# Enneagram Type and Instinctual Stacking CORRELATION



## Alana (Jun 21, 2019)

I have noticed that while any type can have every instinctual variant, certain types seem to be more likely to have certain instinctual variants than others. Certain types are described in a way that is biased to the instinct they are most likely to be. This is how some of the mistypes are caused. 

The correlation seems to be:
1w9: Sp/So1w2: So/Sp
2w1: So/Sp2w3: So/Sx
3w2: So/Sx3w4: Sx/So
4w3: Sx/So4w5: Sp/Sx
5w4: Sp/Sx5w6: Sp/So
6w5: Sp/So6w7: Sp/Sx
7w6: Sx/Sp 7w8: Sx/Sp
8w7: Sx/Sp 8w9: So/Sp
9w8: Sp/Sx 9w1: Sp/So
Thoughts?


----------



## Janna (Aug 31, 2018)

It would make perfect sense to me that for instance Fives would most often have sp as their first instinct. Now that you say it, I would even say that sp/sx would probably be the most frequent instinct stack for 5w4s such as me, although I myself am more of a sp/so. I guess it's _possible_ to be a Five so/sx, but it does sound a bit atypical.

Where do you think that the mistyping happens - that people are wrong about their type based on their instinctual stack, or the other way round?


----------



## Suntide (Dec 22, 2018)

When I first learned about enneagram I thought I was a 9w1 sp/so. Lol. Then 6w5 sp/so, then 6w7 so/sx. Now I relate the most to 2w3 so/sx, which not only correlates together, but also correlates to ESFJ. I've given up on trying to look at every theory together. I used to be like, "What if what I think is enneagram 2 is just Fe?" But I don't think it's a good idea to mix theory like that because they aren't all one big theory, they're 3 separate theories that should be considered separately.

I think your correlations are spot on though. I have the same curiosity is Janna, do you think it's the instincts that people mistype more frequently, or the core type?


----------



## Alana (Jun 21, 2019)

Janna said:


> It would make perfect sense to me that for instance Fives would most often have sp as their first instinct. Now that you say it, I would even say that sp/sx would probably be the most frequent instinct stack for 5w4s such as me, although I myself am more of a sp/so. I guess it's _possible_ to be a Five so/sx, but it does sound a bit atypical.
> 
> Where do you think that the mistyping happens - that people are wrong about their type based on their instinctual stack, or the other way round?





Suntide said:


> When I first learned about enneagram I thought I was a 9w1 sp/so. Lol. Then 6w5 sp/so, then 6w7 so/sx. Now I relate the most to 2w3 so/sx, which not only correlates together, but also correlates to ESFJ. I've given up on trying to look at every theory together. I used to be like, "What if what I think is enneagram 2 is just Fe?" But I don't think it's a good idea to mix theory like that because they aren't all one big theory, they're 3 separate theories that should be considered separately.
> 
> I think your correlations are spot on though. I have the same curiosity is Janna, do you think it's the instincts that people mistype more frequently, or the core type?


Both, but more likely the other way around since Types independent of instinct are more easy to distinguish than instinct independent of Type. For example, a 2 would be very likely to assume they are So since 2 is about being useful to others. However, not every 2 is an So-dom, though the other instinctual variants ARE more rare for 2.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

I think that not only do type and instinct correlate )though I’m not aware that that’s ever been scientifically studied) but often they’re describing the very same thing, and the overlap can’t be removed by making a few alterations to the descriptions, because it goes to the core of what each type and instinct is about. The passion of type 5 is avarice, which, as the word is used in Enneagram contexts, is about hoarding and conserving oneself, one’s energy and one’s resources, just like the SP instinct. The passion of type 8 is lust, which sounds a lot like the Sx instinct, even if lust isn’t only about sex. It’s an issue of conceptual confusion within the system. You’d think subtype descriptions as written by people like Chestnut would help, since they describe every type/instinct combination, but I’ve always found Chestnut’s descriptions a bit artificial, like they’re more about playing with ideas than describing real people.


----------



## Suntide (Dec 22, 2018)

Octavarium said:


> ...like they’re more about playing with ideas than describing real people.


This is how I feel about _every_ typological system tbh. (I'm not trying to disagree or subtract from your your post, I just wanted to add my 2 cents lol.)


----------



## baitedcrow (Dec 22, 2015)

Octavarium said:


> I think that not only do type and instinct correlate )though I’m not aware that that’s ever been scientifically studied) but often they’re describing the very same thing, and the overlap can’t be removed by making a few alterations to the descriptions, because it goes to the core of what each type and instinct is about.


It doesn't take much for me to think of ways to make all combinations possible within the system if the instincts and types are conceived of as working at different levels or at different layers of the psyche. (I mean, clearly... I am core-5 enough that recently an old friend, new to Enneagram, who asked me for good basic descriptions, called me out as having "Observer issues with a bit of Perfectionist" before I had shared what I thought my type was. But I also think I'm best understood as SO-dominant and SP-last.)

However... explicitly doing that is not at all an agreed upon part of the system, or at least, the level at which one vs. the other operates isn't consistently talked about or defined. 

I try to clarify things by thinking of the dominant instinct as the area of human life in which the archetypal fears, defense mechanisms, drives (I'm not using classic terminology like "passion" here, but hopefully you can relate them), etc. of the type manifest most strongly, in a way as the primary trigger of the ego fixation. I remember Hudson calling the instincts where you _leak_ your life force - that idea of the dominant instinct as a particular vulnerability in one's "energy" defenses was key to me conceptualizing how an SO 5 might look, and getting me to realize that that might be a good way to frame my experiences because impressionistically, it was a match.

So, a type 1 who is an SO dom will, one way or another, manifest perfectionism/correctness, resentment and reaction formation most strongly in the SO sphere or in response to SO-things (politics, culture, manners, group dynamics, affiliation). A type 1 SX dom will do so in the SX sphere/in response to SX-things (limerent relationships or sublimations of limerence, adrenaline, attraction/repulsion, charismatic display, etc.). A type 1 SP will do so in the SP sphere/in response to SP-things (health, personal material resources, physical space/privacy/"home", etc.). 

I also favor interpretations of the "blind" instinct that acknowledge its functioning in the individual but place it as something they will want to push out of conscious attention. So I still see people as engaging with the blind instinct, sometimes quite a lot, in the way their core type would dictate... but it may be an engagement that they don't/don't want to see in themselves, or usually prefer not to think about. (Whereas issues of the dominant instinct might be ruminated on.)

But that's me "playing with ideas" to please myself, trying to jury rig a device that came out of the box with missing parts so that it can function a little closer to the way it supposedly already does, but really doesn't quite.

I have noticed that when I mess around with Enneagram Indicators (not necessarily a great way to find a core type, but still) I score higher on SP on joint Enneatype/Instinct indicators than I do on indicators for Instinct alone. I'm not sure if that's on me or on the way the tests are written.


----------

