# Tritype: is this a real thing?



## SolMoon (Oct 4, 2018)

I always felt that tritype is just the general state of a person('s core type) and not a real thing by itself, or at least most just use it that way. I see it comes handy as proof of self mistyping, and it usually consist of the real type, the wing of the real type and/or an arrow (integration, disintegration) from the real type.

So what do you think, Is tritype a real thing or just the 'blur' of the real type, wing and arrow?

(Please use your own words and don't post links about it.)


----------



## Aridela (Mar 14, 2015)

It's a school of thought, you decide what you like. 

It's the same with the MBTI, you technically have 4 personalities the ego, shadow, subconscious and superego. Not everyone agrees with this view of course.


----------



## drmiller100 (Dec 3, 2011)

SolMoon said:


> I always felt that tritype is just the general state of a person('s core type) and not a real thing by itself, or at least most just use it that way. I see it comes handy as proof of self mistyping, and it usually consist of the real type, the wing of the real type and/or an arrow (integration, disintegration) from the real type.


Smiles. Your words describe tri-type for me. 
I see it as a sign of really shallow understanding of Enneagram. At least it gets people to consider Enneagram.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

I really like the idea that we "have multiple types," and feel this message is most easily conveyed through Tritype Theory. However, I've always found the rhetoric of the theory itself half-baked, and for that reason until we have a clearer rationale to prop up the Tritype theory I like a more structure-agnostic way of looking at the types other than our Core. Tritype makes us ask "what type other than the Core am I" - I prefer the question "what types other than my Core can I learn the most salient lessons from."

For those who dislike Tritype, an alternative concept (and one I've grown more fond of over the years) is to know that:


Type 9 represents the basic way in which all people become removed and distracted from being in the immediate here and now and get pulled into habits that distract us from what we really need
Our Core Type is a specific refraction of Type 9, each with its own theme of basic distracting habits that warp our view of reality to a specific skew
Although we deeply fixate around _only one_ of these Types, we should be able to relate with more than just one - and perhaps all 9. There are bits and pieces, traces of all 9 types in us to varying extents, and they become more apparent as we become more aware of our attitudes/habits
Our Core Type, then, is #1 - and we're free to explore the impact or learn lessons from all of the other 8 types

One difference between this style of thinking and Tritype Theory is an open-endedness to our other Centers. Tritype tells us it's always Body, Mind, and Heart in some specific order. While I agree we use all 3 Centers, I'm not convinced that our Centers dictate which types we're most inclined to. I'm also not convinced that only one type from each Center is necessarily "dominant" - even though Katherine Fauvre's research says otherwise. 

Personally speaking, I'm a Core Type 1 - but the 7 "Soul Child" plays an enormous factor in my life, as does Type 2 - and to a lesser extent types 4, 5, and 9. There are issues that are crucial to understanding 8 and 1 that, although 8's approach in a completely different way, are useful for me to understand as a 1. Types 3 and 6 are the two I have a hard time personally relating with, though I "get the gist" of them intellectually. So I identify as a 1, but see substantial 2 and 7 - yet don't relate per se with the 1-2-7 Tritype.


----------



## drmiller100 (Dec 3, 2011)

Figure said:


> I
> 
> 
> Type 9 represents the basic way in which all people become removed and distracted from being in the immediate here and now and get pulled into habits that distract us from what we really need





Smiles..... Another way to say this is 8 represent the true way of being honest and in the present moment, and the other types are removed from it. 

We all should relate to all the types. some are more obvious and easy than others. 3 is easy for me, as is 7 and 5. that doesn't make a tritype.


----------



## SolMoon (Oct 4, 2018)

Figure said:


> Personally speaking, I'm a Core Type 1 - but the 7 "Soul Child" plays an enormous factor in my life, as does Type 2 - and to a lesser extent types 4, 5, and 9. There are issues that are crucial to understanding 8 and 1 that, although 8's approach in a completely different way, are useful for me to understand as a 1. Types 3 and 6 are the two I have a hard time personally relating with, though I "get the gist" of them intellectually. So I identify as a 1, but see substantial 2 and 7 - yet don't relate per se with the 1-2-7 Tritype.


Maybe you feel/think this way because you are a 1 with 2 wing who is mostly (or at least more than a few times) moved towards integration to 7, much less moved to disintegration to 4. Also 1 and 5 is both types that think logically but 1 is more outwards and active hence the 5 factor (if you suppress a 1 hard enough, he/she will self type as 5). Also while you have a strong 2 wing you can have a small 9 wing too. So this leaves out 3, 6 and 8.

Can you describe the 8 part a bit more? Why does it help to understand yourself?


----------



## drmiller100 (Dec 3, 2011)

SolMoon said:


> Can you describe the 8 part a bit more? Why does it help to understand yourself?


my point was it is about perspective. You can see things from different views depending on how you perceive the world.

Which is what Enneagram is all about.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

I'm not completely against tritype, but from what I've seen, I think it adds an extra layer of confusion to typing oneself/others, and is also a distraction from addressing one's core type fixations/issues, which is really the point of the Enneagram. I think it's often used to justify a lot of differences within types that really doesn't need justifying, for the most part. Tritype ignores Occam's Razor a lot of the time. In short, I don't really see it as being necessary or all that helpful at this point.


----------



## Brains (Jul 22, 2015)

Real? No. Typology systems are a series of names for what is legitimately out there, what kinds of people you can find. That doesn't mean that people are actually sorted into those types in reality - they're not. Tritype is just more names, more boxes. If used as a bit of flavour, a bit of spice, yeah, it can be a fun thought exercise. The way most use it, to finagle bad typings to fit, or by hanging on to to the tritype archetypes as justification they're some way or another, it's poison and silliness.


----------



## Fatal Destiny (Oct 4, 2018)

Why shouldn't there be a tritype? I mean, our motivations throughout life aren't always going to relate to that one dominant type. I mean, for one, think about all of the emotions we go through on a regular basis that can change our outlook on things, thus change how we are motivated to respond to those things. I don't know, I like the idea of the tritype - more to work with that way.


----------



## drmiller100 (Dec 3, 2011)

Fatal Destiny said:


> I mean, for one, think about all of the emotions we go through on a regular basis that can change our outlook on things, thus change how we are motivated to respond to those things. I don't know, I like the idea of the tritype - more to work with that way.


This to me is a GREAT argument against tri-type. 

"the daily emotions changes our outlook and with tritype we don't have to look at the deeper levels."


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

SolMoon said:


> I always felt that tritype is just the general state of a person('s core type) and not a real thing by itself, or at least most just use it that way. I see it comes handy as proof of self mistyping, and it usually consist of the real type, the wing of the real type and/or an arrow (integration, disintegration) from the real type.
> 
> So what do you think, Is tritype a real thing or just the 'blur' of the real type, wing and arrow?
> 
> (Please use your own words and don't post links about it.)


Tritypes explains a more complete picture of our motivations. Without it, some of us would seem less than complete. There's 3 centers: Heart, Mind, Body. 

If you're a 1, 3, 6, 8, or 9, you automatically have lines of connection that put you in touch with all 3 centers, but if you're a 2, 4, 5, or 7, one of your connection points circles back on the same center you're already a part of. 

As an example, I'm a 5, so my connections go to 7 and 8. Where's my heart connection? 

So tritypes explain variances that cannot be otherwise explained, and also provide those of us whose connection lines don't permit us to have access to all 3 centers. It provides for both variety and clear connection to all 3 centers.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

SolMoon said:


> Maybe you feel/think this way because you are a 1 with 2 wing who is mostly (or at least more than a few times) moved towards integration to 7, much less moved to disintegration to 4. Also 1 and 5 is both types that think logically but 1 is more outwards and active hence the 5 factor (if you suppress a 1 hard enough, he/she will self type as 5). Also while you have a strong 2 wing you can have a small 9 wing too. So this leaves out 3, 6 and 8.
> 
> Can you describe the 8 part a bit more? Why does it help to understand yourself?


Sorry, I wrote that quoted post while in a much more pensive state and have since gone all over the place XD

I do think 1/8 can learn a lot about themselves by studying the other when you look back at how the Id and Superego are engaged within the types, given that 1's and 8's _have both_ psychostructures. Two main themes I think 1/8 share - being enslaved to something outside of themselves, and having massive/unending self wants. 8's are enslaved to self wants, while 1's are enslaved to Superego demands; 8's never seem to get enough juice out of getting what they want, and 1's never think it's appropriate to allow wants; 8's have a more punitive Superego than kitschy type descriptions suggest, and 1's have much more ravenous and grabby self desires than kitschy type descriptions suggest. People who are 1's and 8's have both an Id and a Superego despite being "Superego" and "Id" types respectively - those titles are just denoting what they've merged with. Had a 1 merged with wants over should's he/she might have become an 8; had an 8 merged with should's over wants he/she might have become a 1 as the underlying psychostructures are there in both types. 

I know a lot of that is a stretch, and it's more or less just thoughts I've been toying around with lately rather than something I've adopted as a hard and fast truth. But I do think these types have a primitive similarity that gets lost in a lot of type descriptions.


----------



## drmiller100 (Dec 3, 2011)

Figure said:


> Sorry, I wrote that quoted post while in a much more pensive state and have since gone all over the place XD
> 
> I do think 1/8 can learn a lot about themselves by studying the other when you look back at how the Id and Superego are engaged within the types, given that 1's and 8's _have both_ psychostructures. Two main themes I think 1/8 share - being enslaved to something outside of themselves, and having massive/unending self wants. 8's are enslaved to self wants, while 1's are enslaved to Superego demands; 8's never seem to get enough juice out of getting what they want, and 1's never think it's appropriate to allow wants; 8's have a more punitive Superego than kitschy type descriptions suggest, and 1's have much more ravenous and grabby self desires than kitschy type descriptions suggest. People who are 1's and 8's have both an Id and a Superego despite being "Superego" and "Id" types respectively - those titles are just denoting what they've merged with. Had a 1 merged with wants over should's he/she might have become an 8; had an 8 merged with should's over wants he/she might have become a 1 as the underlying psychostructures are there in both types.
> 
> I know a lot of that is a stretch, and it's more or less just thoughts I've been toying around with lately rather than something I've adopted as a hard and fast truth. But I do think these types have a primitive similarity that gets lost in a lot of type descriptions.


You worry too much. Go get laid.

(Smiles........)


----------



## Spiritwalker86 (Sep 11, 2017)

Tritype is a hugely flawed theory that appeals to those who look for something that explains in an oversimplified way why types with the same core can have such different preferences or behaviours, or to those who are more interested in quick labels to wear on theirselves (2w3-6w7-8w9-ENFJ-slytherin-klingon and so on) than a deep approach to the enneagram and their own self.

Tritype is in big contradiction with the enneagram theory and also with itself.
The "basic" enneagram theory states that we have a "core" that distorts our perception of the world, it involves certain psychological dynamics, and we cope with them using our own core traits while also drawing traits from our wings and integration/disintegration points. If the outcome isn't successful, the distortion related to our core gets bigger. Among many things, a 4 would get more self absorbed, an 8 more "dead inside" and callous, a 5 more detached from reality and his own body, a 6 more wary and untrusful and so on.
On the other hand, tritype theory states that we have 3 cores used in a sequential way. If the main core (with related wings and points) coping doesn't work, the main core switches off and the second core (with its wings and points) switches on, and so on. To give an example: Brian is a 497. Brian is a self-absorbed guy and ends up into a (whatever you like) situation. According to his core, he perceives that situation in a certain way, and tries to deal with it with automatic coping mechanisms based on his past experiences. In this case, the outcome isn't successful, and he's still stuck into that situation. Something happens (it is not really clear how and when), and instead of getting even more self-absorbed and taking all this stuff personally, he starts being self-forgetting. The things that now bother him are different from the ones that bothered him before. If before he was over-indulging in all the emotional turbulence that was growing inside him, now he's narcotizing from any feeling, thought or event that may slightly upset his inner quietness. If this approach doesn't work (his inner peace gets continously broken), instead of getting even more dumb, narcotized and self-unaware, he switches again. If before he was looking for easy basic-level satisfaction, now he sees everywhere possibilities to jump on. If before his mind was somehow narcotized, now is upbeat and hyperactive. If before he was a wallflower, now he needs to stay under the spotlights. If this still doesn't work, well... it's unclear what happens. 
Of course, this doesn't make any sense to me.
Plus,while stating previously that tritypes work in a sequential way and are about motivations and not behaviour, the 27 tritypes descriptions are mostly behaviour and role-oriented, with all the three cores working simultaneously and influencing each other according to the core priority, creating a "unique" archetype.

If the main issue with the basic enneagram is the risk of creating stereotypes and cliches for the 9 types, tritype is *all* about two-dimensional, schematic stereotypes.

Do I need to add something else?


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

I don't think it matters. In a sense, nothing pertaining to typology is "real" because none of it can be verified in any kind of objective sense—except in terms of our individual verification of whether the theory meshes without our experience. 

So I think the question of whether tritype is relatable and useful to an individual (which can only be decided by the individual) is just about the only meaningful way to determine whether it is real, particularly given that personal exploration is the reason for its existing at all.


----------



## SolMoon (Oct 4, 2018)

Hello Clitty said:


> I don't think it matters. In a sense, nothing pertaining to typology is "real" because none of it can be verified in any kind of objective sense—except in terms of our individual verification of whether the theory meshes without our experience.
> 
> So I think the question of whether tritype is relatable and useful to an individual (which can only be decided by the individual) is just about the only meaningful way to determine whether it is real, particularly given that personal exploration is the reason for its existing at all.


Even though psychology just starts to mature as a real science, there are objective, scientific ways to test these 'theories'. I don't know if there were any real study about enneagram though (please link/message me if there were any). So in this sense you are right, I have only my experiences in this matter, and that's just the reason why I've started this thread. 
On the other hand, lot of people fool themselves with 'random' stuff that they find useful, but in fact is harmful to them. Tritype might just be one of those.

IMO even if tritype is a 'thing' and is useful, it would be nice to just leave it alone before finding out our real core type. I saw too many mistyping (here)...


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

No, I believe tritype is a real structure, that goes beyond the core type. It explains why those of the same type may not always look like one another. It accounts for more variability between people, and for the complexity that makes up who a person is


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

SolMoon said:


> On the other hand, lot of people fool themselves with 'random' stuff that they find useful, but in fact is harmful to them. Tritype might just be one of those.


 I don't think it can be harmful. It's just an idea.


> IMO even if tritype is a 'thing' and is useful, it would be nice to just leave it alone before finding out our real core type. I saw too many mistyping (here)...


 Well tritype is made up of the core type plus other things, so people *have to* find their core type before looking into their tritype. It's not the focus on tritype that causes people to mistype; it's some improper self-typing process that causes them to mistype.


----------



## SolMoon (Oct 4, 2018)

Hello Clitty said:


> I don't think it can be harmful. It's just an idea.
> Well tritype is made up of the core type plus other things, so people *have to* find their core type before looking into their tritype. It's not the focus on tritype that causes people to mistype; it's some improper self-typing process that causes them to mistype.


What I meant is, tritype is often used to justify the mistyping, so it would be nice not to touch tritype until the core type is really clear. (Ok I know they think their sure, but still...)
So this way even though tritype is just an idea, it can cause harm.
(And I don't want to mention cases when an idea caused real bad things, like mass murders, etc... )


----------

