# How Is a 4w5 an Image Type?



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@enneathusiast so what would their positions be, then? In what sense are they wrong? Is this the action/inaction contrast you werE getting at or what?


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

I think the term 'image' has a specific meaning, as in, a 7 may in a sense have a tendency to look in the mirror to glorify their image, but the 234 is to me very much about fixation in the realm of falseness and inauthenticity (I know naively applied this is sounding 4-like) as related to winning meaning/appreciation/impact in the eyes of others, in that seeking appreciation means someone must see you, and so you become fixated in what they see. You can even become so fixated that you begin to identify with a projection of yourself. Naranjo likes to say the 4 weeps to win appreciation of the self in the face of its flaws, since I imagine the underlying fear is of ever showing oneself, since they cannot quite identify with a projected image in their minds (even if they ultimately are not immune to doing so).
Of course, some fours will not at all be weepy to others, and this may play out more internally.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

bearotter said:


> @_enneathusiast_ so what would their positions be, then?


That's a book in itself (which I'm looking at writing down the road because it goes beyond the Enneagram symbol which means the result can no longer be called the Enneagram). 

Hurley and Dobson have an older book out (My Best Self) where she (Hurley) talks about how the 3, 6, and 9 repress their centers and actually use the other two centers (she self-identifies as a type 3). Unfortunately, I never saw that approach get any traction. I think the way Palmer resolved the problem for type 6 (the type she self-identifies with) was to emphasize the phobic/counter-phobic differentiation. I don't know of any type 9 authors so I haven't seen the type 9 resolution. I guess that might have to do with creating an intellectual-9 variation vs. the merging-9 that I've sometimes seen (for instance, Obama would be the intellectual-9 not the merging-9 if typed as a 9).



bearotter said:


> In what sense are they wrong? Is this the action/inaction contrast you werE getting at or what?


Yes, that's where I first noticed it.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

bearotter said:


> I think the term 'image' has a specific meaning, as in, a 7 may in a sense have a tendency to look in the mirror to glorify their image, but the 234 is to me very much about fixation in the realm of falseness and inauthenticity...


Naranjo actually ties "narcissism" to both types 7 and 3 in one of his books (though he does refer to a specific author's interpretation of narcissism, so their not the same interpretation of narcissism for both types). To me narcissism is all about image.

I dont' think type 3 is aware of any inauthenticity because it's just an image they project to get by in the cultural group they find themselves in. I think inauthenticity comes in when what you present doesn't match what you feel and that would be the domain of type 4 I believe (I think that confuses things by calling that image-based when it's really feeling-based). So, type 4 looking at type 3 might easily see inauthenticity but would other types see it that way (including the type 3)? Others might just say that's the way the game is played.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@enneathusiast, I do not think type 3 would focus on the fear of being inauthentic. And yes I mentioned 7 because of that parallel, but think it is especially important to distinguish those types (3 and 7). 
To me image is not just image - perhaps image-heart is the better way to put it. Two sides of the equation -- what is the interrelation between how I am seen and the appreciation/love/insert-other-terms that I am to receive.

Whereas an 8 may block signs of vulnerability to themselves and others, but for I think a different purpose.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

bearotter said:


> To me image is not just image - perhaps image-heart is the better way to put it. Two sides of the equation -- what is the interrelation between how I am seen and the appreciation/love/insert-other-terms that I am to receive.


To me it still confuses things by forcing image upon 2 and 4. If I took the competence triad (135), I might say that type 5 is image-competence to indicate that type 5 is projecting an image of competence for instance or the aggressive triad (738) to say that type 8 is image-assertive to indicate that type 8 is projecting an image of assertiveness. It just seems the image concept is unnecessary and only indicates an effort to define types 2 and 4 as a variation of type 3. 

Bottom line is that I find defining 2, 3, and 4 as the image triad adds nothing but distortion to types 2 and 4, but I'm probably in the minority anyways. That's OK for me though because I don't feel confused by the 234 triad.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Bottom line is that I find defining 2, 3, and 4 as the image triad adds nothing but distortion to types 2 and 4, but I'm probably in the minority anyways




Well the thing is, image to me is just a word -- the distortion only happens if you think the philosophical meaning of 2 and 4 are removed by a particular interpretation of their fixations. And I have no doubt some interpretations do this, but shrugs, we have to fix that by our own thinking, right?
I already for instance gave examples of how 7's narcissism and 8's vulnerability could fit into some kind of 'image' paradigm. 

Either way you look at it, I don't see a way of assigning 2 and 4 any meaning without assigning 3 meaning, not prior, or subsequently, but essentially simultaneously -- they're supposed to be inter-related according to the basic understanding I have, unless you think the ordering of the numbers is meaningless, and then we get into _how_ the inter-relation should be -- this is where it seems you diverged from some sources, and that is fine by me... as long as your schematic is coherent, it would provide some insight I'd think.

If you think the 'image triad' should be called something else, that would be fine by me. Really what I am interested in is how you'd classify coherently the descriptions of all 3, as things that I would think should be inter-related according to some pattern.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

What I would ask is what you think happens to 2 and 4 -- what about their integrity is lost, and why this loss is significant to understanding the types and inter-relations. After all, a priori they are just numbers. It appears you have some conception as to the meaning of these types. 

The only logical guess I can make is that you think the two outer and inner are equally valid ways of looking at a triad, and thus there's no reason they shouldn't fit into a unified classification (i.e. that one shouldn't do away with the properties of the outer approach, and if calling the triad 'image' does this, then it's showing an unwanted bias according to you).

If you notice, by the way, I described the triad not as image, but image-heart -- and already implicit to that is that I'm rejecting 3 being the number 1 player, and also rejecting 2 and 4 being the number 1 players (you call them feeling/heart types). 

If you are going to remove image from the equation entirely, then I'd have to ask whether you are ultimately just saying we do away with triads, and instead view the inner triangle and the surrounding shape separately. 

When I see distortions I usually do sit down and try to ask why a type must be a certain way, and might diverge from some source data in finding exceptions, rather than necessarily finding the source data to be completely off.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

@bearotter

Simply put, I associate image with type 3 and not 2 and 4. 

Within the Enneagram framework, triads can be useful if people don't try to generalize a specific type to other types (e.g., 3 image to 2 and 4, 9 self-forgetting to 8 and 1, 5 moving away from people to 4 and 9, etc.). Personally however, I no longer actually use the Enneagram symbol as a framework when thinking about the types for myself, yet I do still have to translate it in terms of the symbol because that's what people are familiar with.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Personally however, I no longer actually use the Enneagram symbol as a framework when thinking about the types for myself







> Simply put, I associate image with type 3 and not 2 and 4.




Yeah I could see signs as to this perspective of yours.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> There doesn't need to be two approaches. There needs to be one approach that reconciles the two. I've had to do that for myself and it took a long time. But why is it still that way after decades of the Enneagram being around? It just seems like it gets more complicated and confusing rather more straightforward and accurate.
> 
> @_OrangeAppled_
> It just seems that when image is used for the 234 triad it's artificial for types 2 and 4. You could use image for all types if you wanted to.
> ...


Presenting an image =/= driven by image/heart-issues. I would also say that this doesn't always apply in all scenarios for any type. I've seen 1s who don't try to be good or perfect and may if anything end beating up themselves exactly because they get so caught up seeing their own personal flaws, just like I've seen 2s who get caught up in their power-lust so they appear as the selfish manipulative bastards they actually are, like I know that a lot of 6s in here will diasgree on that 6s try to present an image of loyalty (and why 6 instead of 8? To 8s, loyalty is one of their most important creeds), and 7s are not upbeat as much as they are self-loving. @Swordsman of Mana can tell you that much. 

What is common for the image/heart-triad is that they all idealize a self-image as a part of their core issue/neurosis. The other types do _not_ do this. As a 5, I have zero interest in actually exuding an image of being knowledgeable (actually, I couldn't give a fuck). It just happens that as a part of my drive towards competence being a competency type and that I am driven in a more intellectual sense, that I may _appear as_ knowledgeable, but this is more how the outsider views the type then, and not how the type is actually formulated on the inside. That is the important distinction to make.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

enneathusiast said:


> 1. presents the image of being good and perfect.


Wait what? I don't care about seen as good or perfect, as I know perfectly my own limits and my fucked up inner world. I don't project an image of being a saint nor something similar, in fact I can be a jerk if others piss me off or begin to do stupid things. I only care about doing that I think is right, even if that can hurt the feelings of other people.


----------



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

I have to admit I'm a little puzzled by this topic. If you can see 4w3 as an image type, why not 4w5? They are both 4s when you get down to it.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

Nonsense said:


> I have to admit I'm a little puzzled by this topic. If you can see 4w3 as an image type, why not 4w5? They are both 4s when you get down to it.


Yeah, I'm confused by it too. 

But I'm also confused by this strange belief that just because each type "sees itself" in a certain way, that they could all be called image types. That's no different than saying that all types are "fear" types because they have a core fear. Neither of these make any sense at all - simply having a self-image and in part structuring your method for survival in the world around your self-image are radically different ideas. Everyone has some degree of a self-image whether or not it is taken seriously or becomes part of your core fixation, it's simply part of existing as a human. 

A wing is a flavoring of the core type, not a shift of the core to the adjacent type. Type 4 is not a Head type, and type 4w5 is fundamentally and equally type 4 as 4w3 is. 



This quote sums it up perfectly:



spectralsparrow said:


> I don't know if 4w5 is truly the "outsider" of the enneagram, though we do see ourselves as inherently separated or deficient. But that's what it all boils down to - how we see ourselves. I feel like a total outsider in most situations, but I try to compensate for that by being seen a certain way. A way that might cover up or hide my inevitable deficiencies. I want my ~true self~ to be seen, and loved, so badly, *because* I fear that it never could be the case. We're fixated on identity and value. Of course it's an image type. How is it anything but an image type?


----------



## Arya (Oct 17, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> 2, 3, and 4 are in the heart triad, which implies feelings for that triad. Problem is 3 tends to push away personal feelings for the sake of goal achievement or performance. Validation often comes from the feelings of others regarding that achievement - personal feelings tend not to provide that validation but get in the way of moving toward the goal.
> 
> There are generally two ways I've seen the centers of intelligence (891, 234, 567) described.
> 
> ...


Type six is in the thinking triad because all three types retreat to their heads to deal with the underlying emotion, anxiety. They all have different ways of dealing with it, but they're all detached from their bodies and deal with anxiety through thinking. They are not the same type so obviously they all have slightly different ways of dealing. That does not come across as problematic. I would hardly expect every thinking type to think in the exact same way or deal with anxiety in the exact same way, or they would pretty much be the same type.


----------



## DoubleDare (May 15, 2013)

I too feel like the term "image" is being used in this discussion as synonymous with projection (as @ephemereality pointed out), and perhaps introjection as well.

I think the "image" part of the "image triad" refers instead to the fixation of the included personality types on answering the question "Who am I?" That question is asked in the specific context of relationship to other individuals in that personality's life. Answering the question "What is it that makes me who I am, makes me different and unique from others?" requires some kind of created self-image, and their feelings about themselves and others are the building blocks of that self-image. 

It's the fact that 2-3-4 types are fixated on always having to answer that question that makes them the "image" triad, from my understanding.

And the fact that 3s are exceptionally good at disregarding or ignoring unproductive feelings certainly doesn't preclude them from being the center of the heart triad, IMO. Only someone that facile with feelings could be so effective at harnessing the power of the "useful" feelings while discounting all the others...


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> It just seems that when image is used for the 234 triad it's artificial for types 2 and 4. You could use image for all types if you wanted to.
> 
> 1. presents the image of being good and perfect
> 2. presents the image of being helpful and loving
> ...


This list was to show how you could make up anything about each type based on image. I don't actually think the list is useful or necessarily accurate (just as I don't think describing types 2 and 4 in terms of image is useful or necessarily accurate). I was going to explicitly state that I pulled it out of my ass and it has no validity but wrongly thought that would be obvious so I didn't explicitly state it.


----------

