame. But I don't know, it might be really shallow on a way, it really catches in silly things like...hearing my voice on an answering machine or... When someone thinks I said something I didn't, that's a small misunderstanding but seems stupid or childish, it really throws me off-guard to get a whiff of how people perceive me without my normal mental filters getting in the way, I think maybe add a 2 I tend to have a short if mythical amazing person doing things in my stead and it's a shock when I suddenly see _ me_. And I think with my 1 won't I usually address it by trying hard to improve myself.

One thing that would...comfort me, I guess, would be walking through the streets and thinking 'well I can tell who they are seeing right now but they have no idea how great I'll be in 6 months'. Although...that was based in reality)) I remember once...so in high school or so I had a story with a friend and in that story I was married to Ludwig II of Bavaria and was employed and did many useful things for Bavaria, it was a whole thing. Anyways, when I was walking through Munich recently after being fired (for no reason:sad from my job I remember feeling quite small and inferior to everyone around me and then remembering 'oh wait but you guys have no clue; I'm your_ queen_ and I did so much for this city' which solved the whole problem) it was really immensely comforting, but totally fictional)

Same thing with fictional guys) it's really stupid but I never think about it, however it just sounds too silly outside of my head to write about) however, you get the idea) I guess I use completely fictional scenarios to ward off shame as well as to amuse myself)


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Anyone has an idea or simply personal experience of the rarity and commonality of certain instinctual variants in dom.?

I am realising most of the people in my life have been sp, some so but only recently have I finally found other sx doms. And beoing sp last, this explains why I always felt like people are not involved enough and I must be far too involved... the intensity!

Also, are 2 people with the same dom. instinct far more likely to have a successful relationship?


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

oh the irony said:


> Also, are 2 people with the same dom. instinct far more likely to have a successful relationship?


I don't think so. My absolute besties are sx and sp, and I'm so. We tend to let each other lead in our own instincts when everyone will be affected, long before we knew about them as instincts. Looking back, most of my best relationships (that I've retro-typed) have been mixed, not matched, on instincts.

If you meant exclusively not-casual romantic/sexual relationships, then idk. I care way more about friendships.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

periwinklepromise said:


> I don't think so. My absolute besties are sx and sp, and I'm so. We tend to let each other lead in our own instincts when everyone will be affected, long before we knew about them as instincts. Looking back, most of my best relationships (that I've retro-typed) have been mixed, not matched, on instincts.
> 
> If you meant exclusively not-casual romantic/sexual relationships, then idk. I care way more about friendships.


Yeah, I meant more in romantic relationships where 2 personalities share more of their lives together.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

oh the irony said:


> Yeah, I meant more in romantic relationships where 2 personalities share more of their lives together.


See, and I think friendships are the ultimate "sharing lives" relationships, but I also know that literally no one agrees with me on that. (I literally think that going from friends to dating is a downgrade. I have reliably informed this is weird as fuck.) 

People who actually care about the traditional romantic relationships might be a bigger help to you.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

periwinklepromise said:


> See, and I think friendships are the ultimate "sharing lives" relationships, but I also know that literally no one agrees with me on that. (I literally think that going from friends to dating is a downgrade. I have reliably informed this is weird as fuck.)
> 
> People who actually care about the traditional romantic relationships might be a bigger help to you.


hahaha, that's such an odd perspective. i've left my home state without saying bye to anyone, let alone a lot of the people i grew up with. i miss them sometimes whenever they pop into my head, but to me it's "joining" of sorts in an intimate relationship that puts it as more of a priority in my own head, over all the rest.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Donovan said:


> hahaha, that's such an odd perspective. i've left my home state without saying bye to anyone, let alone a lot of the people i grew up with. i miss them sometimes whenever they pop into my head, but to me it's "joining" of sorts in an intimate relationship that puts it as more of a priority in my own head, over all the rest.


YESSS



periwinklepromise said:


> See, and I think friendships are the ultimate "sharing lives" relationships, but I also know that literally no one agrees with me on that. (I literally think that going from friends to dating is a downgrade. I have reliably informed this is weird as fuck.)
> 
> People who actually care about the traditional romantic relationships might be a bigger help to you.


Hahah. I agree that it's a downgrade sometimes or I simply don't think that the risk of loosing a great friendship is worth a potential relationship. But I def. seek a best friend, not friendships. Also a made in heaven, no other way, destined to be ''relationship''. Although chicks before dicks is my moral rule.

A friend is important to me, not friendships in general. Or is the distinction there not important to you either?


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Last night I cried myself to sleep because of shame but somehow I still don't know what to say about my shame.

I think big part of it is the thing you said about being thrown off guard by how people actually perceive you, @hope whispers , even though I am very aware of my flaws, on some level, at the same time I am shocked that they are real and people care about them, because I think I'm just being hard on myself whenever I start having bad thoughts, and assume people still feel about me like I don't have them.

Or slightly different, but weird contrast- I was always self conscious about my appearance, since elementary school, cried about it, felt so much jealousy and rage, hated my mother, criticized my father for having a child with her and not more beautiful women he could have (mom was pretty though, but not by 8 year old girl's standards), didn't let my father compliment other women but at the same time I assumed that somehow I was actually pretty, and charming and that I am gonna get married, and that my husband is gonna feel delighted to take care of me)

I get shocked by reality in general.
And I think I partly cried about that last night ,and remembering things people actually said to me in the past, but also just relationships and such. I sometimes cry and can't believe what god(s) or whoever gives out things has given me, it feels foreign, like it shouldn't be part of me or my life but it somehow is. I guess I 'like' talking about it for that reason, if everyone knew my real plans and intentions nothing else would be as important.


Maybe I should take a break from enneagram, haven't felt like this is a long time(


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Moderately Nefarious ( I don't know what to say (and you're obviously gorgeous, always surprised when you mention insecurity about your appearance, is funny, there's a party of me that assumes pretty people are just happy all the time)...and, I'm sorry about that, hope you feel better..i don't really know that feeling but it sounds awful.

(And yes, that's the thing, being aware of my glasses yet somehow surprised that they're real, relate to that whole second paragraph)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Off topic but, can you guys do me a favor, if you have the time or the inclination? Answer this thread....


*How do you feel about the user Animal? Hate? Love? Frustration? Unload here!*


​


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Donovan said:


> hahaha, that's such an odd perspective.


yeah, I know. :wink:



> i've left my home state without saying bye to anyone, let alone a lot of the people i grew up with. i miss them sometimes whenever they pop into my head,


fwiw, I do this too. I can up and _leave_.



> but to me it's "joining" of sorts in an intimate relationship that puts it as more of a priority in my own head, over all the rest.


Not sure if I'm layering this on to your post because I'm so used to it, or if you are actually saying this, but I'll throw it out there anyway: I do not see "intimate relationship" as being opposed to "friendship" in some way. I do not see the two as different, as necessarily referring to different things. Thus, I can see a person's most "intimate relationship" being a "friendship" as opposed to a romantic and/or sexual relationship. When people think about "intimacy" in such a way that they obviously just mean "sex", I'm distinctly not interested. (also, not interested in sex.) In this way, it could be understood that you and I do not disagree in priorities - I too put the priority on "joining", as you say, in "an intimate relationship", but I'm guessing we refer to differing _forms_ of said "intimate relationship", yes?




oh the irony said:


> Hahah. I agree that it's a downgrade sometimes or I simply don't think that the risk of loosing a great friendship is worth a potential relationship. But I def. seek a best friend, not friendships. Also a made in heaven, no other way, destined to be ''relationship''. Although chicks before dicks is my moral rule.


I see, I see. I will say that it is not about the "risk" for me, at least not consciously. Consciously, my rationale is more like, "Your current rank, BEST FRIEND, is higher than the sought-after rank of BOYFRIEND. Why do you ask for a demotion?" The only answer my mind can supply is, "Probs sex" (everything else is basically already included under the BEST FRIEND package). And as I mentioned above, I don't much care about sex. I'd rather be really great friends than lackluster datemates/"lovers".



> A friend is important to me, not friendships in general. Or is the distinction there not important to you either?


I'm a little confused about this. Would you also say, "A romantic partner is important to me, not romantic relationships in general"?

Friends are (super!) important to me, so friendships are important to me, as they are simply the state of being friends with someone. (right?) I'm certainly not interested in being friends with anyone/everyone, if that's what we're getting at. I am particular as hell. Not many people "make the cut", and fewer still are interested in the long-term (my being a massive Bitch is apparently only awesome for the first eighteen months?). 

If we're talking Friendship as more of a abstract concept, and as one of many forms of Connection/Relation, then I still think it is very important, and I think it is often undervalued in social consciousness. If there _is_ a worthy distinction between "a friend" and "friendship", "a friend" will always be valued more, by me.

*

Hope that clears some stuff up! If there is some tie to the instincts throughout all this, I'm super interested. Otherwise - if anyone has any random questions about this subject for me - feel free to PM me, so we don't clog the thread. :kitteh:


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@periwinklepromise
I always enjoy your posts. I check the 8 forum on occasion. Please feel free to clog the thread.  If you're comfortable with it and it's not too personal, I would even request that people answer here (unless that's intrusive for you, in which case feel free to refuse) - because I love watching people's thought processes.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Animal said:


> Please feel free to clog the thread.  If you're comfortable with it and it's not too personal, I would even request that people answer here (unless that's intrusive for you, in which case feel free to refuse) - because I love watching people's thought processes.


I'll take you at your word, then. 

**Any/all questions on this topic (which is really just low-key relationship anarchy, tbh) and surrounding topics can be answered here, for as long as I feel like answering them. If I start annoying anybody with it, lmk tho


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Annnddd I still have almost no clue on what instincts I use. It's weird, because I feel like I've been reading the wrong info this whole time.  I can relate to all three of them just fine, but none too intensely enough to give me a lead.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

@*periwinklepromise*


it's hard to say what is and isn't enneagram. it doesn't account for everything, but there are parallels that can be drawn. i don't see a relationship as encompassing "all the things a friendship already is + sex". the dynamic and rapport is totally different (from my perspective). the experience just feels more "full". 

i've had very few friends that i could be as close with on an emotional level, as i've had while seriously dating the person. maybe it's sex that breaks the last few barriers, or that makes me willing to impart emotion to begin with. but, it does seem to be kind of fitting, at least coming from an So-dominant (... i don't know you though. maybe this has nothing to do with enneagram, instincts or otherwise for you). 


and while we're talking about differences, and going under the impression that each of us is coming from a different instinctual base, whereas friendships seem to be very important to you, they aren't really to me. if someone eventually gets close, then i'll always have respect for them or for what kind of person they are, will help them or go out of my way for them, but i won't be feel a pang from not seeing them. that's just not something i feel is a "need" in my life. 
i have plenty of "friends", and a few that i realize could be really interesting to include a little more in personal sphere, but i'd rather leave it where it is; i maintain them just enough so that we can make a little more of whatever we're involved in when we do see each other, and keep ties because they are the kind of people that i can "make things a little 'more'" with (and even on my side here, this could be something unrelated to enneagram as well, aside from instincts)...
and maybe this is where a difference comes in: you seem to be able to forgo intimate relationships in lieu of more platonic ones, and i want to do the opposite. 


i very aware of "bonds" between others and how they fluctuate, and i'm usually pretty good about abstaining from being too close to a lot of people--even if i do like them, just because it's simpler--because it's (as shitty as this sounds) almost like i don't want to waste that energy that is either for me or for people that i want to give it to. 
and the strength of the friendships i usually have are only as strong as they strengthen, or least do not diminish, those more sought after forms of interaction. 
i know that sounds bad, but it's the truth. there's kind of "what i plan on doing with my life" + "experiencing with someone/some people" (as i doubt it will end up being with one person) that are priorities in my life currently.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Thank you , @hope whispers
I am doing a bit better today)
Made some plans I'm looking forward to)

@Animal I'll respond to the thread later today, or tomorrow)


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

periwinklepromise said:


> *I'm a little confused about this. Would you also say, "A romantic partner is important to me, not romantic relationships in general"?*
> 
> Friends are (super!) important to me, so friendships are important to me, as they are simply the state of being friends with someone. (right?) I'm certainly not interested in being friends with anyone/everyone, if that's what we're getting at. I am particular as hell. Not many people "make the cut", and fewer still are interested in the long-term (my being a massive Bitch is apparently only awesome for the first eighteen months?).
> 
> If we're talking Friendship as more of a abstract concept, and as one of many forms of Connection/Relation, then I still think it is very important, and I think it is often undervalued in social consciousness. If there _is_ a worthy distinction between "a friend" and "friendship", "a friend" will always be valued more, by me.


Bolded: Hmm. In a way I think I would. With friendships - the person simply becomes very important to me, not as much the friendship or the label of who the person is to me. They become a consistent part of me as in my boundaries almost completely disappear (but that's my 9nness maybe).
I'm also not that much a fan of friends groups, I prefer my 1 or 2 friends so I can put my social concentration and intensity in them. It's hard for me to share this focus.

But true, maybe none of that's got anything to do with instinctual variants, maybe it's a very personal thing. It does fall somewhat inline though...

I think it's good you brought up the concept of Connection/Relation. To me there is no more sought after and stronger connection than that of romantic relationship. I need to be of the highest priority to a person and I see that possible only in romantic partnership, of tying together with the very motive of ''forever''. While friendships are often for a lifetime, each person has an independent home and a life... in a relationship that is one. Your partner is your home, your safety, one that entrusts you their own blood in the form of children/etc, their comfort...

That ONE relation is what I hold as the absolute highest of connections.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Donovan said:


> i don't see a relationship as encompassing "all the things a friendship already is + sex". the dynamic and rapport is totally different (from my perspective). the experience just feels more "full".


I do see a romantic/sexual (r/s for short) relationships as encompassing that, because when I compare my friendships with other people's r/s relationships, sex is the only difference I can really see. My friendships include intimacy, interdependence, comfort, connection, commitment, understanding - all these awesome things, right? Lots of people say there are certain awesome things (beyond sex) that come only in r/s relationships, but I just disagree. That's not how it works in my experiences. 

I agree the dynamic between r/s relationships and friendships is totally different. I just like the dynamic of friendships better. To me, that fullness is found in friendships; r/s relationships have always fallen kinda flat, and have forced me into a distant position, which I find uncomfortable.



> i've had very few friends that i could be as close with on an emotional level
> ...
> if someone eventually gets close, then i'll always have respect for them or for what kind of person they are, will help them or go out of my way for them, but i won't be feel a pang from not seeing them. that's just not something i feel is a "need" in my life.
> i have plenty of "friends", and a few that i realize could be really interesting to include a little more in personal sphere, but i'd rather leave it where it is; i maintain them just enough so that we can make a little more of whatever we're involved in when we do see each other, and keep ties because they are the kind of people that i can "make things a little 'more'" with (and even on my side here, this could be something unrelated to enneagram as well, aside from instincts)...


I had exactly zero deep, intimate friendships for years, but I still had people most would consider to be "my friends". These people were basically disposable, tbh. I defended them while they were around, but if their family moved to another state or whatever, the friendship fizzled out completely and wasn't worth the effort. 

Then a 4 swooped into my life and did some serious work on my emotional capacity and availability (among other things), and now I can't imagine not seeking out that same kind of incredible, intimate friendship I shared with her. 

I do have a very obvious demarcation between "tiers" of friends though. Friends from class or work or whatever (I will literally refer to them as "my friend from Italian", never just "my friend") fall the way of childhood friends, while my best friends are The Ultimate - in high school, I used to joke that being called Best Friend by me unlocked several privileges, none of which could be "re-locked" at the end of the relationship (I once left work to go watch an ex-best friend's baby brother when she had an emergency somewhere else and no one else could come and help, not even her current friends or boyfriend. But she called me as a last resort, despite the shit that had gone down between us, because she knew I could still be counted on.) I go _hard_ for friendships.

I don't know if it's Enneagram or not. I just roll with it.



> and maybe this is where a difference comes in: you seem to be able to forgo intimate relationships in lieu of more platonic ones, and i want to do the opposite.


The difference is that my platonic relationships _are_ my intimate relationships. A platonic relationship just means a relationship not marked by r/s, right? I don't need r/s to consider it intimate. I don't consider "platonic" in this situation to be a binary opposite of "intimate". You type, ya know, the above quote, and I read what amounts to "you seem to be able to forgo X for X." ?????????! Like, to say, "I, periwinklepromise, can forgo intimate relationships in lieu of more platonic ones" or "I, periwinklepromise, prioritize platonic relationships over intimate relationships, when I have to" would be impossible for me. They sound _nonsensical_. 

I understand that this is weird.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

oh the irony said:


> Bolded: Hmm. In a way I think I would. With friendships - the person simply becomes very important to me, not as much the friendship or the label of who the person is to me. They become a consistent part of me as in my boundaries almost completely disappear (but that's my 9nness maybe).


Okay. I _think_ we might be able to work on the same page, there. Not the sx9 bit, but the rest. 



> I'm also not that much a fan of friends groups, I prefer my 1 or 2 friends so I can put my social concentration and intensity in them. It's hard for me to share this focus.


I recently joked to my best friends that any time I doubt my social-first typing, I should remind myself that no matter where I go, I immediately fall into/form friend groups. Now, the large-scale friend group is important to me, but my one or two core friends are always put first. They get all of the concentration and intensity, but I like groups too. 

I know there's a wide dispute about whether the sexual instinct could ever be named One-to-One, but for the sake of just this moment, I'll say, "fine, sure, it's 1-to-1": if I had to choose between groups and literally one on one, (yes, I know this doesn't actually work as a typing process because the vast majority in America choose one on one, shhh) I would choose group. But let's be clear: I want a _very_ small group. I'm talking - me and two other people. (I'm very good at always having two best friends, idk why) _That's_ where I'm most comfortable. It's not a large 10+ group, or whatever - does that still count as social instinct? Who knows!



> I think it's good you brought up the concept of Connection/Relation. To me there is no more sought after and stronger connection than that of romantic relationship. I need to be of the highest priority to a person and I see that possible only in romantic partnership, of tying together with the very motive of ''forever''. While friendships are often for a lifetime, each person has an independent home and a life... in a relationship that is one. Your partner is your home, your safety, one that entrusts you their own blood in the form of children/etc, their comfort...
> 
> That ONE relation is what I hold as the absolute highest of connections.


See, and for me, the strongest connection is that of a friendship. I too care a great deal about being someone's first priority, and I care a great deal about being with that someone forever (not in a literal-ish Christian sense or something). 

My friend can be my home - I've had a friend with whom I used to sing "You Are My Home", a duet actually written for brother and sister. My friend can be my safety - I've had a friend about whom I said, "Being with {x} was the first time I ever felt safe." The children ... okay, I've never tried to have kids with a friend, but I'm also insistent on never having kids, because I'm certain I'd be a horrendous mother. My friends are the highest level of comfort - I've had a friend who used to bake me cookies and lend me her blanket and put on my favorite show when I was super down. 

I recognise that everyone I've ever known has considered a romantic partnership to be the absolute highest of connections. I just see a friendship as that absolute instead.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@periwinklepromise I've been sort of vaguely mulling over this thing you've said and I guess....i don't get it)

For instance, you say that for you dating is a downgrade from friendship and I'm not sure I get that because...well, what, to you, are you losing by starting to date soneone, after being friends? Honest question, add I can envision a couple answers actually, for instance friend don't usually break up...

When I think about it, there's more than sex as a difference between romantic relationships and non-romantic. For instance, add much I love my friend, the are certain emotions that I'm not going to feel for them, that I would (hopefully) feel for a romantic partner. I don't know which ones exactly but there are a bunch, for instance, idk, I'm not going to_ yearn_ for my friend, I might miss them or be sad when they're gone but, idk, I'm never gonna feel like the wind is telling me about them or anything silly, and frankly that would be weird, wouldn't strengthen the friendship))

Anyways, I see it a lot in the media, idk, when there's romance on the show everyone on the Internet stays criticizing that, 'why can't they just be friends? Isn't friendship good enough?' I don't get that either, like, live a little, bit I don't think it's such an unusual view) though probably not majority regardless)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

periwinklepromise said:


> r/s relationships have always fallen kinda flat, and have forced me into a distant position, which I find uncomfortable.





> Then a 4 swooped into my life and did some serious work on my emotional capacity and availability (among other things), and now I can't imagine not seeking out that same kind of incredible, intimate friendship I shared with her.


My ex... the only man I've ever truly loved besides my husband (who is my soulmate and my whole life - my ex and I broke up 18 years ago) ... he was an 8w7, Sp/Sx. He had the same problem with being shoved into a distant position by relationships.. until he met ME. We got back in touch 2 years ago and he still felt that way after all this time. We got closure and it was a very beautiful thing. He haunted me all the time in between.. I could never let it go.

He's social last - so for him, this would only be possible in an Sx/romantic context. He had friends, but traveled a lot on his own, and his friends knew very little about him.

THen, there's my soul-brother, who I've known since age 11. He's an 8w9. He has girlfriend after girlfriend. He's very Sx/So. In a new city, with a new woman, every two years, like clockwork. I am the only constant in his life - I'm his family, his friend, part of his soul. He flew in from very far away to attend my wedding. He says the same thing, I'm the ONLY PERSON who is important enough to remain close to, and he would never have dreamed of dating me - not only because we're sister/brother dynamic and it's "weird," but also, because the thought of losing me, never talking to me again like what happens with his exes, would literally be soul-death for him.


I wonder what it is about 4s that would get an 8 to open up like that?


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

I still have many posts here to answer. I haven't forgotten!! I will get to them.

In the meantime, I have a question.

*Can a social dom - or anyone - explain to me why it's necessary to have "girl's night out?" * I have received requests like this all my life, and usually if I have a boyfriend, I want to bring him along because... why shouldn't I? I mean why does socializing have to be separate? When I have 'groups of friends' which consist mostly of men (which is the norm for me when I do have a social group), we don't make exclusions like that. If someone has a girlfriend or if I have a boyfriend, that person can come along. Yet for some reason women want "girls' night out." And my guy friends have NEVER done "guys' night out" without me. They always invite me. I've actually been invited to "boys' night" lol, whereas I've never been excluded from it if my social group consisted of men. But I don't understand the reason for "girls' night." I don't have secrets that my boyfriend can't know but my friends can. If I have a problem with him, he knows about it before they do. Just like , if I have a problem with a friend, she or he is the first to know about it. Is the purpose of girls' night to talk about men - talk about things that your man doesn't know? Or is it to establish something? I am just confused. I wonder if someone could explain.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

hope whispers said:


> I've been sort of vaguely mulling over this thing you've said and I guess....i don't get it)


To be honest, this doesn't surprise me  I remember on that thread about 2s where self-love was discussed a bunch, you would say things that I just _didn't get_, or someone said something I totally agreed with but you disagreed with. I think it's safe to say we have pretty different perspectives on relationships.



> For instance, you say that for you dating is a downgrade from friendship and I'm not sure I get that because...well, what, to you, are you losing by starting to date soneone, after being friends? Honest question, add I can envision a couple answers actually, for instance friend don't usually break up...


Well, it's a downgrade in my little, personal hierarchy of relations (ie where friend is ranked higher than boyfriend), but I guess... 

Okay. Quick story. A couple years ago, when I was inhaling personality quizes (something I do), there was one of those, five-point scales on accuracy (how accurate is this statement, not at all to always me) and the statement was "I enjoy having great friends, but I hate when they put expectations on me." I clicked always me. That statement really stuck with me.

I actually do have friend break-ups (like I said, I go _hard_), and from my perspective, the break-ups tend to happen when they start thinking they're allowed to put expectations on me. When they start thinking they're allowed to put me in a box, or tell me what to do, how to live. I heavily resent that. *It's my life, and my opinion is the only one that matters.* (People hate hearing this, I've learned.) I guess what I'm "losing" by starting to date someone is the autonomy - now that I'm "their girlfriend", they think they get to tell me how to live my life.

And it'll never be explicitly stated, of course. But maybe they rebuke me when I make certain jokes. Maybe they ask me to stop behaving in a certain way. Maybe sometimes they attempt to coerce me into doing something, or into pretending to be someone else when I "meet the parents". Maybe they get mad when I say no. And maybe they think they have some sort of entitlement to my body. There are a lot of expectations in r/s relationships, that (it seems) all of society agrees are okay to have, and so most of the individuals I've met _also_ think are okay to have, and I'm like, No. No, it's not.



> When I think about it, there's more than sex as a difference between romantic relationships and non-romantic. For instance, add much I love my friend, the are certain emotions that I'm not going to feel for them, that I would (hopefully) feel for a romantic partner. I don't know which ones exactly but there are a bunch, for instance, idk, I'm not going to_ yearn_ for my friend, I might miss them or be sad when they're gone but, idk, I'm never gonna feel like the wind is telling me about them or anything silly, and frankly that would be weird, wouldn't strengthen the friendship))


Fair enough. Despite the help from that 4 I mentioned, I'm still not the best with emotions (this _also_ bothers people when they try to date me), but I do think I experience a wide range of emotions concerning my friends, some of which many people might reserve for r/s exclusively. Some people once tried to argue that my friendships are actually romantic ones without the labels, but I thought that was mostly just insulting (as if I would ever enter into any kind of a relationship without the person's consent!). And anything the wind tells me is probably gonna be about me and the wind, not anyone else. 



> Anyways, I see it a lot in the media, idk, when there's romance on the show everyone on the Internet stays criticizing that, 'why can't they just be friends? Isn't friendship good enough?' I don't get that either, like, live a little, bit I don't think it's such an unusual view) though probably not majority regardless)


I see this sometimes too. I notice it the most when it's a gay ship though, so I don't think it's a great stance within the context (painting very obviously romantically involved women as "just friends! gal pals!" is just erasure, nothing great about that). Maybe more broadly, people say that about a ship they don't want to be romantic. Beyond that, I still see that as a stance people take when it's _fictional_. I _don't_ see people arguing that for themselves or for their loved ones as much (pls, no discussion of the "friendzone" or "Nice Guys"). Like, in high school, when two people get together after a long time coming, nobody says, "What, wasn't friendship good enough?" They say, "Oh, thank god, finally!"


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Animal said:


> I wonder what it is about 4s that would get an 8 to open up like that?


My guess? 8s are difficult as hell, but 4s persevere. Once you lot decide something is important, you don't let it go easily.



> *Can a social dom - or anyone - explain to me why it's necessary to have "girl's night out?"* I have received requests like this all my life, and usually if I have a boyfriend, I want to bring him along because... why shouldn't I? I mean why does socializing have to be separate? When I have 'groups of friends' which consist mostly of men (which is the norm for me when I do have a social group), we don't make exclusions like that. If someone has a girlfriend or if I have a boyfriend, that person can come along. Yet for some reason women want "girls' night out." And my guy friends have NEVER done "guys' night out" without me. They always invite me. I've actually been invited to "boys' night" lol, whereas I've never been excluded from it if my social group consisted of men. But I don't understand the reason for "girls' night." I don't have secrets that my boyfriend can't know but my friends can. If I have a problem with him, he knows about it before they do. Just like , if I have a problem with a friend, she or he is the first to know about it. Is the purpose of girls' night to talk about men - talk about things that your man doesn't know? Or is it to establish something? I am just confused. I wonder if someone could explain.


Besides being the *best thing ever*, girls night can be a way of making sure you don't lose all your other relationships once you (or your friends) get boyfriends. Last summer, one friend got so meshed with her boyfriend we never saw her, so we declared a girls night to talk about it. Calling the hang out a "girls night" also gives women an excuse to give to their bfs about why the bf can't come - "sorry, girls only!" Sometimes the purpose is to talk about men. Sometimes it's to just be away from men for a bit. Sometimes, it's to remember you were someone before this guy, and you'll still be someone after he's gone. It does seem to be defined in some way by the men in the girls' lives, but sometimes, you just need your girls.

Never thought I'd have a better grasp on girls night than someone.... my first was like, three years ago? They're super fun tho.

I've also been part of boys night, but my guy friends see me as "one of the guys." I enjoy both, but for different reasons. 

But the perspective of someone who has a more classic stance on romantic relationships will probably be totally different. I get that feeling...


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

periwinklepromise said:


> To be honest, this doesn't surprise me  I remember on that thread about 2s where self-love was discussed a bunch, you would say things that I just _didn't get_, or someone said something I totally agreed with but you disagreed with. I think it's safe to say we have pretty different perspectives on relationships.


I guess I'm oddly flattered if you didn't get my parts) I usually assume my views things are what people got at one point and then evolved out of when they got smarter) 


> ÷
> Well, it's a downgrade in my little, personal hierarchy of relations (ie where friend is ranked higher than boyfriend), but I guess...
> 
> Okay. Quick story. A couple years ago, when I was inhaling personality quizes (something I do), there was one of those, five-point scales on accuracy (how accurate is this statement, not at all to always me) and the statement was "I enjoy having great friends, but I hate when they put expectations on me." I clicked always me. That statement really stuck with me.
> ...


Gosh, I'm lucky I don't have any 8 friends...not anything against 8s of course...just I'm pretty sure none of that means anything to me and I would accidentally push away such a person within the month...

I mean, it's not that I try to control people but my whole communication style is one of...idk, command) except not really, not sure how to put it) I see myself pissing off 8s) In general my feeling with gut types is..."I know there's something I shouldn't be saying right now; Lord help me know what it is")) Same goes for 4s actually, I'm constantly surprised that I still have a 4 friend...

Speaking of friend break-ups, I met my 4 friend the other day and she was telling me about a box of papers she has and one of the items was 'all the letters where you tried to break up with me 'because you were such a bad friend'.' It was...yeah, all my current friends I've tried hard to break up with at some point or the other) Ironically, probably my chief shame as a friend, versus whatever my original reason was))

Anyways, I guess I get the theory here, though I don't get it on an intuitive level)





> Fair enough. Despite the help from that 4 I mentioned, I'm still not the best with emotions (this _also_ bothers people when they try to date me), but I do think I experience a wide range of emotions concerning my friends, some of which many people might reserve for r/s exclusively. Some people once tried to argue that my friendships are actually romantic ones without the labels, but I thought that was mostly just insulting (as if I would ever enter into any kind of a relationship without the person's consent!). *And anything the wind tells me is probably gonna be about me and the wind, not anyone else.*


:laughing: In my experience the wind can be a bit of a gossip, but I'll take that))

Hm, maybe just different boundaries on what things are) It's like - in Italian and Russian blue is seperated into two colors, light blue and dark blue) We're all seeing the same shades but things get conceptualized differently, belong to different categories) It's funny)


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

periwinklepromise said:


> I do see a romantic/sexual (r/s for short) relationships as encompassing that, because when I compare my friendships with other people's r/s relationships, sex is the only difference I can really see. My friendships include intimacy, interdependence, comfort, connection, commitment, understanding - all these awesome things, right? Lots of people say there are certain awesome things (beyond sex) that come only in r/s relationships, but I just disagree. That's not how it works in my experiences.
> 
> I agree the dynamic between r/s relationships and friendships is totally different. I just like the dynamic of friendships better. To me, that fullness is found in friendships; r/s relationships have always fallen kinda flat, and have forced me into a distant position, which I find uncomfortable.
> 
> ...


no, it's not weird. it really isn't, my "odd" comment means that it's "odd to me". 

to me, in the area of intimacy, friendships are a place where everyone can place their problems on me, or their issues or their thoughts (because i see a lot of intimacy being in sharing in what troubles you and the like)--but it's never a place where i'll tell them any of my situations. i just don't feel right about that. (so, just about everyone is ignorant of my life--roommate included, who i'm closest to [although, it's really difficult to hide anything as we live together], and it's never been any different all my life)


i've continued to this conversation--aside because it interests me and i have things to say, and you are a good person to hash it out with--because we're on an instinct page and i do see stark differences in how we go about things. 
again, maybe it's not enneagram or 'instinctual', but i'm not necessarily geared towards friendship in the way that you are. i don't think i've ever been what you speak about with friends (at least, not in the two-way department--they have been the type of people to give it back, but i wouldn't know because i never put myself in those situations to _even_ know--i just don't like it). 

so maybe the whole friendship-thing is kind of bunk, but i still think there is a central theme to Sx vs So in the "intimate"-one-on-one vs the finding the exact same in other arenas. 
because when it comes down to it, the experience per person isn't going to be so drastically different in the end--experience-wise, trials and tribulations, yes, it will--but when it comes to emotions that one had, the sense of equating smaller to large in human experience, i imagine we all pretty much feel the same things. 
but since you are social... , i think there is a link (aside from what was said in earlier in the thread) in Sx and "oneness" (which can be experienced with friends, if one'll allow it), and with the Social variant taking _that same need_ and just looking to a different sector of humanity in order to reach the same feeling. 

and that's really what instincts are to me. which direction can i find the same human experience. i don't mean to take away from what one can experience (that'd be really stupid). i'm just trying to find a way to parse up a distinction within this concept we're talking about.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Animal about girls night, idk, if it's an established friend group, like the same for people always get together in this grouping, think the idea is probably to talk about guys, or just wanting to be in the established friend group (not leaving people out of inside jokes, being able to talk freely without the awkward stranger small talk) Though frankly the concept has always enraged me because if I'm going to talk about guys I need to know them and this is just another opportunity I won't have to meet my friends' guy friends...

When I met my friends one-on-one we usually talk about their boyfriends/husbands in a way we wouldn't do if they were there, otherwise it would be couples therapy lol, but I also would... probably be disappointed if their menfolk were always there with us, because I have individual friends that I want to spend individual time with, but if it's a group then...the more the merrier.


I find the term 'girls' night out' very obnoxious on the whole and I'm not sure why it's a thing though


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

@periwinklepromise

Ok, What I'm understanding is that I am generalising So and Sx tendencies in my mind too much and playing sx out as too much oine-on-one even though I know it's not actually that. But it tends to end up being that because it is attraction, it is concentrated energy and extreme need for intimacy and one-on-one is simply where getting that is more possible in social settings.

For instance, even though I'm Sx/So, my friends who are observant enough have told me that when I talk to people one-on-one I blossom and they cannot imagine why I would ever have confidence issues because I become super charming, yet when the group becomes larger, I shut down and zone out. I experience this too. One-on-one I truly blossom and wake up.... and it's because of the concentration of energy. When I have to sparse it around, listening to many, conversing with many at a time, I get lost and bored, because the energy become more mellow. In one-on-one it intensifies, the pressure point is smaller therefor putting all the energy on it means a deeper hit. So I think Sx simply can get it's intencity drug in one-on-one and not in group situations.

If I stop generalising and taking things too litterally, this would allow So to get their social needs in both cases - group and one-on-one. For Sx that's simply more extreme.
I blossom in group situations only if there is something else I can focus on, like a game we are playing or a very specific topic I need to talk about. But again - I absolutely need that focus point.


----------



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

Hm, the talk about romantic relationships vs platonic friendship is interesting to me, though I'm having some trouble untangling my thoughts to articulate how I feel about it.

But I'm reminded of how one thing I can feel rather envious of is seeing two friends who seem really close... although ugh, I wish I could think of a good example because it's not like every platonic display of intimacy move me either. (Too much mushiness can be off-putting to me in general, heh.)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

periwinklepromise said:


> My guess? 8s are difficult as hell, but 4s persevere. Once you lot decide something is important, you don't let it go easily.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





hope whispers said:


> @*Animal* about girls night, idk, if it's an established friend group, like the same for people always get together in this grouping, think the idea is probably to talk about guys, or just wanting to be in the established friend group (not leaving people out of inside jokes, being able to talk freely without the awkward stranger small talk) Though frankly the concept has always enraged me because if I'm going to talk about guys I need to know them and this is just another opportunity I won't have to meet my friends' guy friends...
> 
> When I met my friends one-on-one we usually talk about their boyfriends/husbands in a way we wouldn't do if they were there, otherwise it would be couples therapy lol, but I also would... probably be disappointed if their menfolk were always there with us, because I have individual friends that I want to spend individual time with, but if it's a group then...the more the merrier.
> 
> ...


Yeah hmm... thanks for answering, both of you. 


I guess it makes sense. My guy friends consider me "one of the guys" as well. I actually do better if my group of friends is mostly or entirely guys (besides me).. they're more relaxed in the sense we can have "night out" together and just chill.. the guys will watch tv.. I am REALLY not into tv, but I can sit there with a book, or talk to one person who also isn't into tv, or just be around them without having to actually interact unless I want to. I grew up with a pool in the backyard, and when guy friends would come over we would race, etc, and then I could just sit separately and look at the stars... when women all get together for girls' night there is a lot of talking. Much like @*oh the irony* I can really light up in an intense conversation one on one, and on the rare occasion that a group is talking about something that matters to me as well, but I really can't keep up with small talk and really fast conversation in ten directions at once. This might have more to do with being an introvert and very highly focused. I'm not good at focusing on ten things at once. In groups mostly consisting of guys, we all just casually do things or don't, there's no "enforced conversation" or "enforced participation" .. you can be in their company without having to interact constantly, go into your own world, and they seem to be more focused on activities. I'll also concede that maybe I just haven't found the right women groups, because I know some other women who would be totally into that- but I was always in one on one friendships with them rather than ever having a period where it became a group- but those are the type of women who would agree with me that "friends night out" could include either gender because they have mostly guy friends as well.

I tend to date very emotional men, and be extremely open with them. I don't have anything to hide from them that I need to vent to my girlfriends. (If I do, the relationship is probably about to end, lol.) I don't forget who I was before nor do I forget my friends. Actually, some of my close friends are ex-boyfriends. I communicate well so I tend to keep people who really matter in my life for long periods. Right now most of my friends moved away so they come to the hometown for one week here or there and I see them one at a time, so there haven't been groups for almost 10 years. But when I did have groups, I could bring a boyfriend while an ex was there and there would be no tension because I really face things and solve things, with both friends and exes, anyone that's important to me. Once someone has gotten in my heart they will stay there in some capacity even if not "r/s" .... I guess this is what you mean @*periwinklepromise* when you say 4s will endure. I DO NOT put up with crap whatsoever; I confront, but I also have a big heart for people I love so I can forgive, endure etc, although some people have reached a cut-off point with me and after that there is absolutely no going back.


Also @hope whispers you mentioned meeting the guy friends that your girlfriends know. Since I am platonically close with a handful of beautiful men, and also my exes (though not quite as close usually), I LOVE introducing everyone. That's part of why i like mixed-gender get togethers.


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

hope whispers said:


> I guess I'm oddly flattered if you didn't get my parts) I usually assume my views things are what people got at one point and then evolved out of when they got smarter)


 Your perspectives are not any less evolved or less insightful than anybody else's! 



> Gosh, I'm lucky I don't have any 8 friends...not anything against 8s of course...just I'm pretty sure none of that means anything to me and I would accidentally push away such a person within the month...


(I see you as a 2) You know, I don't have any 2 friends either... I think we need to call in a techie, this line of connection is _broken_. My communication style is also one of command, so I've been told. It might be a rejection triad thing?



> Anyways, I guess I get the theory here, though I don't get it on an intuitive level)


Fair enough.



> Hm, maybe just different boundaries on what things are) It's like - in Italian and Russian blue is seperated into two colors, light blue and dark blue) We're all seeing the same shades but things get conceptualized differently, belong to different categories) It's funny)


You might be onto something with this blue thing, but I'm not quite sure how to articulate it yet.





oh the irony said:


> Ok, What I'm understanding is that I am generalising So and Sx tendencies in my mind too much


Or maybe I am! I'm super lost on the instincts, hence my hardcore lurking on this thread and others like it. Fwiw (and to complicate things further), I agree with everything here:



> For instance, even though I'm Sx/So, my friends who are observant enough have told me that when I talk to people one-on-one I blossom and they cannot imagine why I would ever have confidence issues because I become super charming, yet when the group becomes larger, I shut down and zone out. I experience this too. One-on-one I truly blossom and wake up.... and it's because of the concentration of energy. When I have to sparse it around, listening to many, conversing with many at a time, I get lost and bored, because the energy become more mellow. In one-on-one it intensifies, the pressure point is smaller therefor putting all the energy on it means a deeper hit. So I think Sx simply can get it's intencity drug in one-on-one and not in group situations.


How you describe the energy? I totally relate. 

I'm thinking back on the last time I had a large group (8 ppl). I tended to focus on one or two at any given time. I think I could _switch_ focuses pretty quickly though, I guess? I can chat mostly with A, then start doing something with B and C (while A fades into the background), but I'm never focusing on A and B and C and D all at once. (I just don't think that works. After four people, people start breaking into smaller groups. I've thrown a lot of parties for my friends - it never stays at all 12, everybody trio's off.) Is it similar for you, or do you choose A and stick with them for the whole time?


@Donovan So for you, do friendships lack a necessary reciprocity? It sounds like it might be closed specifically on your end. A problem I have in r/s is feeling a sense of closed-ness. I try to rectify that by forcing myself to be open (which of course never works), and I'm trying so hard to be genuine that I always come off as very insincere. And maybe I really am insincere. R/s (for me) lacks the intuitive connection and the organic development I seek. **intuitive and organic are the operative words here. they feel very important, vital**

I am on this thread because I don't know I'm social. I can see arguments for any, but most of all, I struggle with the placement of the sexual. I often think I relate to people discussing their sexual instinct dominance, but I never feel those things in the situations/context others do. 

I met a girl once - saw her across the room, but w/e - and I felt a very magnetic attraction to her. That zooming-in while zoning-everything-else-out that cameras do for television shows (that hope whispers once discussed, hopefully in this thread)? It was that. We became best friends, for five years. I feel if I had said, "We became *partners*, for five years," people would use that example as evidence supporting a sexual-first typing. 

How important is the "scope" when determining sexual vs social? Does it count as sexual as long as the correct levels of frequency and intensity are present?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

I thought I'd throw in some thoughts to see if they help regarding so and sx.

The sx focus can be too much for some people. It's getting too deep, too personal, too revealing, etc. I'm not talking about someone you don't have that desire with (most people wouldn't want that), but I'm talking about someone close or you want to be close to. It can be a drain or an intrusion that you have to get away from. SX-first however, actually seeks out this sort of thing by trying to find that particular person or interest that offers that for them.

The so focus is more diffuse. The energy gets spread out among more people. So with any single person it's less intense even though overall you get the same energy.

I guess an analogy can be like two different types of an energy source. You can find a single battery with an extremely strong charge to it and rely on just that or multiple batteries with lesser charges that collectively offer the same charge as the single battery. You're just going to different sources to get what you need because your system was developed around that type of source.


----------



## sloop (Jan 19, 2015)

I've noticed that my sexual instinct emerges in my friendships. With me, there is always an underlying resentment at feeling as though I am no one's first priority. I've always gotten the impression that each of my friends had that one friend who they prioritized before any other friends, but I was never "that one friend." And it has eaten me alive sometimes. I've never allowed my jealousy to surface, but I feel it internally quite often. That feeling of not being the primary object of one's desire, specifically when that one is your object of desire. Horrible delusion that I have. I just have to remind myself that it's a false perception.

So, yeah, that's how the sexual instinct manifests in my life.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Elitist random but I was listening to that song(Body Electric) as I read your comment so your signature really surprised me, lol) The words lined to with the vocals, it was strange))


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

If this makes any sense sometimes Sx lead seems to me like watching The Great Gatsby. Like the aim is perfect, it's beautiful, and my heart aches for it, but it's too much, too fast, too dangerous. It's everything all at once. It's more than I can handle. I still yearn for it at night. 

Being soc/sx to me feels like being immersed in a warm swimming pool, or butterflies alighting on everything. The same connection and meaning but gentler, softer, lighter, more dispersed. But sometimes it also feels like watching everything from the outside and only catching quick glimpses of the within. 

Also it means losing my keys a lot and never remembering to do my laundry until I run completely out of underwear because sp fail.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

angelfish said:


> If this makes any sense sometimes Sx lead seems to me like watching The Great Gatsby. Like the aim is perfect, it's beautiful, and my heart aches for it, but it's too much, too fast, too dangerous. It's everything all at once. It's more than I can handle. I still yearn for it at night.
> 
> Being soc/sx to me feels like being immersed in a warm swimming pool, or butterflies alighting on everything. The same connection and meaning but gentler, softer, lighter, more dispersed. But sometimes it also feels like watching everything from the outside and only catching quick glimpses of the within.












This is so beautiful!

(I don't think I experience the world like this but if have to ponder. I really like the idea of instincts being expressed like this).


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Could this indicate my instincts?

I only partake in conversations when a topic that interests me is brought up. Then instead of being a quiet observer, I become much more animated and enthusiastic. In a way, I nearly dominate the conversation. But, it doesn't apply to all groups. The more people in a group, the more likely I end up fading in the background. Or in other words, assuming my usual role of silent bystander; listening, but never participating. 

It's a different story with one-on-one conversations. Much more skilled at those, plus it's easier for me to focus my energy on fewer, yet more personal relationships. I also have a habit of "closing" others off when I zone in on a person that gets my attention. That's probably the "spark instinct" that comes into play.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

0k I guess... I was pondering of there's any particular way I feel, and everything I can think seems...more situational than instinctual, it's hard to know

But i remembered a little conversation with my mother earlier today, maybe it (+ point I shall lead into) would say something about my sx placement (first or last probably).

(We were both speaking in playful times, to be clear)
Me: I'm going to the store to buy a new nightgown and tea kettle, do you want to come with me?
Mother: Not a bit!
Me: Oh no, but you could help me pick out my new nightgown, we could be more connected!
Mother: We are already _ very_ connected.
Me: Really?
Mother: Are you kidding?

Anyways, it made me think, I often feel... disconnected from the people around me, in a way, like we don't spend much time together or whatnot, but they don't, and I think it's me basically, not them) like ice been surprised a couple of times when friends bring up something from a few years ago, say, as being a big part of their lives, because...it was a big part of my life too but it also didn't feel like much? And it's somewhat seperate from...i mean, I'm always afraid that people secretly don't like me, are humoring me, etc., so that comes into it a bit but...i think it's unrelated, that, for instance, watching a movie every Friday is really nice but it surprises me to hear a friend reminiscing about that being the highlight of her week because it seems_ wrong_, if they was the highlight of both of our weeks why was it only a weekly thing; once av week is nothing! Does that make sense at all? It's like...what's a normal amount for other people is a little amount for me, I guess, and I chronically underestimate the value of these things (while valuing them insanely highly in my mind because in my mind there is such a scarcity)

So I mean...i guess it surprises me to hear from people basically 'you matter as much to me as I matter to you' however that comes out because I'm always working with the idea that...when I part with someone there going of to some awesome party and I'm going back to some grey cell, which I think is partly true but not for the reason, maybe, that I've expected, maybe more because I expect more from life, and people, somehow, and I never really see things as being enough, I always have some sort of hunger for more...whatever, I don't just mean emotional things, even something like board games, one game seems like just a sample, almost not worth doing because you're not going to really get into the game, or something...no moderation.

I feel like this isn't making sense or is somehow misconstruing what I'm real put trying to say. Really tired, maybe that's partly the problem

I mean I was originally wondering about sp/s? because one way I could imagine my life would be like... Someone looking from a tower, or behind a sheet of glass, waiting for something to happen, thinking'there's something happening somewhere' but not really knowing where somewhere is. But I often feel also like the person trying to start something, to get prep please going, without really any success, which..i thought is probably just due to the people in usually around) For instance, I think I have a lot of similarities to Emma Wodehouse from Jane Austens 
Emma, and that's kinda her thing) I see her typed as social 2 mostly, which seems right, what else could she be?

I think I've said nothing, my apologies, there's something hiding in there though..


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Elitist said:


> I've noticed that my sexual instinct emerges in my friendships. With me, there is always an underlying resentment at feeling as though I am no one's first priority. I've always gotten the impression that each of my friends had that one friend who they prioritized before any other friends, but I was never "that one friend." And it has eaten me alive sometimes. I've never allowed my jealousy to surface, but I feel it internally quite often. That feeling of not being the primary object of one's desire, specifically when that one is your object of desire. Horrible delusion that I have. I just have to remind myself that it's a false perception.
> 
> So, yeah, that's how the sexual instinct manifests in my life.


Dude. Story of my life, a fellow 9. Even to this day when I realise at certain situations that no one prioritizes me (I do prioritize my people) I get existentially sad and anger arises.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

angelfish said:


> Being soc/sx to me feels like being immersed in a warm swimming pool, or butterflies alighting on everything. The same connection and meaning but gentler, softer, lighter, more dispersed. But sometimes it also feels like watching everything from the outside and only catching quick glimpses of the within.


I mean no offense to you and I really really love your post, but I just wanted to comment on what this sounds like from my perspective -

When I hear "soft/ light/ butterflies/ warm" etc, I want to puke. The idea of looking from outside and never within makes me feel clausterphobic and dead. I'd rather be suffering on fire or just relaxing alone in my room than do _anything_ half-way. It doesn't feel warm to me, it feels cold. Pictures of butterflies and happy happy soft pastels make me sick too. It's like being drowned in elevator music.

For this reason I think your post is excellent - it's a great representation of how the "Spread-outness" of soc clashes with the lightning-sharp penetrativeness of an Sx-neurotic person. I'm probably even worse because I'm a 4 and don't have any positive fixes or really anything to soften my edges. So it might be extreme....

I don't mind Soc first people though, in fact, some are my closest friends and people I respect tremendously. I don't feel light, warm and half-way with them just because they're soc (even if they're So/Sp) ... it's more of the metaphor of it that gets to me - not the actual people. If I hadn't met my soulmate, I could even see myself having no problem falling for a Sx-last or Soc-first type - I am not put off by them at all, like some Sx people claim to be. The "light" "pastel" imagery and feel isn't me, yet when I hone in on someone, I feel who they are and whoever they are can light me up.

Even with people who are Sx last, I tend to bring out their passions and connect to them deeply. It's always about a dynamic, not just one person. Sx last, Soc first or Sp first people can be interesting, intelligent, intense etc (and some Sx people can turn me off also) ..... it doesn't matter what someone's instincts are; if I like them and they like me, I will find what's real about them. So I really strongly disagree with Sx-firsts who are elitist about it and claim Soc or Sp types bore them, or Sx-lasts are dry. That is not my experience at all.


It's just that the softer imagery couldn't be further from how I'd describe my life experience. When I picture what I'm like on the inside I see fire, volcanos, etc, although I don't like anything too bright, cluttered or overdone either; my avatar is actually me so that's a good example of my "penetrative" and darker nature.


----------



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

I like pastels, though I don't necessarily see/experience them as "happy" (I think of it as more... elegant, I suppose).

Which is a little besides the point, but something I find interesting. How some things I like might be read differently by someone else, which means some things probably get "lost in translation."

Like this picture, I showed it to someone and they thought it looked soothing, or something like that (don't remember):








And it surprised me a little because I hadn't thought of that. I think I found it more exciting because it looks like a sea of magic (to me), lol. 

Not that the above image represents how I feel on the inside most of the time.

But I do notice I'm drawn to things that have some... restraint? Compared to what I imagine as Sx-first. Restraint doesn't feel like the best way to put it but I can't think of anything better right now.

Idk, aesthetic stuff can be hard to put into words.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@Distortions yeah, I think there's a possible disconnect because what people see and what they think, I've definitely been surprised on a couple of occasions (especially with music! A quite sad song will be playing and someone will comment, unironically, "This song is so peppy!" or something, it's very strange, and stars me thinking, "If they think this song is happy, what else do they think??"

(I'm specifically thinking of this song, which to me even without understanding the lyrics sounds...dark and intense and driving, but I had a couple people argue with me that it sounds 'peppy' and happy, which I just don't understand)

* *












I used to not like pastel at all, I guess it didn't seem very 'deep', but I've since expanded my horizons, and I wouldn't exclude it, though...I probably wouldn't want to live in pastel.

It might also be a problem with Ne-Si, I tend to like things a little more for their associations than the thing themselves, so for instance a certain shade of green, and wicker, together, remind me of visisting my grandparents in Florida as a child and a certain feeling associated with that, so you know someday when I'm designing my own covered deck or something I'll be thinking "I need _this green_ and wicker, so much wicker", which might not be my natural aesthetic inclination; at this point I don't know anymore, I just know that green and wicker evokes something for me, which it might not even evoke for anyone else. 

So pastel at this point, I've grown associations with it, I've found a place for it in my mental palette, although I probably wouldn't use it near the core of my soul. I think I partially want to project a pastel-ish image, I think because it does seem elegant in a way; restrained. (Openness in general, like rooms flooded with light with billowy pastel curtains, are a thing that I'm not naturally inclined to but have grown to admire and aspire to, even though they feel partially foreign). 

_________________________________________________________________

ANYWAYS, overly long digression haha, when I think of myself inside, I don't know...I don't think I feel like volcanoes and...well, fire a bit, but not _volcanoes and fire_, different fire, maybe not front-and-center) But the chief characteristics would have to be architectural elements (something I can't really escape, I notice that my dreams even are always somewhat focused on _buildings_ or cities and...it's been mentioned on other threads, I think, that preferring images of architecture might hint at self-pres, 6, or 1, which I can understand, although I think it comes back to the aesthetics thing, I don't know if my 'reasons' for liking architecture have to do with security or such things, though it might, I think it just evokes something for me that I don't have a reason for :/ 

(Though one thing I can point to is that I've always preferred man-made things; always liked animals but people are more interesting. As a kid I didn't like animated movies, only ones with people in them, in a school play there were like 20 animal parts and one human part, which I got, and I was so shocked that I didn't have any competition; I assumed everyone would want to be the human. And I really do like nature, but...)

Also, not a fan of really bright colors. I've trained myself to like colors but they don't mean a whole lot to me)

ANYWAYS, can't seem to stop digressing, the image I would choose to express how I feel inside would be this one probably:










edit: I should also say why!
The colonnade, first of all, it's very beautiful, and every time I look I notice the side colonnade, and then the row of windows on top and...they just really strike me, there's a certain feeling I associate, like a diagonal shaft of light...in my heart...and of course the ruined building conjures up images of 'chiefs and ladies bright', there's always a nostalgic feeling with that, a building that remembers...but with this image specifically, it's not the main thing for me. It's...ah, it's all the diagonals. The diagonal...cross-beams? and how the windows intercept them at an angle, it creates these...when I was a child I discovered that if you squint at a tiled pattern, it will become three-dimensional and look almost like a city, I always imagined that there were these magic cities everywhere, that I couldn't see of course, so lines crossing like that feels...magical. As well as being naturally evocative.

And then, the wintry land beyond, the bird flying, the little river...it's just nice, it looks like a horn sounding in the distance, it makes me shiver, and then, down the main little hall, there's an opening in the wall, and that's my favorite part of the picture, it looks like a looking-glass into another world or...just outside, obviously, but it's special somehow, it's dark and...like a memory.

As for how it _feels like me_, I can't say, it just does.
Sp/so? 

Also, took pictures of two pictures I bought at a rummage sale or something, that are some of my favorites:

* *





















(Sorry, you can sorta see the reflection of my bedroom, not part of the picture...)




(That said, the second I chose because it reminded me of two of my characters, I probably would have liked it anyway but it wouldn't be so evocative)

This is still about aesthetics, not instincts though...gonna make a better post actually about instincts and internal feeling of self later but I have to go)


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> A quite sad song will be playing and someone will comment, unironically, "This song is so peppy!" or something, it's very strange, and stars me thinking, "If they think this song is happy, what else do they think??"
> 
> (I'm specifically thinking of this song, which to me even without understanding the lyrics sounds...dark and intense and driving, but I had a couple people argue with me that it sounds 'peppy' and happy, which I just don't understand)


Wow, it's hard to imagine that song as sad. The bass line is too hard driving and energetic. All I can imagine is that the words mean something to you that makes it a sad song for you (I have no idea what the lyrics mean so all I can do is listen to the music itself). The difference to me could be seen on the dance floor. This song would have people very energetic and active. A sad song to me would be something to slow dance to.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> Wow, it's hard to imagine that song as sad. The bass line is too hard driving and energetic. All I can imagine is that the words mean something to you that makes it a sad song for you (I have no idea what the lyrics mean so all I can do is listen to the music itself). The difference to me could be seen on the dance floor. This song would have people very energetic and active. A sad song to me would be something to slow dance to.


Really? This is...just really weird to me)) The bass line is part of what makes it so sad! (Although, now I'm wondering if the lyrics are just coloring my perception so much...but I don't think so...I can't hear it as happy) Energetic, yes, but you can be energetically sad) I don't see why sad songs have to be impossible to dance to) 

Trying to think of another song, in English...maybe Rolling in the Deep?

* *












To me this song doesn't sound any sadder than the other, just based on overall...melange of instrumentals/melody/vocals, but...I can't see mistaking it for a happy song...but it has a strong beat, maybe it's danceable...she doesn't sound like she's slowly drowning...

(Though I like the other one more, tbh)


----------



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

@*hope whispers*
Yeah, I don't really connect easily with pictures myself. I can try to (I mean, I have been. Even made a tag on tumblr to give an idea of my "aesthetic"), but... 

I like cartoons, though. Connect more with them than real people, lol.

But I'm not even sure which aesthetic would best describe me, to be honest. 

(Although like I said, stuff like this can be hard to articulate. In a way that captures the depth of it.)

Edit: Also, I'm not sure what I think of the song.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Jealous. It's too cold here. I'll take the 90-100s all year rather than winter ever :hotneko:


Well, you can always add clothes but you can only strip down to the skin and no further. All you can do when it gets too hot is hide inside if you have A/C.

Truth be told though. I have absolutely no desire to deal with those winters again except for maybe a short visit.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Call me a music snob, but....
> 
> While I appreciate a great atmospheric arrangement, if a song can't be taken out of context of arrangement, and stand on its own - with nothing but the song itself.... on any instrument, or any voice, but simply stand as a raw song due to the lyrics, the chord structure, the rhythm and the melody... I don't consider it a great song, even if I can enjoy listening to it.


I agree. But that may have to do with a musician's perspective. Too much autotune and sampling and such these days for my taste. Interesting effect on one song maybe, but a substitute for talent if depended upon.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Well, you can always add clothes but you can only strip down to the skin and no further. All you can do when it gets too hot is hide inside if you have A/C.
> 
> Truth be told though. I have absolutely no desire to deal with those winters again except for maybe a short visit.


Yeah, my whole family, who likes cold more than I do, say the same thing about "you can always add clothes." The thing is, it's so bad for my health. I get really sick every winter. The changes.. going outside in fur coats and then stepping inside and sweating.. it's really bad for the body. And, while most people can "add on clothes" and be ok, I can't. My body doesn't retain heat at all due to my illness and how it affects my circulation. So I can wear 5 pairs of socks and fur boots and coat and hat, but still, if I'm outside in sub-freezing weather for more than 10 minutes, my toes are going to freeze and I can't walk properly because they're numb, and I have to rush somewhere to put them under hot water. I'm basically trapped indoors all winter, which makes me fucking insane. I'm not someone who likes to party.. I like writing in isolation etc.. but I need my outdoor walks. I can't get the same 'release' by going to the mall where it's echoey and full of people. I get sick every winter, and thus miserable, and my temper is shorter, and I can't think as clearly.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> I agree. But that may have to do with a musician's perspective. Too much autotune and sampling and such these days for my taste. Interesting effect on one song maybe, but a substitute for talent if depended upon.


Right..

... not to be a jerk, but I was earning good money (and loving every minute of it) playing piano and singing songs - my own, as well as known songs - at bars and restaurants by age 13. I also sold my first written song to someone who needed songs for a play when I was 12. I don't have much patience for crap, and my resentment about losing my very classically trained 4-octave voice doesn't help my patience either.

I'm hard to impress when it comes to music. "The Music of the Night" in Phantom of the Opera is the best song I know. #1, no contest.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Animal said:


> Yeah, I knew that from the first post of yours I ever read. :kitteh: I can sniff it out even online.



Somebody recently asked me what tripping is like. I said you have to experience it. You gotta do it. Actually, you probably shouldn't do it but it is hard to describe. It is weird. lol. I love the movie Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. These guys are tripping balls and have no idea what they are doing. 

One night we tripped so hard. And it started in a field and all these fireflies were there. Cemeteries. Tripped there a lot. A place where people won't bug you.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Somebody recently asked me what tripping is like. I said you have to experience it. You gotta do it. Actually, you probably shouldn't do it but it is hard to describe. It is weird. lol. I love the movie Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. These guys are tripping balls and have no idea what they are doing.
> 
> One night we tripped so hard. And it started in a field and all these fireflies were there. Cemeteries. Tripped there a lot. A place where people won't bug you.


This was one attempt to describe one aspect of it..

Does it matter if the inner self is an illusion? - Blogs - Personality Cafe


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> Yeah, my whole family, who likes cold more than I do, say the same thing about "you can always add clothes." The thing is, it's so bad for my health. I get really sick every winter. The changes.. going outside in fur coats and then stepping inside and sweating.. it's really bad for the body. And, while most people can "add on clothes" and be ok, I can't. My body doesn't retain heat at all due to my illness and how it affects my circulation. So I can wear 5 pairs of socks and fur boots and coat and hat, but still, if I'm outside in sub-freezing weather for more than 10 minutes, my toes are going to freeze and I can't walk properly because they're numb, and I have to rush somewhere to put them under hot water. I'm basically trapped indoors all winter, which makes me fucking insane. I'm not someone who likes to party.. I like writing in isolation etc.. but I need my outdoor walks. I can't get the same 'release' by going to the mall where it's echoey and full of people. I get sick every winter, and thus miserable, and my temper is shorter, and I can't think as clearly.


Sounds like you're living in the wrong climate. I grew up in the North and winters were fun when I was a healthy kid. I wouldn't want to deal with them as an adult though. It's ironic that summer's can get just as hot up North as well. 

I could always take a walk early evening here before it gets dark if the day's too hot so it's not like the whole day would be shot. Plus the ocean breeze helps. Walks on the beach when the sun is going down...hmmm...nothing to really complain about I guess (except for hurricanes).


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Sounds like you're living in the wrong climate. I grew up in the North and winters were fun when I was a healthy kid. I wouldn't want to deal with them as an adult though. It's ironic that summer's can get just as hot up North as well.
> 
> I could always take a walk early evening here before it gets dark if the day's too hot so it's not like the whole day would be shot. Plus the ocean breeze helps. Walks on the beach when the sun is going down...hmmm...nothing to really complain about I guess (except for hurricanes).


Ahh you're making me want to cry, lol.
I would really like to move to a place like that. We will as soon as we can. I'm kind of stuck to my family financially because my illness is not recognized by the CDC or covered by Obamacare (and now Obamacare mandates are making it so that insurance companies are no longer allowed to pay for medicines I've been getting covered since 1996) ... so.... my medical bills just to survive are about 50k Per year, which is just wonderful when you're too sick to work full time. :ninja: We are saving up though and working on moving somewhere warm where there's a lyme doctor and lyme-literate hospital climate somewhere within range. Right now we're paying rent at a house my parents own which is more convenient than paying it to strangers, and it's too soon to buy our own house...so yeah. But damn, I've been wanting to live in a climate like that since I was young.. and I was about to prepare for moving to one but then, at 16, I got sick.

It's ironic when being sick prevents you from doing the things you need to do to get better (like moving to a warmer climate). It's a recursive bunch of bullshit. I'm not meaning to complain though. I'm on top of it. I have long term plans.  The warm beach is among them.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Animal said:


> This was one attempt to describe one aspect of it..
> 
> Does it matter if the inner self is an illusion? - Blogs - Personality Cafe



Your husband looks like my ENFJ drug dealer btw.

What is the self first of all? Where did it come from? Where did your feelings come from? What you call "you" is a reaction to other people. Your carved out space. The boundaries of the self, are set by others. Like in GOT, he is trying to empty Arya Stark. Who is Arya Stark? Arya Stark is a shape. What made this shape? Cersei, the Hound, Joffrey, etc, in other words, her very form is the result of other people. They own her. Your very shape is a an escape pattern. She is a key. Every groove was made because of that lock. And that is all that key is good for. That one lock.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Your husband looks like my ENFJ drug dealer btw.


But I can guarantee he smells better. ;P



> What is the self first of all? Where did it come from? Where did your feelings come from? What you call "you" is a reaction to other people. Your carved out space. The boundaries of the self, are set by others. Like in GOT, he is trying to empty Arya Stark. Who is Arya Stark? Arya Stark is a shape. What made this shape? Cersei, the Hound, Joffrey, etc, in other words, her very form is the result of other people. They own her. Your very shape is a an escape pattern. She is a key. Every groove was made because of that lock. And that is all that key is good for. That one lock.


Yes. Self is a choice. That is what LSD helps with - to empty that stuff out. I feel that now I've built my own self and I can continue to build it. I wasn't shaped by my trauma, my losses - those may be my "shape" but I can use that space as I see fit. That is what I mean about how it's not productive to keep emptying it over and over. I've already emptied it ; I'm onto the next step.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

@Animal 

But yes, I agree with your overall point that one should use what is practically meaningful for them. We all need some kind of stirrup to place ourselves on. To get our footing. Which may tie in 4 and meaning. Jung and Nietzsche talked a lot about it. Jung said that meaningless is an illness. It is a sickness that needs attention.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> @*Animal*
> 
> But yes, I agree with your overall point that one should use what is practically meaningful for them. We all need some kind of stirrup to place ourselves on. To get our footing. Which may tie in 4 and meaning. Jung and Nietzsche talked a lot about it. Jung said that meaningless is an illness. It is a sickness that needs attention.


Ahh I really love that idea. I am anything but a nihilist. 

When I lost my voice and autonomy to illness - I was confronted with, what is the meaning of life? I kept writing in my diary "loss of sense of self." I lost my sense of purpose; I knew that's what I needed back; not my voice in and of itself. But I couldn't just fill that gap with the next thing. I needed to feel something was as deeply woven into my origin. I knew that writing was just as meaningful, if not more in some ways, but I felt inadequate as a writer, and I didn't know how to address it - whereas music came easily to me. What I needed to build was the confidence in my own endurance; that I could be a phoenix and rise from the ashes without losing any of my original form. I concluded very quickly that there may or may not be an "inherent" meaning to life but it's completely irrelevant - something has meaning if you choose to give it meaning. And that is good enough for me. It's an internal decision. Of course I would like it to mean something to someone else, but that's less important than my own sense of purpose. I'd written this poem just after losing my voice (I'm no poet, but it shows how I felt)

am ii too jagged
or is the world too perfectly round?
sometimes ii feel like everyone else is lost
and ii, alone, am found.
but if a tree falls in the woods
and no one hears it
does it make a sound?
that question is what keeps me
so tightly bound.



Music was my way to be heard and seen and loved by the world. I know, "Image issues." I did music because it came from my soul; I started playing at 5 and wrote my first full song at 8. I didn't show it off til much later. But it felt great to reach the world, to be seen for who I was. I felt I'd lost my ability to do that; the communication line was cut. All I needed to do was to find my own sense of purpose no matter how inadequate I felt (like with writing, I KNEW that was next but I had to wrestle with my own inadequacy and also, with my need to get out the songs I'd already written, and more) ... I kept writing book after book about singers and musicians and I knew I couldn't do that to myself; I needed to LIVE my dream. This is why I sang through my whisper, fronted my band.. I needed to live it, to know I tried my best and failed because my whispery voice is so sensitive and even building a whole lifestyle around its maintenance wasn't enough to guarantee a good show; I needed to expose myself to the hideous and shitty music industry the way it is for people who don't have a name or a very easy in (like I used to have because of my very classical talent).. I needed to go raw and all out with it. And I did, and I got it out of my system. At this point my un-recorded songs are the only thing I need to deal with; I need to record them - but I have no more need to play shows or communicate with an audience that way. Writing will be my avenue. Perc has helped me improve that and I'm still striving. But as long as I'm striving, my life has meaning, and that's what counts.


----------



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

@hope whispers
Btw, I tried showing this song to my mom to ask what she thought:





And she said it seemed like a happy or upbeat song or something like that, lol. Well, in a way it is I guess (the German version is "entertaining" at least), but...


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

@*enneathusiast*
Fwiw that above post that I wrote ^ is my main case for Sx/So, I think. About wanting to reach the world through my Sx passions. But maybe that's just being an image type.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> Well, I wasn't saying any of the songs felt happy. I was simply saying they didn't feel sad.
> 
> Those lyrics aren't sad to me either. I suppose they could be interpreted that way though. I don't know. Maybe the word sad just has a different meaning for you than me. This is sad to me.
> 
> ...


I didn't know we were doing loss-of-children level sad) I just meant, kinda sad lyrics, guy loved a girl who didn't love him back, that's sad) Sadder than the music would suggest)
This song...might just be my mood, but listening to it doesn't make me feel sad, though it's objectively sad. Maybe part of it is the musical arrangement, that kind of music doesn't appeal to me much, it's a clashy Todd Rundgren-y sound, which is nice but it doesn't do much for me emotionally. (though! one of my favorite songs is by Eric Clapton!...not supposed to be sad, though)

* *














Here's a song that _does_ work for me as a really _sad_ song, on the same subject, obviously it's a totally different genre though so maybe not a good comparison, but definitely straight-up sad, I might have been using the word liberally)








enneathusiast said:


> I wouldn't make that analogy to the instincts. I'm sx-first and prefer the sun for warmth as you describe. Maybe that just has more to do with the climate where one lives or would like to live or personal preference (there's no winter where I live and I can't stand it when it gets in the 90s-100s - too freaking hot).


I mean, we were speaking metaphorically (though I went and made it literal). I definitely wouldn't argue that the actual temperature you prefer speaks to your instinctual stacking)) 

And for the record, I don't think sx=fire, for instance I am sure my sp 4 friend (and I expect most 2s and 4s, not sure about other types) would choose fire over sunlight; in fact I think it is more of a personal journey that people need to make, I think appreciating sunlight is somewhat difficult to do and a sign of maturity; fire is easier to love because you can really feel it. I would guess that some types, like 9s and maybe head types, would be predisposed to prefer sunlight, and I expect being social-first would have something to do with it as well.



Distortions said:


> <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> @<b><a href="http://personalitycafe.com/member.php?u=164034" target="_blank">hope whispers</a></b>
> <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
> Heh, but that makes me think about love in a way, because from what I can understand, love is like the sun, while fire is something... less wholesome but more interesting.


Yes...I think so...though I don't really think of love as being sun ( But yeah, I think that's the thing basically)


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Distortions said:


> @hope whispers
> Btw, I tried showing this song to my mom to ask what she thought:
> 
> 
> ...


:laughing:
I'm just imagining a little dance party with all these happy, upbeat songs)


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Animal said:


> Ahh I really love that idea. I am anything but a nihilist.
> 
> When I lost my voice and autonomy to illness - I was confronted with, what is the meaning of life? I kept writing in my diary "loss of sense of self." I lost my sense of purpose; I knew that's what I needed back; not my voice in and of itself. But I couldn't just fill that gap with the next thing. I needed to feel something was as deeply woven into my origin. I knew that writing was just as meaningful, if not more in some ways, but I felt inadequate as a writer, and I didn't know how to address it - whereas music came easily to me. What I needed to build was the confidence in my own endurance; that I could be a phoenix and rise from the ashes without losing any of my original form. I concluded very quickly that there may or may not be an "inherent" meaning to life but it's completely irrelevant - something has meaning if you choose to give it meaning. And that is good enough for me. It's an internal decision. Of course I would like it to mean something to someone else, but that's less important than my own sense of purpose. I'd written this poem just after losing my voice (I'm no poet, but it shows how I felt)
> 
> ...



I liked that. It was really good. 

Paul Simon again:

A man walks down the street
He says why am I soft in the middle now
Why am I soft in the middle
The rest of my life is so hard

​





And poet was mad and said he was writ in water. 


This grave contains all that was Mortal of a Young English Poet Who on his Death Bed, in the Bitterness of his Heart at the Malicious Power of his Enemies Desired these Words to be engraven on his Tomb Stone: _Here lies One Whose Name was writ in Water. 
_

which came from:
*
"As you are living* ; *all your better deeds shall be in water writ*, *but this in marble**"*


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> Here's a song that _does_ work for me as a really _sad_ song, on the same subject, obviously it's a totally different genre though so maybe not a good comparison, but definitely straight-up sad, I might have been using the word liberally)


That one represents painful regret to me and the longing and suffering that comes from that. Especially when the blame is on oneself.

I guess I just find more of a nuance with the feelings. Not stereotypical for someone who's dominant type is 5. :shocked:


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

@FearAndTremblinga bit unrelated, but on Keats' deathbed he could hear the sound of the fountain 'Barcaccia' from his bedroom window, which inspired the line))










His house was on the right, the second window up)

Fountain, by the way, built after this square was flooded from the Tiber, when the waters went down there was a boat left in the middle of the square, which the fountain represents) It was built by Pietro Bernini, the father of the more famous Gian Lorenzo Bernini)

just some facts

Keats seems like a sp 4 (but then again lots of poets do and I doubt they all really are)
_
My spirit is too weak—mortality
Weighs heavily on me like unwilling sleep,
And each imagined pinnacle and steep
Of godlike hardship tells me I must die
Like a sick eagle looking at the sky.
Yet ‘tis a gentle luxury to weep,
That I have not the cloudy winds to keep,
Fresh for the opening of the morning’s eye.
Such dim-conceived glories of the brain
Bring round the heart an indescribable feud;
So do these wonders a most dizzy pain,
That mingles Grecian grandeur with the rude
Wasting of old Time—with a billowy main—
A sun—a shadow of a magnitude._


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> That one represents painful regret to me and the longing and suffering that comes from that. Especially when the blame is on oneself.
> 
> I guess I just find more of a nuance with the feelings. Not stereotypical for someone who's dominant type is 5. :shocked:



I see 'sad' as a blanket notion for that I guess) It's hard for something to be just literally sad and nothing else besides...


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> I mean, we were speaking metaphorically (though I went and made it literal).


Well, I was also saying the metaphor didn't work for me as sx. Because it's not simply something in my environment that I'm receiving but more something I'm seeking. Instead of a broad diffuse focus, it's a narrow more intense focus. I've used the analogy of floodlight vs. spotlight before. I guess you could also use some analogy with the magnifying glass as well.

The fact that you even used the metaphor of heat or warmth hints to me an SP way of seeing things.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Sunlight is super lame, fire is...well, I like it more than sunlight but I never felt connected to it and I don't like the color)
I never identified with having fire in me or anything like that, I think.
I like smoke.
Not sure what exactly it represents to me though, but partly it's that it's connected to fire but not really fire. Another thing is probably that I used to find it creepy/sad as a child, things burning and smoke above them, things turning into smoke and then just disappearing, but I was also drawn to things I found creepy (and sad, not sure how to explain)

Goodnight!
:sleepytime:
Will try to respond to more things tomorrow, also to your thread inthe gossip forum @Animal


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> @*enneathusiast*
> Fwiw that above post that I wrote ^ is my main case for Sx/So, I think. About wanting to reach the world through my Sx passions. But maybe that's just being an image type.


I don't think that's SO or image. I think that's simply more about finding meaning/purpose and expressing yourself. I felt that way when I was studying music as well. I also feel that about writing fiction (though I haven't done anything with it). 

I think the social instinct is more about being aware of how to participate/navigate in the social domain (e.g., the workings of hierarchies, status, tracking others, trends, playing the game, inclusion, etc.).


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Animal said:


> I'm hard to impress when it comes to music. "The Music of the Night" in Phantom of the Opera is the best song I know. #1, no contest.


I just went and listened to that for the first time on YouTube. That is a great blending of both lyrics and musical elements. Maybe the best written song I've heard for the stage (not that I've heard a lot).

For me, I'd have to name best songs by genre because I'd be looking for different things in each and comparing to other songs within each.


----------



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

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Sunlight is super lame, fire is...well, I like it more than sunlight but I never felt connected to it and I don't like the color)
> I never identified with having fire in me or anything like that, I think.


Lol.

Orange isn't my favorite color either.

As for feeling if I have fire in me, it's not something I usually think about/a major theme for me/my "thing" but I don't feel devoid of fire either. I think too much can be tacky, but... well, now I'm thinking about Pokemon again.  And I would be drawn to fire Pokemon when I was younger, at least.

I can see smoke fitting you. 

@*enneathusiast*
I'd think So can care about meaning/purpose too, though, and reaching the world could be a way to doing it in an So-ish way.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

hope whispers said:


> This is so beautiful!
> 
> (I don't think I experience the world like this but if have to ponder. I really like the idea of instincts being expressed like this).


Ahhh that's _perfect_ :shocked::lovekitty:


----------



## Shadow Tag (Jan 11, 2014)

periwinklepromise said:


> If you meant exclusively not-casual romantic/sexual relationships, then idk. I care way more about friendships.


I know that I wasn't involved in this exchange, but I am one person who agrees with you. Friendships, and networks of friendships, have always been more enjoyable and beneficial to me. But then again all of the few romantic relationships I've been in have seemed forced. I dunno, in college I had friends who were even engaged by the end of senior year and while I'm super happy for them, putting myself in their shoes gives me anxiety. First, I like devoting my time to a variety of people instead of narrowing my focus to one individual. I just like groups better. When I settle into my new place, I want to join a volleyball league. Second, I want to excel in my career, so that involves taking more time for that. In the end for me, it's a matter of what I have time for and what I prioritize at this time in my life. These don't exactly seem like your reasons, but, yes, there is someone else here who thinks that friendship trumps relationships.


----------



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

Ironically, it occurred to me my current avatar is of someone looking up towards the "sun" >_>


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> Well, I was also saying the metaphor didn't work for me as sx. Because it's not simply something in my environment that I'm receiving but more something I'm seeking. Instead of a broad diffuse focus, it's a narrow more intense focus. I've used the analogy of floodlight vs. spotlight before. I guess you could also use some analogy with the magnifying glass as well.


Why does floodlight vs. spotlight work but fire vs. sun not work?
Anyways, I wasn't really trying to make a direct metaphor, I was using a previous concept that I had before Enneagram to try to explain something about my personality, I wouldn't expect a direct correlation in terms of instincts, though I do think it has _some_ relation)


> The fact that you even used the metaphor of heat or warmth hints to me an SP way of seeing things.


This...idk, this is the kind of thing that has frustrated me with the instincts in the past, specifically my experience with trying to find my instincts; I feel like this kind of thing gets used to say I'm sp-first, which...I understand like having a vibe that I'm sp-first and trying to find 'proof' but it's still strange, it was my friend's metaphor in the first place as I said and it's not like heat and warmth are state secrets only revealed to self-preservation types, a metaphor is a metaphor...






I'm not against a sp-first typing if that's what I am, but for some reason a lot of the evidence for my being sp-first comes like this and it makes me resist it) idk what it is, it just feels like people are trying to trick me into revealing that I'm self-pres)

it is my least favorite instinct though and especially sp 2, so...it's maybe true that I'm subtly trying to resist that typing, there may be an element of truth of needing to catch me using this instinct, though I've tried to be upfront about how I do/don't relate to it

To be clear, not annoyed at you, my tone was annoyed and I was talking about something you said, but it was just a general complaint/observation that your thing reminded me of)


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Lol I'm not a vampire, but I remember really hating the sunlight and what it stood for. Personally, sunlight's energy was too bright and scattered for my liking. And in a way, something about sunlight was too...optimistic, too "out-in-the-open." Not sure how to expound on that. Excuse the slight pun though. :3

Perhaps that's why I have a slight fascination with fire. Fire's the archetype for everything dangerous, reckless, and passionate. One misstep and you'll be consumed. Or you become transformed, reincarnated into a form greater than your old self. It can create and destroy. Fire stirs in more thoughts and emotions within me than sunlight ever will.

Plus, I'm more drawn to the aesthetics. 



















And for reasons I can't properly explain, I really like pictures of people holding flames.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Not expressing myself well today :/ but I'm going to try again! 

I think it's probably a sign of lower sx than sp, however that pans out, that...my internal world is really very small and...it never occurs to me to go outside a certain circle. For instance, I remember once in middle school practicing a monologue for drama class with my 4 friend and I'd previously had everything worked out, thought I knew exactly what I wanted to do, but she kept telling me...'you have to make that line sound more angry' and I had thought it already sounded garishly angry, but I did it her way and I realized that it actually did pack a lot more punch that way and when I did it in drama class everyone was ~amazed~ at how well I did it) 

I was thinking about being behind a glass wall as a possible analogy for sp, and maybe that's how I feel) But it's like there's a gauzy curtain all around me and I usually stay within it not because I especially want to but because it's what occurs to me, but sometimes I remember oh! step outside the curtain it'll be fine! and then it's better than expected)

Writing, too) I usually have characters who sit around doing nothing, even when I have a plot...it's, like, nothing) And then I encounter other media that goes all the way and only then do I realize 'oh that's how it should be'

For instance, I had/technically still am working on an Arthurian (medieval) series, and when I started watching Game of Thrones I realized what was wrong with it finally, it was just so...it could have been so much _more_. When I'm writing I feel like my characters are practically on the verge of being caricatures but when I compare it to a series like GoT, my characters altogether occupy about this much space | | whereas each of the GoT characters are like | | and they don't even feel like caricatures; they're just _interesting._

Not that I really dislike my writing; I actually like it more than it probably deserves, but I do forget to pack punch, I guess (besides other irrelevant problems). 


* *





Like _reaallly_ forced plot lines lol, couldn't even make my protagonist care about them)) most 9s can't even manage to be this lazy I think) Definitely need to deeply rewrite this one)










"I tried to pique my interest in the country"

As well as this 'it happened but we're skipping it because it was boring ok so five years later...'










lol I haven't looked at this for a while but it's really funny as well as slightly embarassing
Maybe I am a 9 after all)




edit: to be clear, when I said I like my writing, this is not the kind of thing I was referring to ^

Anyways, that's a pretty consistent thing for me) I do things in two dimensions and the 3D version just doesn't cross my mind until I see it)

edit: remembered this random (2? prideful at least thing) from many years ago (I mean when I was 12 or so), someone (I think my youth group director) told me "You're very special, you know".
Me: I know! :smileys-sunbathing- 
Person: Just like everyone else!
Me:









It was somewhat humiliating, I genuinely thought I was being told I was special and unique and then was told that everyone else was too)
The word 'special' might not have been the one used, that has different connotations) But still) I don't think I was able to save it, I really looked like I believed that I was special and somehow better than everyone else, probably)


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Animal said:


> I mean no offense to you and I really really love your post, but I just wanted to comment on what this sounds like from my perspective -
> 
> When I hear "soft/ light/ butterflies/ warm" etc, I want to puke. The idea of looking from outside and never within makes me feel clausterphobic and dead. I'd rather be suffering on fire or just relaxing alone in my room than do _anything_ half-way. It doesn't feel warm to me, it feels cold. Pictures of butterflies and happy happy soft pastels make me sick too. It's like being drowned in elevator music.
> 
> ...


It's fine 

I appreciate your descriptions too. I think as a sort of turmoil-y 6 that I feel so much of the darkness and stress and angst already that the Soc/Sx seems like a relief to me. Maybe I expressed it poorly that I can never go inside - because I know fully that I _can_, if I want to, and sometimes I have, and sometimes I've been pulled in quite against my will. But if I move too fast and intensely for my own comfort, then I don't connect with someone as deeply because I have too much of a foot in the Soc ocean. I can't remove myself completely enough from that pulled-back Soc perspective to be able to "live into" an experience like an Sx dominant can. But it doesn't feel disappointing or anything to me.

I do generally like iridescence/pastel and sparkle/glitter but too much is sickly and/or crass-seeming. I'm kind of "eh" about butterflies when they're cartoony, never really liked them on clothes/binders/etc. I like them as bugs. Like fireflies too. I loved grey wolves and leopards when I was a kid, raised money for conservation efforts and did school projects on them. I'm fond of cows too. I genuinely do like most elevator music though, lmao. 

If I had to describe inside myself... it'd be like... 

this maybe? 
or this?
this?

None are really near perfect but at least it's a start. Dominant lightness, some shadow, some spark, probably more "crowded" than your preference? Some haziness. A feeling of both closeness and distance. Nooks and crannies. 

I actually typed as Sx/Soc when I first encountered IV because longing/yearning has been such a dominant feeling in my life, and immersion is a peak experience/state for me. I tend to keep a handful or less of very close, very tight, pretty-emotionally charged relationships that are probably the most prominent force in my life, in addition to my constant search for idealistic immersion. A member of a personality forum was the first to point out that I seemed to move from specifics into universals, and that seemed more Soc-first to her. Later I learned more about how my general perspective/approach is more "how everything fits together" and about things fitting closely together which is Soc over Sx. 

My SO is actually Sp/Soc and I'm surprised when people talk about Sx-last being "dry". I understand it when I think of some people I know - a friend of mine who is an ISTJ 1w9-5w6-3w? sp/soc is really quite "dry" but also really funny and endearing - but my SO is so blunt and really actually pretty intense at times, just not the same sort of intense as Sx. It's not a "moving into other things" intense, not a turmoiled intensity, not like fire. It's a very hard, firm, opaque intensity. Like solid rock. Like a boulder dropping. And one of my closest friends is Soc/Sp. I think she can be overly political sometimes but she's not dry at all. Maybe "dry" is more referring to how they don't really "cling" to anything. I feel like the Sx-affected types do more imprinting/being imprinted on. 

I feel like Sx-lasts are kind of a special challenge. Like they're almost more fun because when they finally do crack into that Sx level with you it's really incredible. It's so rare and so protected.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Distortions said:


> @*enneathusiast*
> I'd think So can care about meaning/purpose too, though, and reaching the world could be a way to doing it in an So-ish way.


Sure, I was just saying I don't think that's specific to SO.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> Why does floodlight vs. spotlight work but fire vs. sun not work?


It's because with sx I'm trying to find something and the light metaphor emphasizes that for me. The warmth metaphor doesn't.



hope whispers said:


> This...idk, this is the kind of thing that has frustrated me with the instincts in the past, specifically my experience with trying to find my instincts; I feel like this kind of thing gets used to say I'm sp-first, which...I understand like having a vibe that I'm sp-first and trying to find 'proof' but it's still strange...
> 
> I'm not against a sp-first typing if that's what I am, but for some reason a lot of the evidence for my being sp-first comes like this and it makes me resist it) idk what it is, it just feels like people are trying to trick me into revealing that I'm self-pres)


What I said wasn't meant to be about you. It was meant to be about the metaphor. I don't know what your instinctual stacking is. I threw something out there once and you didn't identify with it so I gave up. I'm not one to push that sort of thing. There's nothing in it for me to do so. Instead there only lies the potential for people getting upset if they don't agree. That's why I'm usually hesitant about doing it unless someone just seems to be going in circles (then I'll throw something out there for them to see if it helps) or I need to be direct with someone who's being _persistent _(fortunately this has only happened a few times).


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

angelfish said:


> I actually typed as Sx/Soc when I first encountered IV because longing/yearning has been such a dominant feeling in my life, and immersion is a peak experience/state for me. I tend to keep a handful or less of very close, very tight, pretty-emotionally charged relationships that are probably the most prominent force in my life, in addition to my constant search for idealistic immersion. A member of a personality forum was the first to point out that I *seemed to move from specifics into universals, and that seemed more Soc-first *to her. Later I learned more about how my general perspective/approach is more "how everything fits together" and about things fitting closely together which is Soc over Sx.


This part of your post interested me in particular. I don't have any specific questions so much as I just want to know more. (How do you feel about open-ended ramblings?) For the bolded - I've only really learned how to deal with that idea in JCF terms, so I'm not sure what exactly you (or I guess, this forum member) mean. Could you (or anyone) expand on this?


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

Oh! Almost forgot!



Views from Kanto said:


> I know that I wasn't involved in this exchange, but I am one person who agrees with you. Friendships, and networks of friendships, have always been more enjoyable and beneficial to me. But then again all of the few romantic relationships I've been in have seemed forced. I dunno, in college I had friends who were even engaged by the end of senior year and while I'm super happy for them, putting myself in their shoes gives me anxiety. First, I like devoting my time to a variety of people instead of narrowing my focus to one individual. I just like groups better. When I settle into my new place, I want to join a volleyball league. Second, I want to excel in my career, so that involves taking more time for that. In the end for me, it's a matter of what I have time for and what I prioritize at this time in my life. These don't exactly seem like your reasons, but, yes, there is someone else here who thinks that friendship trumps relationships.


Yay! Someone else understands!

I may not share your reasons (the whole groups/joining league thing isn't really my style, and I'm pretty horrible at just making friends in general), but I do understand them. 

I do relate to the romantic relationships feeling/seeming forced. For me, I wonder if that is related to what was expected of me. My parents are the kind of Christian that thinks women should go to college *for funsies* (cough cough, to find a husband) and then get married, never have a job (OR A LIFE OF YOUR OWN!!!), raise kids, etc. They realized pretty quickly that wouldn't work for me, but those messages were repeated quite a bit, in the media they approved of, in church lessons, stuff like that. I knew that wasn't for me, but it was always vaguely _expected_. Both of my older sisters did that. Right now, I'm in this wonderful grace period where everyone knows not to ask, "So, you got a boyfriend yet?" but I'm not sure how long that'll last. I guess I'm basically waiting for the expectations to be applied with more pressure, since I _know_ they'll come some time. 

R/s relationships are what I'm_ supposed_ to do, but I've never been very good at doing what other people think I should.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> It's because with sx I'm trying to find something and the light metaphor emphasizes that for me. The warmth metaphor doesn't.


Ok, that makes sense)


> What I said wasn't meant to be about you. It was meant to be about the metaphor. I don't know what your instinctual stacking is. I threw something out there once and you didn't identify with it so *I gave up*. I'm not one to push that sort of thing. There's nothing in it for me to do so. Instead there only lies the potential for people getting upset if they don't agree. That's why I'm usually hesitant about doing it unless someone just seems to be going in circles (then I'll throw something out there for them to see if it helps) or I need to be direct with someone who's being _persistent _(fortunately this has only happened a few times).


You didn't have to 'give up', I feel weird now 

Really though, my little rant wasn't directed at you, it just really reminded me of some other conversations where I kept getting typed as sp-first with this kind of thing and it really rubbed me the wrong way; I got that your comment was just a comment) I guess I thought that on the instincts thread it would be relevant to talk about a kind of instinct typing that I don't like; I see it here and there. But my post was way ruder than I meant it to be and I apologize 

(About sp, though, I'm never sure if I'm sp-first or sp-last, for instance: checked my account balance today and found that I somehow spent four hundred dollars over the past...two days...without noticing)) I mean, I bought things, I can buy that I spent that much money, but I wouldn't have guessed it at all) I don't know if that's sp-first (I bought that much stuff in that little time) or sp-last (spending that much money, not noticing). I think there are grounds for my being sp-first definitely, I just have to sort out what is actually what.

I think suggestions of sp that don't seem to be based in much annoy me more than I should, perhaps (just thought of this, new and untested theory) because I often feel like my dad (6) ascribes strange self-pres motivations onto my actions that _aren't_ based in reality so I'm weirdly sensitive to people having this image of me (for instance, as a child, it often happened that, say, I'd ask for a cookie at lunch and my parents would say no and then two hours later I'd be mad about something completely different, and he'd say 'oh, this is about the cookie, isn't it?' or...bad example, it still happens a lot but I can't think of an example :laughing: Doesn't discount sp, just that one kind of sp being falsely ascribed to me makes me a little suspicious about it)) I mean, maybe)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> Lol I'm not a vampire, but I remember really hating the sunlight and what it stood for. Personally, sunlight's energy was too bright and scattered for my liking. And in a way, something about sunlight was too...optimistic, too "out-in-the-open." Not sure how to expound on that. Excuse the slight pun though. :3
> 
> Perhaps that's why I have a slight fascination with fire. Fire's the archetype for everything dangerous, reckless, and passionate. One misstep and you'll be consumed. Or you become transformed, reincarnated into a form greater than your old self. It can create and destroy. Fire stirs in more thoughts and emotions within me than sunlight ever will.
> 
> ...


Holding flames feels very sp/sx to me for some reason



Distortions said:


> Ironically, it occurred to me my current avatar is of someone looking up towards the "sun" >_>


Not the moon??? :shocked:
To me it looks like really bright moon

I love moon btw, if I were in charge of things it'd always be night :lovekitty:
But now that I think about it, maybe it's good that there's day too, who knows if I could appreciate the night without it?
Actually if I were in charge of things I'd make myself never need to sleep.


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Holding flames feels very sp/sx to me for some reason


Yeah, going through this thread almost seals sp/sx for my stackings. Though I know that @Animal once suggested so-first for me, so I wonder what her thoughts are now? :joyous:


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> But my post was way ruder than I meant it to be and I apologize


I didn't take it that way. It just sounded like what I said: you thought I was talking about you being sp when I was really talking about the metaphor having a hint of sp.



hope whispers said:


> (About sp, though, I'm never sure if I'm sp-first or sp-last, for instance: checked my account balance today and found that I somehow spent four hundred dollars over the past...two days...without noticing)) I mean, I bought things, I can buy that I spent that much money, but I wouldn't have guessed it at all) I don't know if that's sp-first (I bought that much stuff in that little time) or sp-last (spending that much money, not noticing). I think there are grounds for my being sp-first definitely, I just have to sort out what is actually what.


Personally, I don't see money or finances as having anything to do with SP. I've known people who are SP-first that burn a hole in their pocket when it comes to money. I think it has more to do with things that are personally important to that particular individual (money may or may not have anything to do with that).


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Oh, I forgot about the moon!

But yeah, between fire, sun, and moonlight I'd take moonlight)

I feel like it could work pretty nicely to have fire as sx, sun as so, and moon as sp)

Night btw, doesn't feel cold to me the way sunlight does. I guess the sun feels cold because it's impersonal...garish light of day and all that...but the moon _always_ feels personal) A strange, lovely combination of feeling lonely and at home.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jun 3, 2012)

Just a disclaimer: everything I say involves an ENTP 7w6 4w3 8w9 sx bias and has a high chance of being terribly wrong. I think I possess some solid thoughts, but I don't mean to suggest that my words should be taken as gospel. Anyway, without further ado~ roud:

In terms of survival value, I think sx is about seeking energy from people and things for the purpose of furthering one's goals- whatever those may be. My experience with the sx instinct is heavily coloured by my enneagram type and personal experiences, but overall I think that I understand it well enough to identify its core elements.

The sexual instinct is built to identify threats to well-being or survival. It is about power.

The way I see it, everyone possesses a certain energy, and sx-firsts are attuned to these energies. However, they only recognize and keep track of anyone who poses a threat to their position or well-being. More specifically, those with energies that could possibly overtake or rival that of said sx-first.

Said strength of energy is self-defined and generally relates to one's most deeply held values and beliefs. I think it can be said that the sx-first seeks the type of strength in others that they would most want to see in themselves.

This directly relates to a common theme in all sx instinct descriptions I've seen- the need to find a mate. This is about the acquisition of power. By seeking out a partner with similar energy to one's own, it is possible to increase one's strength. It is this combination of energies that makes an sx pairing so powerful. However, there is a delicate balance at play in these relationships. Sx types seek to consume or fear being consumed, making it essential to find someone possessing an equal amount of power or intensity.

Outside of relationships, sx-firsts can also be passionately devoted to a pursuit or hobby. This also comes from the need to acquire power and "feed" one's energy.

---

The social and self-preservation instincts are more straightforward, imo. I think of soc-doms as spiders, living in a web of connections. They are sensitive to any changes that may occur in this web. 

I don't think they necessarily have to enjoy social interaction or people as a whole, but it is their way of keeping track of the world and identifying any crucial changes that happen within their world. They adapt accordingly and feel the need to keep up with all the points on the web in order to continue doing so.

Soc is a bit like sx, except one's energy is more thinly spread and seeks to account for everyone rather than just obvious threats. In the soc-doms I've known, I've witnessed a compulsion to stay in touch with all friends and acquaintances, and an avoidance of focusing too much on any one person, for fear of losing the entire web. I don't think soc just has to be about people, though. It's a more versatile instinct than it seems.

In general it is about keeping track of the world and its many changes, of information, etc. I think there is also a feeling of... needing to find one's place in the world that I don't see in sx or sp. As preoccupied as they are with observing the world, they also feel the need to wonder where they fit into it.

---


The self-preservation instinct is basic enough to be simultaneously easy and difficult to understand. It's a very general term- self-preservation. I think that is the ultimate goal of every instinct. The difference is the sp types get to the root of the problem, unlike sx and soc.

Sp is less about energy and more about resources. Conserving and hoarding resources + energy, building defenses, etc. To some extent, sx and soc seek protection from the world and from others. However, sp gathers resources in order to protect itself alone. That's not to say that sp types don't need other people. All humans do, to some extent. However, when sp types find people to survive with, they seem to have a way of internalizing them. They become part of their resources and almost a part of themselves- a sort of self-contained unit. Self-preservation types never cease to be inherently self-reliant, but they certain are capable of relying on others if they believe it will benefit them.

Sp types are concerned with safety and comfort to some extent- survival at its simplest.

I think the idea that sp-doms are reserved and withdrawn is a bit simplistic in itself. I've been mistaken for an sp-dom due to this idea, despite possessing none of the other traits commonly described as having to do with the instinct. Any type can be closed off and reluctant to share their thoughts or feelings. I'm very selective in regards to who I choose to share myself with. The difference, perhaps, is that I _need_ to share and will jump at the opportunity to do so.

All in all, though, I'm not exactly an expert on self-preservation. I'm very likely sp-last, so it's quite possible that everything I've said is complete bullshit. I'm more confident in my descriptions of sx and soc, in that order.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

enneathusiast said:


> I didn't take it that way. It just sounded like what I said: you thought I was talking about you being sp when I was really talking about the metaphor having a hint of sp.


Okay, we're on the same page then, I hope)


> Personally, I don't see money or finances as having anything to do with SP. I've known people who are SP-first that burn a hole in their pocket when it comes to money. I think it has more to do with things that are personally important to that particular individual (money may or may not have anything to do with that).


What exactly is sp to you?
I mean, I hear a lot of things about sp and I'm curious what your take on it is) I don't think I have a good idea of what it is.

When I think sp my mind brings up an image like:










(Which btw I kinda aspire to, in terms of image, not the amount of cake around the girl, lol, but this sense of languid glamour or petty luxury, even just that cake, it doesn't even look like it would taste that good lol but I like the idea of that being the kind of cake I have around me, I love the _idea_ of cake so much despite it being one of my least favorite delicacies)

But I guess unfortunately the other image that comes to mind is just, like, someone licking a spoon, which is _terrible_ and I think it's just because the word spoon starts with the letters sp))










The other thing that comes to mind is, idk, when people emphasize the word _me_ in a sentence, the object pronoun getting italicized in a certain way, "You said that to _me_" or something, like this maybe, this little piece of song feels sp to me...






edit: for instance I hear sp equated with longing; I don't know what to make of that)


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

periwinklepromise said:


> This part of your post interested me in particular. I don't have any specific questions so much as I just want to know more. (How do you feel about open-ended ramblings?) For the bolded - I've only really learned how to deal with that idea in JCF terms, so I'm not sure what exactly you (or I guess, this forum member) mean. Could you (or anyone) expand on this?


Crap, I wish I even could. I honestly don't really know. Unfortunately that poster and I ended up having a rather nasty falling-out (which is pretty rare for me in general), and I never even entirely understood what she meant. She tried to explain it but I didn't comprehend how it was something different than Ne. If I'm not mistaken I also thought I was ENFP at the time (I think typing as Sx/Soc provided me with reasoning as to why I seemed more intense/insular than other ENFPs), for whatever that adds to the complexity of it all. I think she may have been a true(r) ENFP and that was her iNtuition talking, seeing and expressing some holistic/externally-conscious quality in me that keyed her into me having stronger Soc instinct than Sx. Couldn't tell you what, though. 



Eclipsed said:


> I think of soc-doms as spiders, living in a web of connections. They are sensitive to any changes that may occur in this web.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily have to enjoy social interaction or people as a whole, but it is their way of keeping track of the world and identifying any crucial changes that happen within their world. They adapt accordingly and feel the need to keep up with all the points on the web in order to continue doing so.
> 
> ...


Huge thumbs up to this. 



> The self-preservation instinct is basic enough to be simultaneously easy and difficult to understand. It's a very general term- self-preservation. I think that is the ultimate goal of every instinct. The difference is the sp types get to the root of the problem, unlike sx and soc.
> 
> Sp is less about energy and more about *resources*. Conserving and hoarding resources + energy, building defenses, etc. To some extent, sx and soc seek protection from the world and from others. However, sp gathers resources in order to protect itself alone. That's not to say that sp types don't need other people. All humans do, to some extent. However, when sp types find people to survive with, they seem to have a way of internalizing them. *They become part of their resources and almost a part of themselves- a sort of self-contained unit. Self-preservation types never cease to be inherently self-reliant*, but they certain are capable of relying on others if they believe it will benefit them.
> 
> ...


Huge thumbs up to this too, having observed my Sp-dom partner for years. Bolded is mine and what I find most striking/compelling. My SO ensures that he always has what he will need. If he doesn't, it causes him great stress, even if he's not really going to perish immediately without it. That ranges from clean clothes to money. He regularly stays up late into the night doing laundry but then he'll get stressed that he hasn't gotten enough sleep. He always feels tired on Mondays even when he hasn't had a hard day, just by virtue of the cognitive load of it being a new workweek, which I think is fascinating. It's true somaticization. He also is one of few people I know who really always has his shit together. He's always on time. Always in proper dress. Always has his keys. Always has gas in his tank. Etc. But that's also at the price of sort of freaking out about those things before they deplete - filling his tank after only using a half, having a strict routine in the morning, and so on. I lose my keys a lot more but feel stress about it basically never. I know where the extra keys are - in a designated place in the organized and secure house owned by my Sp/Soc mom and Sp/Sx dad :laughing:



hope whispers said:


> When I think sp my mind brings up an image like:


Sp to me makes me think of someone in a hotel room, they adjust their own thermostat, big plush bed, newly washed (hopefully!!!) sheets, room service available, maybe a mini bar, double locks on the door, a "do not disturb" sign, coffee maker in the bathroom, mini travel toiletries in the shower - everything you need to live, right there. One self-contained unit that sustains life. Lots of small options/adjustments/decisions available for how to tune it all just right for your comfort. And a bill slipped under the door, because resource exchange.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Edit: posted by accident


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

hope whispers said:


> But yeah, between fire, sun, and moonlight I'd take moonlight)


I would take moonlight too, but because it's the most intimate. It closes everything else out and shows you only what it shines on.
Then I would take fire, then the sun. Sun is boring, even though it's a friggin ball of fire.


----------



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

hope whispers said:


> I was thinking about being behind a glass wall as a possible analogy for sp, and maybe that's how I feel) But it's like there's a gauzy curtain all around me and I usually stay within it not because I especially want to but because it's what occurs to me, but sometimes I remember oh! step outside the curtain it'll be fine! and then it's better than expected)


Yes, I think "behind a glass wall" works for how I can often feel. And a lot of the time I don't actually _mind_ this, though sometimes I can feel sad about the thought of what I might be missing out on. 

My SO actually told me he got a similar impression, that there are these walls around me that you can't reach through even if you can see through them. At the same time I often feel/worry that I might be coming across too strong when I interact with someone, so it has surprised me a bit that I can give the opposite impression. But I noticed my approach is maybe not that intimate, because with my SO for example, it was more like I was seeing him as an "interesting case" than... however else you can see someone, and this kind of thing doesn't seem rare for me.



> Writing, too) I usually have characters who sit around doing nothing, even when I have a plot...it's, like, nothing) And then I encounter other media that goes all the way and only then do I realize 'oh that's how it should be'


Lol, I think my characters might be too passive, but that's because I find it difficult to describe actions and make events flow well, while it's easier to describe their thoughts and feels... and dialogue. =P

Also, even though I can actually enjoy some... pretty dramatic stuff (you probably have some idea based on the music I tend to like), I find it awkward to write something like that myself, like I get too self-conscious.

(At least I don't think my writing is very dramatic as is, it's probably more dramatic in my head, though I enjoy writing some angst. =P But it's similar with my responses on the forum for example, they often end up so toned-down from what I was originally thinking. Might be better when IMing, because I respond somewhat more spontaneously then.)



> As well as this 'it happened but we're skipping it because it was boring ok so five years later...'


That's beautiful. :')



Moderately Nefarious said:


> Not the moon??? :shocked:
> To me it looks like really bright moon


Well I think in the scene it's still daytime, but of course with the picture you can interpret it as you want since it's not just literal anyway. :tongue: (But I think the character himself probably wants the sunlight)

I also wish I never had to sleep. :/ Also I would use to avoid the sun because I thought it was nice to be pale (also because I didn't want to sweat, but).



hope whispers said:


> edit: for instance I hear sp equated with longing; I don't know what to make of that)


Longing, hm. I'm not sure I'm especially prone to _longing_ compared to other people, though I can have this sense of never having enough, or fear that I don't, or... feeling deprived or like I might be deprived. For example I would often dream about being in a store or mall, but not having enough money for what I wanted. Probably helps that I often felt I didn't have enough money when I was younger, though I didn't exactly struggle with poverty. But it's not just about money, of course, but resources in general. 

Maybe Sp can result in longing because it must always hold a bit of itself back. Although some Sps can be more "dauntless" lol.

And now I'm reminded of this song again, though I'm not entirely sure what I would type this:




(Damn, it's been a while. I almost forgot how nice this song is.)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

oh the irony said:


> I would take moonlight too, but because it's the most intimate. It closes everything else out and shows you only what it shines on.
> Then I would take fire, then the sun. Sun is boring, even though it's a friggin ball of fire.


Random, but I'm really enjoying your presence on this forum.
I've only read a couple of your posts yet somehow it feels like you've been here since forever.
And I like your avatar.

This post reminded me, because you are moonligh-ish, I'd associate you with moolight too)


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

angelfish said:


> Sp to me makes me think of someone in a hotel room, they adjust their own thermostat, big plush bed, newly washed (hopefully!!!) sheets, room service available, maybe a mini bar, double locks on the door, a "do not disturb" sign, coffee maker in the bathroom, mini travel toiletries in the shower - everything you need to live, right there. One self-contained unit that sustains life. Lots of small options/adjustments/decisions available for how to tune it all just right for your comfort. And a bill slipped under the door, because resource exchange.


I really like this description! (and I really like being in a hotel room )
I guess my question (not for you specifically, just general question) is...is it true for every type? For instance...it stands to reason that head types, maybe gut types, would operate like this but for heart types for instance, are the resources being conserved and such literal physical resources? And how aware is the sp type of this focus? I mean, I am sure no one goes to sleep thinking about how they are going to change the temperature in the morning, I don't see how it can compete with so and sx in this sense. I mean I'm not sure how the balance is; it seems like a little sp has to go a long way in instinctual stackings but on the other hand...idk...everyone uses sp a little...

______________________________________

I think I've somehow confused myself about the instincts. For instance, in @Eclipsed 's post, which I like, it still all sounds like self-preservation to me. I get that as a species we're programmed to preserve ourselves but I can't relate to the idea of forging connections, social or sexual, in order to stay safe or gain power or any of that, and I don't understand why _that's_ not self-preservation; in fact many of the things that seem most clearly self-pres to me seem to actually be sexual or social and that puzzles me, so many things in this system seem counter-intuitive, for instance I don't understand why pursuing a career in order to make money is sx/so or so/sx, not sp, for instance this song feels self-pres because it's all about, basically, getting more things, not being hungry anymore, being opportunistic, etc. 







* *





I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
I'm 'a get a scholarship to King's College
I prob'ly shouldn't brag, but dag, I amaze and astonish
The problem is I got a lot of brains but no polish
I gotta holler just to be heard
With every word, I drop knowledge
I'm a diamond in the rough, a shiny piece of coal
Tryin' to reach my goal my power of speech, unimpeachable
Only nineteen but my mind is older
These New York City streets get colder, I shoulder
Every burden, every disadvantage
I have learned to manage, I don't have a gun to brandish
I walk these streets famished
The plan is to fan this spark into a flame
But damn, it's getting dark, so let me spell out the name
I am the A-L-E-X-A-N-D-E-R we are meant to be
A colony that runs independently
Meanwhile, Britain keeps shittin' on us endlessly
Essentially, they tax us relentlessly
Then King George turns around, runs a spending spree
He ain't ever gonna set his descendants free
So there will be a revolution in this century
Enter me, he says in parentheses
Don't be shocked when your hist'ry book mentions me
I will lay down my life if it sets us free
Eventually, you'll see my ascendancy
And I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
It's time to take a shot
I dream of life without a monarchy
The unrest in France will lead to onarchy?
Onarchy how you say, how you say, anarchy?
When I fight, I make the other side panicky
With my, shot
Yo, I'm a tailor's apprentice
And I got y'all knuckleheads in loco parentis
I'm joining the rebellion 'cause I know it's my chance
To socially advance, instead of sewin' some pants
I'm gonna take a shot
But we'll never be truly free
Until those in bondage have the same rights as you and me
You and I. Do or die. Wait till I sally in
On a stallion with the first black battalion
Have another shot
Geniuses, lower your voices
You keep out of trouble and you double your choices
I'm with you, but the situation is fraught
You've got to be carefully taught
If you talk, you're gonna get shot
Burr, check what we got
Mister Lafayette, hard rock like Lancelot
I think your pants look hot
Laurens, I like you a lot
Let's hatch a plot blacker than the kettle callin' the pot
What are the odds the gods would put us all in one spot
Poppin' a squat on conventional wisdom, like it or not
A bunch of revolutionary manumission abolitionists?
Give me a position, show me where the ammunition is
Oh, am I talkin' too loud?
Sometimes I get over excited, shoot off at the mouth
I never had a group of friends before
I promise that I'll make y'all proud
Let's get this guy in front of a crowd
I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
Everybody sing
Whoa, whoa, whoa
Hey, whoa, whoa, whoa
Ay, let 'em hear ya
Let's go
Whoa, whoa, whoa I said shout it to the rooftops
Whoa, whoa, whoa said, to the rooftops
Whoa, whoa, whoa come on
Come on, let's go
Rise up
When you're living on your knees, you rise up
Tell your brother that he's gotta rise up
Tell your sister that she's gotta rise up
When are these colonies gonna rise up?
When are these colonies gonna rise up?
When are these colonies gonna rise up?
When are these colonies gonna rise up?
Rise up
I imagine death so much it feels more like a memory
When's it gonna get me?
In my sleep, seven feet ahead of me?
If I see it comin', do I run or do I let it be?
Is it like a beat without a melody?
See, I never thought I'd live past twenty
Where I come from some get half as many
Ask anybody why we livin' fast and we laugh, reach for a flask
We have to make this moment last, that's plenty
Scratch that this is not a moment, it's the movement
Where all the hungriest brothers with something to prove went?
Foes oppose us, we take an honest stand
We roll like Moses, claimin' our promised land
And? If we win our independence?
'Zat a guarantee of freedom for our descendants?
Or will the blood we shed begin an endless cycle of vengeance and death with no defendants?
I know the action in the street is excitin'
But Jesus, between all the bleedin' 'n fightin'
I've been readin' 'n writin'
We need to handle our financial situation
Are we a nation of states what's the state of our nation?
I'm past patiently waitin' I'm passionatelymashin' every expectation
Every action's an act of creation
I'm laughin' in the face of casualties and sorrow
For the first time, I'm thinkin' past tomorrow
And I am not throwing away my shot
I am not throwing away my shot
Hey yo, I'm just like my country
I'm young, scrappy and hungry
And I'm not throwing away my shot
We're gonna rise up (time to take a shot)
We're gonna rise up (time to take a shot)
We're gonna, rise up, rise up
It's time to take a shot
Rise up, rise up, it's time to take a shot
Rise up, it's time to take a shot
Rise up, take a shot, shot, shot
It's time to take a shot, time to take a shot
And I am not throwing away my shot
Not throwing away my shot












All this seems sp > so and definitely > sx but I don't see people talking about it like that, I don't get it, people talk about this (or things like this) as so/sx but...I mean, I see the so but it's sp-based so

Or Les Mis style songs feel self-pres as well, I mean all this:










...all feels incredibly sp(/so) to me. For instance, I'd think that with sx and so, there would be more about...loving their country, but there's none of that in any of this, it's just about getting more bread, getting more rights, which is important of course, not wanting to discredit that, but it still seems...I don't understand how all that isn't automatically self-pres.

Versus...I can't think of any good example that's not kinda political...first thing that came to mind would be this...feels more so/sx or sx/so to me, "I loved this country but I couldn't pay my taxes, also they burned down our house, so that's another reason I left, couldn't leave you there, grow up and avenge it". 


* *









O, Father dear, I oft times here, you speak of Erin's Isle,
Her lofty scenes, her valleys green, her mountains rude and wild
They say it tis a lovely place, wherein in a saint might dwell,
so why did you abandon it, the reason to me tell?

Oh son I loved my native land, with energy and pride
'Til a blight came over on my prats, my sheep and cattle died,
The rent and taxes were so high, I could not them redeem,
And that's the cruel reason why, I left old Skibbereen.

Oh, It's well I do remember, that bleak December day,
The landlord and the sheriff came, to drive us all away
They set my roof on fire, with their cursed English spleen
And that's another reason why, I left old Skibbereen.

Your mother too, God rest her soul, fell on the snowy ground,
She fainted in her anguish, seeing the desolation all round.
She never rose, but passed away, from life to immortal dream,
She found a quiet grave, my boy, in dear old Skibbereen.

And you were only two years old, and feeble was your frame,
I could not leave you with your friends, you bore your father's name,
I wrapped you in my cota mior, in the dead of night unseen
I heaved a sigh, and said goodbye, to dear old Skibbereen

O' father dear, the day will come, when answer to the call
all Irish men of Freedom Stern, will rally one and all
I'll be the man to lead the band, beneath the flag of green
loud and clear, we'll raise a cheer , remember Skibbereen




Sorry, overly long, I don't know, I'm confused about the instincts, _especially_ self-pres, it all feels counterintuitive and not just 'oh that's actually smart' counterintuitive, just...counterintuitive to the point of me being completely lost))


Moderately Nefarious said:


> Edit: posted by accident


What was it?  


Distortions said:


> Longing, hm. I'm not sure I'm especially prone to _longing_ compared to other people, though I can have this sense of never having enough, or fear that I don't, or... feeling deprived or like I might be deprived. For example I would often dream about being in a store or mall, but not having enough money for what I wanted. Probably helps that I often felt I didn't have enough money when I was younger, though I didn't exactly struggle with poverty. But it's not just about money, of course, but resources in general.
> 
> Maybe Sp can result in longing because it must always hold a bit of itself back. Although some Sps can be more "dauntless" lol.
> 
> ...


This song feel social for some reason to me) I really like Bastille, though I haven't listened to any of their songs)

This is another counterintuitive thing for me, I guess) I don't get why longing wouldn't be sx) And then sometimes so or sp, for specific things (longing for a country, longing for a better life). People long for other individual people, not that much for groups or...self-oriented things)

Sorry, not trying to rant, just thinking if I get all my thoughts out there I can reach some clarity) This has been frustrating me for a while)


----------



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

@hope whispers
Well, I don't disagree with you. At least most of it.


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

@hope whispers something about sp, don't remember anymore.
I meant to write more but idk what to say, I feel like you're misunderstanding something when it comes to sp/instincts, I don't know what exactly


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> That one represents painful regret to me and the longing and suffering that comes from that. Especially when the blame is on oneself.
> 
> I guess I just find more of a nuance with the feelings. Not stereotypical for someone who's dominant type is 5. :shocked:





enneathusiast said:


> I just went and listened to that for the first time on YouTube. That is a great blending of both lyrics and musical elements. Maybe the best written song I've heard for the stage (not that I've heard a lot).


The phantom himself is a 5w4 Sx/So, by my estimation. Look at the lyrics here where he sings about wanting to overpower Christine through the use of his mind... and she would be his "voice" while he pulls the strings from behind the scenes. How much more 5 can you get????

Christine:
In sleep he sang to me
In dreams he came
That voice which calls to me
And speaks my name
And do I dream again
For now I find
The Phantom of the Opera is there
Inside my mind

Phantom:
Sing once again with me
Our strange duet
My power over you
Grows stronger yet
And though you turn from me
To glance behind
The Phantom of the Opera is there
Inside your mind

Christine:
Those who have seen your face
Draw back in fear
I am the mask you wear

Phantom:
It's me they hear

Both:
My/your spirit and your/my voice
In one combined
The Phantom of the Opera is there
Inside your/my mind

Offstage:
He's there the Phantom of the Opera!

Phantom:
In all your fantasies
You always knew
That man and mystery

Christine:
Were both in you

Both:
And in this labyrinth
Where night is blind
The Phantom of the Opera is there
Inside your/my mind

Christine:
He's there, the Phantom of the Opera!
(Vocalizing)

Phantom:
Sing, my angel of music!

Christine:
(Vocalizing higher)

Phantom:
Sing for me!

Christine:
(Vocalizing higher)

Phantom:
Sing my angel of music!

Christine:
(Sings higher)

Phantom:
SING FOR ME!

Phantom:
I have brought you
To the seat of sweet music's throne
To this kingdom where all must pay homage to music
Music.
You have come here
For one purpose and one alone
Since the moment I first heard you sing
I have needed you with me to serve me
To sing for my music





---


5s can be very passionate about music. Look at Chopin. It's so underestimated. I would never have mistyped at 5 otherwise.  And I've noticed 5s are the type generally as sensitive to the nuance in feeling as 4s, when it comes to music. I'm very very picky about this. The phantom as a Sx 5 archetype is really perfect, being a musical genius and writing with such nuance and all for the sake of controlling this woman's mind with his brilliance and talent. 

Another brilliant real 5 is Trent Reznor. Sp/Sx. I would not say many could match his rhythmic nuances, the blends of sounds he uses in production. He makes the hairs on my arms stand up every time. Though there are other musicians I listen to more often, because NIN is really like a drug to me in a specific type of mood... and it was my staple during my most trauamatic time - I will readily say that Trent Reznor is the most nuanced, brilliant producer in the rock/industrial genre. He doesn't overdo the drums like many industrial artists; every sound is there to create a scathing and pronounced emotion, however subtle. And even when you strip away his brilliant production, you're still left with layers of melodies and rhythms that are absolutely unique to him and downright impossible to copy. I can cover most songs after hearing it once and figuring out the chords... if I have a chord chart in front of me I can even transpose it while playing it for the first time. Trent's songs however, are beyond my capacity. I could do an electronic or piano cover I guess but the amount of time it would take would be overwhelming whereas most other artists - even those I love and worship like Jeff Martin - I can still cover their songs by ear without even looking at a chord chart or taking much time to figure it out.








> For me, I'd have to name best songs by genre because I'd be looking for different things in each and comparing to other songs within each.


Well yeah I agree with this. But it's not that hard for me to admit that in terms of pure composing and lyrics..that is simply the best one. Although I get what you mean about genres; I have favorites in many genres too.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Oh, @*enneathusiast*
I don't know which tracks you found, but it's hard to find decent Phantoms.. they usually get people with these thin, flaky voices. This guy is spectacular!











^ This is also a great song. The context is he casts her as the lead in this show, and then he kills the guy who is supposed to sing the show with her. And he steps into the scene and seduces her on stage with this song they sing together, and then he steals her away to his dungeon....


--

Anyone who says Andrew Lloyd Weber is anything less than a genius of magnificent proportions is a plebian fool. Lol. I hate a lot of Broadway shows, and I can't stand some of the uppityflashy dancy shows either. But anyone who has heard Phantom and still holds the opinion that Weber is 'basic' ... immediately loses my respect and becomes sub-human in my eyes.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> @hope whispers something about sp, don't remember anymore.
> I meant to write more but idk what to say, I feel like you're misunderstanding something when it comes to sp/instincts, I don't know what exactly


I feel like I am too but I don't know what it is; I want someone to explain it to me)
As I said the whole thing feels essentially counter-intuitive to me; not sure what the problem is


----------



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

I agree Les Mis seems Sp (or So/Sp) at least. Hamilton... I need to think about.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Animal said:


> Anyone who says Andrew Lloyd Weber is anything less than a genius of magnificent proportions is a plebian fool. Lol. I hate a lot of Broadway shows, and I can't stand some of the uppityflashy dancy shows either. But anyone who has heard Phantom and still holds the opinion that Weber is 'basic' ... immediately loses my respect and becomes sub-human in my eyes.












(Haven't really listened to Norm Lewis but I really like him here! Although...there's something about his voice that I don't quite like, same with Ramin Karimloo, a bit too pronounced or...something. I think I'm always comparing Phantoms to Michael Crawford; to me his silky style of singing matches the Phantom best even if he's ridiculous in everything else. Probably because I heard him first; can't quite break out of that.

I first heard the soundtrack when I was 13, my friend invited me to her house, she had a surround sound system and she made the room completely dark so we were just sitting in the dark surrounded by the music. It was magical :lovekitty: Best musical experience ever. My heart almost stopped at this moment (though I thought she said 'beautiful creature of darkness which is better'...)










And then I got the CD and proceeded to listen to it and only it on repeat for about a year, lol
I remember pressing the CD player to my ear for Music of the Night, trying to be completely close to the music and fully internalize it, apparently never having heard of headphones at that point in my life


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Distortions said:


> I agree Les Mis seems Sp (or So/Sp) at least. Hamilton... I need to think about.


Notre Dame...sx/so, perhaps?





(Victor Hugo himself seems like he must have been social-first, I think?)

This song is so haunting, maybe it has a bit of a sp flavor, if haunting = sp 





edit: Or maybe it's sp, all about things being destroyed, the old world, etc


----------



## Eclipsed (Jun 3, 2012)

hope whispers said:


> I think I've somehow confused myself about the instincts. For instance, in @*Eclipsed* 's post, which I like, it still all sounds like self-preservation to me. I get that as a species we're programmed to preserve ourselves but I can't relate to the idea of forging connections, social or sexual, in order to stay safe or gain power or any of that, and I don't understand why _that's_ not self-preservation; in fact many of the things that seem most clearly self-pres to me seem to actually be sexual or social and that puzzles me, so many things in this system seem counter-intuitive, for instance I don't understand why pursuing a career in order to make money is sx/so or so/sx, not sp, for instance this song feels self-pres because it's all about, basically, getting more things, not being hungry anymore, being opportunistic, etc.


I think that perhaps you are conflating the widely used definition of self-preservation with the self-preservation instinct. They are not the same. I think you raise a good point in saying the sp can be related to forging connections in order to survive, though.

The difference between sp and the two other instincts is that the other two have very specific compulsions, while sp does not. They'll adapt to their social environment if it is necessary to their survival, but it's not an obsession for them. Soc nervously keeps track of connections all the time, while sp does not have this same sort of sensitivity. It's more of a "as the need arises" sort of self-defense mechanism.

Also, something I didn't mention because I am concerned with how simplistic it sounds, is yeah, sp-doms are very attuned to their own safety and comfort.

My partner has a lot of sp, and is constantly worrying about natural disaster threats (because it is applicable to the area he lives in), is very attuned to the environment and sources of comfort/happiness. Overall, I think people with the sp instinct are just very good at taking care of themselves and getting comfortable.

It's not entirely that simple though, since I'm an sp-last seven and relate to that to some extent. However, the difference is that I can go very long stretches ignoring my physical needs, such as hunger, sleep, thirst, etc. I haven't seen this in anyone who isn't sp-last. I'm not good at taking care of myself or keeping out of harm's way. Obviously I can do this on some level, but I'm not preoccupied with keeping myself safe or comfortable. It's not a fixation for me. I enjoy stimulation and seek to have "fun" but this doesn't require me to be comfortable.

And that is pretty much how I see the instincts: the first is a compulsion, the second is something one is good at but not obsessed with doing, and the last is a blindspot, even an insecurity. When I try to focus on things like keeping track of my finances or doing menial things that I need to do to survive, I get very anxious and believe I am doing it all wrong.

I am not at all neurotic otherwise or concerned about these things unless I absolutely have to do them. In my experience, sp-doms and sp-seconds are not as paranoid about these things as I am. They simply get it done and that's something I really envy, because I am recently losing sleep over worrying whether or not I've accepted my university offer correctly even though it obvious that I have :bored:


----------



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

hope whispers said:


> Notre Dame...sx/so, perhaps?


Overall it does seem Sx/So to me, yeah.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

I think I'm Sx/SpSo/Sx. I don't have major soc or sp related problems or things that I totally fail at, but my Sx is neurotic on top of neurotic.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Animal said:


> I think I'm Sx/SpSo/Sx. I don't have major soc or sp related problems or things that I totally fail at, but my Sx is neurotic on top of neurotic.


Speaking of relative instinct strengths, did you ever see this page? 

Typewatch Instinct Ranges

It's pretty chaotic/detailed/just a lot in general but I think it has some interesting insights.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

angelfish said:


> Speaking of relative instinct strengths, did you ever see this page?
> 
> Typewatch Instinct Ranges
> 
> It's pretty chaotic/detailed/just a lot in general but I think it has some interesting insights.


YES. I love this! There is a cleaned up version here:


Socionics - the16types.info - The Three Ranges of Instinctual Stackings


I would be one of the ones with "Sx heavy" - I could see both fireside or seducer, tbh.

Edit:

I just saw this in the longer link you provided, @*angelfish*



> example, say a marilyn monroe who is perceived as hypersexualized, yet was fairly passive in a seductive style or 'yin mode' of drawing a pursuer rather than doing the pursuing. a sx/so would tend to act in the yang or pursuing role. same game but different roles.


Based on this I would be Sx/So, although I would never base it on something so trite.. I need the deeper concepts. But I'm very aggressive. In crush situations, I try to get what I want out of it but without being too direct; convincing the guy that he's the one going after me, obsessing etc; I don't want someone to just settle for me because I'm easy. But it's not natural for me and makes me suck at seducing, to be in that position that I put myself in because of my fear of rejection. 

Naturally, I am not passive in any way, shape or form. Making a first move is not my thing because I don't want to be rejected and I'm neurotic about it. However when I see the green light, I stomp HARD. Once. I will not be rejected twice, period. I struggled a lot with even allowing myself to be rejected once, let alone vulnerable in any way, but it was so unnatural for me to operate that way, and I kept ending up with aggressive guys instead of the sweeter guys that I was really into. My relationships started working out better in my late 20s and early 30s when I learned when to pounce.

I've always been known to have strong masculine energy in general without being "unfeminine." I am not generally mysterious or hard to read. I'm straight forward, and when I can't be, because for instance I'm ashamed of the power of my feelings and obsession with someone so I am trying to act like that's not a thing, or he's just "one of the crowd.." I behave very awkwardly. I am much more comfortable in an aggressive position. In relationships I am usually more of the aggressor when it comes to initiating what we will do , what we will eat, sex, or whatever. Although I love a challenge and a man who can match me and not tumble over at my energy. My husband loves my aggression and he has it in him when he needs it, to take charge or take me down if he's stepped on; I can't stand romantic relationships with wilting flowers. I need someone who can be my equal in relationships, meaning, he is not put off by my aggression because he has a spine of his own, but he doesn't need to make a show out of his aggression in order to feel like a man - he is a man because he's himself and that is enough. I like REAL confidence, not shows of aggression. For me, shows of passiveness or mysteriousness are NOT confidence; it comes from fear of rejection. My aggression runs through me naturally, so when I'm my true confident self, that's who I am. I need someone who is himself, but is an opposite to me ( a yin to my yang, if you will).

I'll point out aggression is not the same as anger. I don't have an anger problem. I'm just forceful with what I want in the moment.

My husband is more mysterious, distant and hard to read - with most people - although with me he's very open. He doesn't need to be in charge or make 'first moves' and he's not threatened by my power or strength.. he is comfortable with his feminine side, his emotions, and also his own strength, even though it's more of a silent strength. I'd say he wears the pants in a way; it's always the outwardly submissive one who controls the dominant.. you know, like how you think you own your cat, but really, your cat owns you.

I could never submit - in a heartfelt way - to a man who was more aggressive outwardly than I am. I need balance. I need someone equally strong in himself, but who does not naturally fill the "aggressor" or "leader" role.... who can seduce and allure me with his beauty and open heart, but who I don't have to worry about "accidentally walking all over" because I know that if push comes to shove, he will assert his needs, and he will not put up with any bullshit from anyone - including me. And that is my husband.


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Sometimes I get baffled by the amount of connections most people I know make.

Like with Facebook, for example. Nearly all of my Facebook "friends" have dozens of other friends who I've never seen or heard of. Seriously, how do people even do this? If I did this, I'd be much more popular in the social sphere. (Not that popularity's essential to my happiness, but still.) However, doing that will be taxing for my energy.

Then I realized something: they compete in team sports. Go to church. Hang out at the rec center. Attend parties filled to the brim with people. Anything and everything that can be defined as "socializing."

So in other words, I'm a social moth. :laughin:


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> Sometimes I get baffled by the amount of connections most people I know make.
> 
> Like with Facebook, for example. Nearly all of my Facebook "friends" have dozens of other friends who I've never seen or heard of. Seriously, how do people even do this? If I did this, I'd be much more popular in the social sphere. (Not that popularity's essential to my happiness, but still.) However, doing that will be taxing for my energy.
> 
> ...


OT:

* *





I have 31 Facebook friends :laughing:
In my defense, I just started a new account in January because my old one had so many humiliating things on it
wish I could do that with PerC
I also have a rule that I don't send friend requests; I only accept them)
Strangely, I have a lot of friend requests from (Arabic?) people I do not know; I wonder if I have a name buddy somewhere (I think Adel is a male name in Arabic??). Never had that on my old account))
accidentally friended one
I think I'll just friend them all and build my friend count; maybe people will think I'm cool))













On topic: yeah, I know what you mean) I wonder if the social instinct is particularly good at this kind of thing? I know I always feel like I'm magically out of the loop...


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> Sometimes I get baffled by the amount of connections most people I know make.
> 
> Like with Facebook, for example. Nearly all of my Facebook "friends" have dozens of other friends who I've never seen or heard of. Seriously, how do people even do this? If I did this, I'd be much more popular in the social sphere. (Not that popularity's essential to my happiness, but still.) However, doing that will be taxing for my energy.
> 
> ...





Phoenix Virtue said:


> OT:
> 
> * *
> 
> ...


Looks can be deceiving. I have thousands of facebook friends - most of whom I don't know at all. I activated facebook initially to promote my music and announce shows. Friends of friends, fans, etc, added me, and then as it grew I got a lot of random requests too, and so I have all these friends. How many I know in person- not that many. And how many I actually talk to ever?? Less than 20. (And by 20 I mean, one "hey how are you?" every year, from most of them.) I am part of an enneagram group on facebook and I interact there just as I do on perc, and those people, as well as complete strangers, add me and comment on my posts. So it looks like I know everyone in the world but in reality I barely leave the house.


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Wow there is not a lot about sx/so on that list)) seems like whoever was writing it got bored))

They seem more useful for identifying other people's stackings than your own. Hard to see myself in any of those descriptions, at least.

edit: Not related, just a spare thought that was partially sparked by something on this thread so I figured I'd put it here even though it's not really related to instincts, sorry

But mm...would it be typical for head types to be a little 'better' in a way at emotions that heart types, or just 2s?

There was the conversation about music with @enneathusiast, @Animal mentioned that sx 5s tend to be very keen on identifying emotional nuance of music; thought it was interesting because I had a VERY similar conversation with another sx 5 on this forum; I shared a few links and I was corrected on what emotions the songs were actually conveying)) 










(I speak lightly, I find these conversations interesting)

But I notice something...different, but similar, I think connected to the same thing, with my 6w7 father, for instance today he showed me and my brother this song:


* *














And he warned us beforehand that it was going to be achingly beautiful, and after showing it to us he asked, "Isn't that just achingly beautiful?" and...obviously the polite, only possible response would be to say "Yes! It is achingly beautiful!" but I found that it would be an uncomfortable exchange of emotions, especially since I had been unable to emotionally process the song without my dad looking over to see if I was liking it as much as I should, and I didn't want to lie, so I just said, "Well, I don't know, but it's nice" like a jerk 

Basically, I find really direct exchanges of emotion very uncomfortable and almost impossible, and I _really_ notice it with my dad, who I'm _sure_ is a 6 (if not 6, 7) because he seems to really like that) And I tend to think of him as not that great at emotional nuance, but goodness knows what he thinks of me, in terms of that))

I'm kinda wondering if it would go against 2 for me, but I kinda think not, 2 seems right for me despite that. But I encounter this a lot with head types, I've had it on this website a bit, somehow it is very difficult to communicate my emotions to them partly because something quite direct is expected, that I cannot quite muster up the wherewithal to do. Also 4s a little (though it's possible that they were actually 7s). 

And I realize that emotional directness and emotional nuance are not the same thing) I guess they'd fall under the banner of being generally 'better at emotions' in a certain way (I still feel like in an absolute sort of way I'm 'better at emotions' than most head types, though obviously that's a silly thing to measure)

I mean, my friends who are heart types, we talk about nothing but emotions, really, but not very...directly. I don't know if a head type would notice that that's what we were doing :/ But idk this might not be related

This is probably not a thing, but now I've typed all this and I am curious if anyone has an answer to this jumble of nothing)

OT, kinda funny, just because the spark for this thing was on this thread:


* *





edit ii: update, I now have 48 FB friends)) And a bunch of wall posts and comments on things in Arabic (but pictures in Arabic so I can't use a translator :frustrating that seem nice btw, the ones I was able to figure out) I don't speak Arabic)

I regret this decision to suddenly friend everyone, who I don't know, as well as the way I haven't learned Arabic in all this time I've been alive, it would be useful at this point) i mean i tried once but it didn't go anywhere

This is exactly the reason I try to be so strict with myself about speaking reasonable amounts of all the major languages) It's like my main thing) I want to be able to politely adapt to every situation) Seems head type-ish but it's essentially about politeness for me, perhaps a social 2 thing)

But I failed) And also I haven't properly studied a language for years so that's not a big surprise




And thus concludes my incoherent ramblings) I will now limit my posts to concrete things about instincts, if they happen to come up) Sorry, post-happy today)


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Moderately Nefarious said:


> Random, but I'm really enjoying your presence on this forum.
> I've only read a couple of your posts yet somehow it feels like you've been here since forever.
> And I like your avatar.
> 
> This post reminded me, because you are moonligh-ish, I'd associate you with moolight too)


Random words of kindness are the best. Thank you sweets 
In all honesty, I have been here since forever. Just took a big break and came back with a fresh profile. Before I hanged in the MBTI forum but that's over, I'm obsessed with enneagram now.


----------



## Philathea (Feb 16, 2015)

I found an old post I made awhile ago on being sx-last:



> "Are you Sx-last and long for a close relationship with someone?"..
> 
> I am sx-last, I'm pretty sure. Definitely an area of neglect. For the most part, on a daily basis, I don't long for a close relationship. I've never sought one out and I don't plan to. So, I can't say it's something that bothers me much. But unlike the other instinctual blindspots, I feel as though being sx-last carries a heavier weight.
> 
> Desiring to connect with others is a universal desire. You can say that so is longing for security or "status" and you'd be right, but I think that fostering a deep connection with another person is.. different. The fact is, no matter what your stacking, most people would agree that relationships are more important than status or even stable financial matters, because there is something special about relating to other people and we all know it. Of course sx-lasters can connect with others, but the difficulties and hang-ups and deficiencies associated with it seem to separate you from the rest of humanity on some level.


I don't actually like this post because I was obviously a bit self-pitying when I wrote it and I _hate_ when I get like that. But it was how I honestly felt at the time. (Also, LOL at how I said "it's not something that bothers me much" when it clearly bothers me VERY much.. I'm prideful and I need my denial haha)

EDIT: Forgot to mention: I was still depressed when I wrote this. So a lot of what I was associating with sx-last, was clinical depression. (In particular, feeling isolated from others)


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

periwinklepromise said:


> @*Donovan* So for you, do friendships lack a necessary reciprocity? It sounds like it might be closed specifically on your end. A problem I have in r/s is feeling a sense of closed-ness. I try to rectify that by forcing myself to be open (which of course never works), and I'm trying so hard to be genuine that I always come off as very insincere. And maybe I really am insincere. R/s (for me) lacks the intuitive connection and the organic development I seek. **intuitive and organic are the operative words here. they feel very important, vital**
> 
> I am on this thread because I don't know I'm social. I can see arguments for any, but most of all, I struggle with the placement of the sexual. I often think I relate to people discussing their sexual instinct dominance, but I never feel those things in the situations/context others do.
> 
> ...


you know, i was giving this reply some time. i wanted to wait until i was ready to invest some thought into it, but it's still not there (lol, sorry). 


okay, so you have doubts as to your instincts, so using that a framework isn't good. i don't want to cloud things (as can easily happen with something this esoteric, and that bends so readily to a user's perspective). 
i would say that your encounter, if categorized within the enneagram, seems like a more Sx-related preoccupation. 


and that's a good point to bring up, regardless of what your actual stacking is. people aren't exempt for those experiences based on what their ennea-fodder happens to be, nor (counter-intuitively enough) are they more likely _beyond a shadow of a doubt_, to experience those things more often than another type (re: life experience). 

this can only be done, like any other metric, with encompassing "all" (whatever that means to the user). you have to take into account all the different ways that a person varies (and if you don't, and you just look for what you already know or suspect/"see", then you just reinforce your view of what this is--not to mention life, as any semi-serious user would hold this facet close to sight--and kind of stop learning). 


to me, to really distinguish between Sx and Sx-2nd/3rd, would be to observe people-to-people relations in tandem with normal every day activities within oneself. just capturing a relation to people doesn't necessarily put that experience into either portion of a triad. 
people say to ask "why", "why did you feel a connection to the person/what spurred you on to act or form that connection", but it might be easier if you put that thought along side what you do throughout your day, and maybe think about the "why" of those as well. 
they may align, and if they do, to me you're Sx more so than the other instincts. especially if it's this lack of the "why" in situations where you aren't your normal self around other people; the human element is there, but you don't see a need to bring yourself out. 
even that take is colored by my own perspective though, so take it for what it is. 

i'm sure i'll have more to say later. very, very tired at the moment, .


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

Phoenix Virtue said:


> OT:
> 
> * *
> 
> ...





Animal said:


> Looks can be deceiving. I have thousands of facebook friends - most of whom I don't know at all. I activated facebook initially to promote my music and announce shows. Friends of friends, fans, etc, added me, and then as it grew I got a lot of random requests too, and so I have all these friends. How many I know in person- not that many. And how many I actually talk to ever?? Less than 20. (And by 20 I mean, one "hey how are you?" every year, from most of them.) I am part of an enneagram group on facebook and I interact there just as I do on perc, and those people, as well as complete strangers, add me and comment on my posts. So it looks like I know everyone in the world but in reality I barely leave the house.


Lol, I have about 143 friends, and I probably talk to...zero on a regular basis. Well I do chat with family members outside the country for the holidays, but that's about it. There's a rule I made for myself for Facebook where I won't accept or make any friend requests unless if I know the person before. I definitely had a few strange requests during my time there, but I just delete them. The only reason I'm still on it is because it's one of my main news sources (and admittedly, some of the games there are _so_ addictive). Clearly, it's great for getting in touch with others outside your current realm. It's a skill I'd like to wield, but my neutrality to that kind of stuff gets in the way.
:ninja:


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

To what extent should self-destructive behavior (I mean outside of anything suicidal or whatever, just normal self-destructive behavior) be classified as self-pres? I'm a bit unclear on that. 

I see it in descriptions but I'm never clear on what it means; is it indulging extra hard in things that can kill you, or...?

(Was asking mother how she sees me in terms of instincts and...it was a short conversation, but she said that she sees self-destructive as my default, like I walk into a situation and immediately think "How can I make this _not_ pay off for me?" which...I don't exactly agree with but I see where it's coming from; many things go wrong for me and it's my fault, I'm basically a sitcom character in that sense)

Also said that I don't put out many social connections but then she wasn't sure, and that compared to others I seemed to have a few close friends rather than...not (using one of my best friends as an example: 'she doesn't really have any _close_ friends, does she?' Me: 'me, I thought ' :laughing: though I think I know what she means in terms of this person)

But as I said short conversation, no chance to hear exactly what she meant)) Wondering about the self-destructive thing too, just in general, in my case it might just be something different, but I want to know about the self-destruction=sp phenomenon)


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> Sometimes I get baffled by the amount of connections most people I know make.
> 
> Like with Facebook, for example. Nearly all of my Facebook "friends" have dozens of other friends who I've never seen or heard of. Seriously, how do people even do this? If I did this, I'd be much more popular in the social sphere. (Not that popularity's essential to my happiness, but still.) However, doing that will be taxing for my energy.
> 
> ...


My so/sx friend has made similar observations.

He has been depressed and devoting more time to solitary hobbies, shutting himself in his room for days on end.

Now he has successfully persuaded himself himself of being sp/sx based on not falling into "that crowd" that goes to church, bars and parties, and posts regularly on Facebook.

What is interesting is that he still agonizes about logging into his Facebook account -- the neurosis of his first instinct roots deep and lets itself be known.

Yet, over time, he has persuaded himself of being social-last due to his depression and his literal interpretation of _so_ instinct as "herd-like" socializing, which in reality is not the case.

...

It's interesting how the _so_ instinct can easily slip by a person's awareness and become rejected even when it's primary.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

Scarlet Eyes said:


> Lol, I have about 143 friends, and I probably talk to...zero on a regular basis. Well I do chat with family members outside the country for the holidays, but that's about it. There's a rule I made for myself for Facebook where I won't accept or make any friend requests unless if I know the person before. I definitely had a few strange requests during my time there, but I just delete them. The only reason I'm still on it is because it's one of my main news sources (and admittedly, some of the games there are _so_ addictive). Clearly, it's great for getting in touch with others outside your current realm. It's a skill I'd like to wield, but my neutrality to that kind of stuff gets in the way.
> :ninja:


I don't care about getting in touch with anyone. I use it to promote my music, art etc , and also to raise Lyme awareness. (I have saved lives by doing this, literally.) That's why I accept everyone. I'm annoyed most of the time when they PM me or try to interact outside public threads, but if someone has a life or death question about Lyme I do try to help, or if they want to know more about my music I direct them to where they can see more of my backstory for my concept albums etc. Socializing is only for discussing ideas (like on perc) or for my very close beloved people.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

woups, wrong thread


----------



## periwinklepromise (Jan 26, 2015)

This thread has allowed for so many lessons for me, and I still have so many questions, none of which can be easily articulated


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

I think this is a sign of "counterphobic" So-first.


One of my oldest habits is avoiding interests that would box me in with a certain clique. So for example, I'd avoid wearing all black, heavy chains, or listening to heavy metal or reading Edgar Allan Poe so I wouldn't be thought of as "goth" or "emo." Same applies to every other school-age group that exists. I had no interest in going to the mall or to football games like the jocks and preps. I even avoided feeling too excited about stereotypically "geeky" things so I wouldn't be associated with that subgroup. It's definitely one of my biggest annoyances: being defined by the groups I'm in instead of just being known for myself.


However, I'd be lying if I said I _completely_ ran away from these interests. I like plenty of things that are "typically" gothic, preppy, or nerdy. But I kept those interests hidden for the main point I made in this post. And I'll admit, it's my first instinct to hate something that's immediately popular. Until my curiosity gets the best of me. ;D


Sometimes, I can't help but think that being in groups loses your sense of individuality. Perhaps that's why I feel best when I stand alone. Or with a few people I really value. But when I see someone feel really at home in a belief system, or a group truly focused on changing the world, it's something that I'll always smile at.


----------



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

@Scarlet Eyes
I don't tend to hate things for being popular (though I can feel self-conscious about some stuff), but I relate to wanting to avoid being too stereotypical, or too easy to pigeonhole. Part of why I can be a bit wishy-washy, because I don't want to be too X, but not too Y either, because I just end up being turned into a ridiculous caricature, and I don't want to be an "ideal" either (except for when I do =P but...).

And it goes with the aesthetic thing too, for example, because over time I believe I have aquired a taste for things that are different from what I liked originally, because what I liked seemed too "obvious" in a way. Not that my taste has totally changed, and part of it is that I just enjoy a variety of things too, so I can be indecisive about what I prefer because there are so many things... though at the same time it can be hard to find something I really like too. =P

But also other things, like when I was thinking of how I relate to fire. I can be undecided about which element is most "me" because in a way I don't want to be _any _of them.

Anyway, one thing which I wonder if it's Sp or something else (seems kind of anti-2) is that I take some pride in being selfish. Although there's some mixed feels because I can have some guilt over being such a... parasite, and in a way I feel I should "earn the right" to be selfish, or should have earnt it (heh, 9w1 influence I guess), but ultimately the idea of living for someone or something else just makes me cringe. Of course, anyone who "lives for" someone else still have their selfish reasons to do so as well deep down, but you know...

Although that reminds me I like this song a lot. Not something I relate to/would want to be like, though it is... awe-inspiring? in a way, that she can find such a sense of purpose or meaning in this, though it's not exactly healthy.





For myself, however, I hate the idea of sacrificing myself so I don't really want to find anything that's so meaningful to me that I would want to sacrificing myself for it. >_> (At least until I remember that I'm going to die one day anyway... Then I sort of understand why anyone would want to sacrifice themselves.)


----------



## Darkbloom (Aug 11, 2013)

Btw those childhood messages, can't tell between 2 "You are wanted" and 9 "Your presence matters"
I mean I get the difference, but at the same time wherever I see those message things I always see 9 and think "Oh I relate to this!"
But like...idk if I'd care about being told my presence matters, not sure how to interpret it. You are wanted feels much more personal and significant.
But like, on some even more basic level I can be...I feel like it's easy to bother people, when I was 5 or so I'd spend every other weekend at dad's (and grandparents) place and in the end when I had to go home I often asked grandma "Why do I have to go, am I bothering you?" so I guess I was aware of potentially being a burden, at a very young age.

Which could be heart type too, but also, just generally I have this awareness of some sort of boundaries, space. Imagine everyone having a fence around them and only some people are allowed to cross it. When you touch someone you crossed it. If they return the gesture, you're in and it's ok, if they don't it's just humiliating and awkward.
That's why I tend to not initiate physical contact)
I mean sometimes I do, depends, but difference between me and many others is obvious, especially when I was younger.
When I touch someone for the first time it almost physically feels like pushing through some sort of barrier first.
Touch is just an example, it's just generally awareness of everyone having their space, their things, their everything, and I might not be welcome, just being there might be a problem. I can purposely violate boundaries sometimes but I just _hate_ the idea of doing it without realizing.
It can also be a bit like...say, imagine someone building a sandcastle and you joining them, and you ruin it. The thought is just really uncomfortable.
Which is I guess related to the money thing I talked about much earlier, I love relationships where there are no those things, where what happens to people's sandcastles doesn't matter.

_________________________________________________
So, SP-ish?
Or actually 9 or something else?


@Phoenix Virtue I remember you saying some things that sounded a bit similar to what I sometimes feel, I don't know how similar what I described is to what you said, there's more I feel, can't think of it atm, but it reminded me a bit.


----------



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

@Moderately Nefarious
Not sure if it's exactly the same, but I think I can feel something like that.

But yeah, I was thinking about those childhood messages, and I'm not sure what to make of the one for 9. Tried to think of a better message for 9, but then I don't entirely know why it currently is as it is either, so... It sounds weird though.


----------



## Rose for a Heart (Nov 14, 2011)

(deleted)


----------



## Dangerose (Sep 30, 2014)

Distortions said:


> @*Phoenix Virtue*
> Well, I don't mean that I actually feel empty inside, so much as thinking that if I wasn't, I wouldn't be struggling with boredom.
> 
> How I actually feel when I'm bored is... well, I'm not that bored right now (yet), but it's like I'm losing my mind basically.


Yeah, I can relate to that)
I mean, I go stir-crazy really easily, and that definitely makes me _act_ like a person literally losing her mind...

Boredom too, but maybe on a different level)

Idk, I don't know what I'm saying anymore) Too tired perhaps)

Goodnight))


----------



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

@*Phoenix Virtue*
Although boredom can easily make it feel like everything is really meaningless, I find. Well, that depends on the type of boredom too. In general it's like this total lack of inspiration and wonder, though. It can make it feel like the world is empty in a way, like everything is so ugly and plain. Of course, then I can ask myself what feeling this way or seeing things that way says about me, like I must be lacking something when I'm not able to find more wonder in things. That's gotten worse over time, so it felt like it was just part of growing up, like as I grow older my "soul" is also dying. Meanwhile, though, some seem to have this really interesting way of seeing the world and are still able to retain that feeling of wonder even as they grow older. Then I feel ashamed of having such a boring mind in comparison, etc. =P

And yeah, the feeling of boredom can be really maddening in the worst way. I can also easily get so desperate, which can often make me act really desperate too against my better judgement. But it's hard to keep it together when the walls are closing in on me.

But yeah, night.


----------

