# Can someone explain the dis/integration thing?



## Zefera (May 31, 2011)

I am specifically curious as to why the enneagram puts emphasis on healthy and unhealthy versions of the types appearing like other types? Like, for example, why a disintegrating 5 will look like an unhealthy 7? I guess I wanna know why it uses different types to explain the behaviour.
I hope this makes sense, I don't know how I could clarify my question further..


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

The most fundamental reason: Enneagram theory wants to remind you that there's no way out. There's no type that's inherently better than any other, and no type will let you pop out of the enneagram, because they're all linked. On a more superficial level, it seems to fit logically in a lot of cases.


----------



## Zefera (May 31, 2011)

Okay I suppose that makes sense. Do the wings affect the disintegration at all? And what about tritypes? Im very interested in the enneagram but its been difficult to find more than superficial information on it...


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

Zefera said:


> Okay I suppose that makes sense. Do the wings affect the disintegration at all? And what about tritypes? Im very interested in the enneagram but its been difficult to find more than superficial information on it...


I'm working on fixing that by writing more articles. This one might be of interest to you: http://personalitycafe.com/articles/47315-freudian-theory-enneagram.html#post1072214

Anyways, generally speaking, the wings and tritypes don't often impact it, because the main focus is the core type. Wings and tritypes add flavor but the most important element of the enneagram system is the core type, followed by the variant stacking.


----------



## Zefera (May 31, 2011)

Thanks for the link, looks like it will be helpful. Im only sure of my variant stacking, and somewhat sure of my core type, but I dont know enough about the theory to know what my tritype is yet but Im enjoying learning about it so far...
Edit:
Thank you @timeless, that is a great article and has sort of helped me to piece the enneagram together a bit better in my mind. And I think it proved to me that Im a five, not a nine, but that nine is certainly in my tritype. Im still unsure of the third fix though. Anyway, thanks for that, it was really helpful.


----------



## Malak (Jun 29, 2011)

The one thing that confuses me with this is that we have the areas of integration-disintegration and then we have the levels of health. So, how to integrate the 2? The way I first learned it was that when you move in the direction of disintegration, this is a sign you are under stress and therefore unhealthy, but then when I look at the 9 levels of health, as articulated by Riso and Hudson at least, it seems disconnected from the dis/integration issue. Anyone have any insights? (should I sneak onto the 5 fourm and see what they think, LOL? =) )


----------



## iMaven (Jan 14, 2011)

Malak said:


> The one thing that confuses me with this is that we have the areas of integration-disintegration and then we have the levels of health. So, how to integrate the 2? The way I first learned it was that when you move in the direction of disintegration, this is a sign you are under stress and therefore unhealthy, but then when I look at the 9 levels of health, as articulated by Riso and Hudson at least, it seems disconnected from the dis/integration issue. Anyone have any insights? (should I sneak onto the 5 fourm and see what they think, LOL? =) )


You just draw energy from the points you're connected to. it's up to you whether or not it's channeled into something positive or negative.
as a 4, when unhealthy I become self-absorbed. this ends up pushing people away when they get tired of it. then I resonate at 2 because my abandoment issues are triggered. aka stress. so then it's like forced friendliness.
if you're insecure, that point will influence your functioning. for a 3 it would be 9.


i wish i knew more of the mbti and being unhealthy.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Malak said:


> The one thing that confuses me with this is that we have the areas of integration-disintegration and then we have the levels of health.


As you move up the levels of health, you are integrating, and as you move down, you are disintegrating. 

The reason enneagram has this aspect to its theory is
1. Personality is not static; it manifests itself differently depending on how stable someone is emotionally. 

2. Emotions are _especially_ not static, and enneagram is focused on the aspects of personality that are driven by emotional motivations. Emotional motivations are not pure either, so an unhealthy, say, 2 will be affected by less developed motivations associated with another type (in their case, the motivations of the 8). It's kind of similar in concept to the shadow theory of cognitive functions - when stressed or unstable, a person manifests these more unconscious aspects of the mind. Just as in MBTI, a person theoretically will or can use every function to some degree, in enneagram, a person has all the emotional motivations of every type, but most don't affect them nearly as much their dominant & wing do, but they may surface on occasion to cause uncharacteristic behavior.

3. Personality is more of a spectrum than distinct categories. The wings, dis/integration, instinctual variants, etc, all add layers which describe the subtleties between people, how types blend into one another instead of being clearly divided. 

4. The dis/integration aspects of the theory are based on observable patterns in people, how they typically grow and break down according to their core emotional motivations. This is also why the order of the types & the lines of the enneagram have significance. They are not arbitrary, but illustrate how emotional motivations are connected & play off one another, creating the spectrum of human personality.


----------



## Malak (Jun 29, 2011)

@OrangeAppled, I get that, but I don't understand how dis/integration and levels of healthy interface: how they overlap, or do they? wings and variants are just different, there's no connection. Is that the case with dis/integration, or when you are in the direction of integration, you are also healthy?


----------



## iMaven (Jan 14, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> As you move up the levels of health, you are integrating, and as you move down, you are disintegrating.


the healthy levels has to do with your core type, not their connecting points.
it's a defense thing.
2s won't show their 8 aggression because their healthy? surely you don't believe that.

just throwing that out there. i think it's more of a situational thing.


----------



## Malak (Jun 29, 2011)

iMaven said:


> the healthy levels has to do with your core type, not their connecting points.
> it's a defense thing.
> 2s won't show their 8 aggression because their healthy? surely you don't believe that.
> 
> just throwing that out there. i think it's more of a situational thing.


that's precisely I guess my question. The way it was first explained to me, and it may be it was explained wrong and somehow I've just hung onto that error, is that the dis/integration had to do with how stressed or healthy I am. So, if I understand you correctly, I can be equally healthy and be at the direction of 9, 3 or 6 (as a 3 mind you), and still be healthy (or unhealthy too). The level of health is just irrelevant to that. Is that accurate?


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

iMaven said:


> the healthy levels has to do with your core type, not their connecting points.
> it's a defense thing.
> 2s won't show their 8 aggression because their healthy? surely you don't believe that.
> 
> just throwing that out there. i think it's more of a situational thing.


 


Malak said:


> @_OrangeAppled_ , I get that, but I don't understand how dis/integration and levels of healthy interface: how they overlap, or do they? wings and variants are just different, there's no connection. Is that the case with dis/integration, or when you are in the direction of integration, you are also healthy?


To answer you both.....

I don't believe that personality is static in that way. I don't think "healthy" is some level you reach & say at. I think people have healthy & unhealthy moments, and whichever is more common determines their general state of health. So a healthy 2 can have an unhealthy moment of 8 aggression, but if they are generally healthy, then yes, I definitely believe it will be less frequent.

And yes, I believe that integration puts you on the road to being generally healthier, and disintegration does the opposite. Integration/disintegration are really just _signs_ of a person's general health & what direction they are moving in at the moment.


----------



## Malak (Jun 29, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> To answer you both.....
> 
> I don't believe that personality is static in that way. I don't think "healthy" is some level you reach & say at. I think people have healthy & unhealthy moments, and whichever is more common determines their general state of health. So a healthy 2 can have an unhealthy moment of 8 aggression, but if they are generally healthy, then yes, I definitely believe it will be less frequent.
> 
> And yes, I believe that integration puts you on the road to being generally healthier, and disintegration does the opposite. Integration/disintegration are really just _signs_ of a person's general health & what direction they are moving in at the moment.


Ok, that's what I thought, originally at least, but what I'm really trying to do is synthesize that with the 9 levels of health that at least Riso and Hudson put forward in their books, b/c I see no overlap between the two concepts.

And of course, yes it's never so easy as just healthy is just some mystical point we get to and say at.  right now though, I'm in the theoretical realm of how it works: how do I synthesize between dis/integration and those 9 levels of health.


----------



## iMaven (Jan 14, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> To answer you both.....
> 
> I don't believe that personality is static in that way. I don't think "healthy" is some level you reach & say at. I think people have healthy & unhealthy moments, and whichever is more common determines their general state of health. So a healthy 2 can have an unhealthy moment of 8 aggression, but if they are generally healthy, then yes, I definitely believe it will be less frequent.
> 
> And yes, I believe that integration puts you on the road to being generally healthier, and disintegration does the opposite. Integration/disintegration are really just _signs_ of a person's general health & what direction they are moving in at the moment.


yeah there's usually a couple levels you resonate between, i agree. we are dynamic systems.


i don't see why aggression is assumed to be wrong or unhealthy. some situations call for it. as you get healthier, you aren't cutting yourself off from your lines of influence. 
you can be the healthiest you've ever been and show signs of your security/stress point influencing you.
anyways that's just how I feel it is. 
i think hanging on to the things that are productive is what helps you become healthier. catching yourself in the act etc.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

iMaven said:


> yeah there's usually a couple levels you resonate between.
> 
> 
> i don't see why aggression is assumed to be wrong or unhealthy. some situations call for it. as you get healthier, you aren't cutting yourself off from your lines of influence.
> ...


This is probably just an issue of semantics, because I see aggression as unbridled, destructive anger fueling violating action. I have a feelign that what you're referring to, I'd likely call assertiveness or something. But I do agree that so-called negative qualities can pop up in a generally healthy person. I think true self-actualization is a mythical goal of perfection, not a realistic mindset.


----------



## iMaven (Jan 14, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> This is probably just an issue of semantics, because I see aggression as unbridled, destructive anger fueling violating action. I have a feelign that what you're referring to, I'd likely call assertiveness or something. But I do agree that so-called negative qualities can pop up in a generally healthy person. I think true self-actualization is a mythical goal of perfection, not a realistic mindset.


not really semantics just cuz aggression : ready or willing to take issue or engage in direct action;
definitely not destructive anger/violating. 


if it's a goal, then we can work towards it forever either way. if we don't show progress, then I guess it's mythical. I'd say i'm showing plenty progress, though. 

i'm not the mindless consumer I used to be, that's for sure 
living in the moment is probably key..





Malak said:


> that's precisely I guess my question. The way it was first explained to me, and it may be it was explained wrong and somehow I've just hung onto that error, is that the dis/integration had to do with how stressed or healthy I am. So, if I understand you correctly, I can be equally healthy and be at the direction of 9, 3 or 6 (as a 3 mind you), and still be healthy (or unhealthy too). The level of health is just irrelevant to that. Is that accurate?


 yep, irrelevant, in my opinion.

I think the healthier you are the more positive your output. I still don't think you shut yourself off from one of your lines just because you're on the path to your potential..
most modern sites have that take on it, though. even the wisdom of the enneagram. 
who knows, this is just my current opinion.

Maybe integrating is the conscious realization of what you're doing wrong with your life and putting forth true effort to change it.
Maybe we *do *just go "resonate" at a point and our "disintegrating" point doesn't influence us anymore.
i think we gotta figure out our tri-type/wings first before coming to these conclusions, though. 
me and my gf almost feel integration/disintegration theory is misleading. 
i'll have to do a lot of reading and thinking and i'll get back to this.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

iMaven said:


> not really semantics just cuz aggression : ready or willing to take issue or engage in direct action;
> definitely not destructive anger/violating.


Uh, that's not the definition the dictionary gives....like I said, it's an issue of semantics, because I tend to use that word in its standard form, which has strongly negative connotations of violating rights & hostile behavior:

*ag·gres·sion*
–noun 1. the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: _The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression. 
_ 
2. any offensive action, attack, or procedure; an inroad or encroachment: an aggression upon one's rights. 

3. the practice of making assaults or attacks; offensive action in general. 

4. Psychiatry . overt or suppressed hostility, either innate or resulting from continued frustration and directed outward or against oneself.



> if it's a goal, then we can work towards it forever either way. if we don't show progress, then I guess it's mythical. I'd say i'm showing plenty progress, though.


A mythical goal can be worked towards, just not fully achieved. Progress towards a mythical goal does not prove it is real & achievable. You would be working towards it forever for the fact that it's not achievable.


----------



## iMaven (Jan 14, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> Uh, that's not the definition the dictionary gives....like I said, it's an issue of semantics, because I tend to use that word in its standard form, which has strongly negative connotations of violating rights & hostile behavior:
> 
> *ag·gres·sion*
> –noun 1. the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: _The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression.
> ...


well i referenced another dictionary, so uhh the dictionary does give that.. lmao

and since it shows great results ("self-actualization").. it's a pretty realistic mindset. plus _you_ can't really say it's unobtainable. none of us can.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

iMaven said:


> well i referenced another dictionary, so uhh the dictionary does give that.. lmao
> 
> and since it shows great results ("self-actualization").. it's a pretty realistic mindset. plus _you_ can't really say it's unobtainable. none of us can.


That's just it - working towards the goal _doesn't_ give the result of self-actualization; great results do not equal self-actualization, nor do great results mean something is realistic. Self-actualization is the unattainable goal to forever be working towards; it's a state of perfect balance. As for proof, well, the whole theory suffers from lack of that. That's sort of irrelevant. But if you find a _perfect _person who is totally balanced emotionally & mentally & has reached self-actualization & point them out to me, then maybe I can agree. Pretty sure they don't exist though.


----------



## Malak (Jun 29, 2011)

Ok, I've been thinking about this, and I'm not sure if this is what everyone is saying, b/c I had to take a pause from that and reflect on it. 

Here's my thoughts on it: I do think when we move in the direction on integration (and I'm speaking as a 3, so this might not be a universal, I haven't gone that far), but I do think the direction of integration, working toward that is concomitant with achieving health. Because at their healthiest three's are: self-accepting, authentic, more real, etc etc And in moving in the direction of 6 is about more commitment to others, less self-focused, whereas an unhealthy 3 becomes more and more willing to step on others to achieve their goals. So, in the case of the 3, there is a connection. Moving in the direction of disintegration, detaching like a 9, can lead to 3's having less of a human connection with the people around them, and hence easier to step on. So moving in the direction of 9 makes unhealth also easier. That's what I see. 

Moving in the direction of integration makes health easier and moving in the direction of disintegration makes unhealth easier. The more authentic we are with others, seeing them, not just using them, the more we are also likely able to be real about why we are in relationships with them, and also to be real *with* them. The more detached we become, the easier it is to use, manipulate, and all those aberrations that come with being an unhealthy 3.

At the same time, I do agree that an overall healthy 3 will sometimes shut down like a 9 when to stressed with a situation, and an unhealthy 3, and i'm thinking here a social variant is where this could really show, the group identity that a 3 has for the sake of the need of the group they find themselves in as being successful. So it is commitment to others, but can be in an unhealthy way linked back to ambition and success. But overall, an unhealthy 3 I still think is more like to sacrifice the group for personal success.

Any thoughts? What about you 4's on this thread? :happy:


----------

