Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 87

Thread: What are your views on the Enneagram? Its basis and validity.

  1. #1
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What are your views on the Enneagram? Its basis and validity.

    What are your views on the enneagram? Personally I think alot of its authors just play on stereotypes, and for a long time I thought thats all that it was. Now Im susupecting there might be some truth to it as a system, though youd have to rewrite and research a great deal in order to have it be as competent as socionics.

  2. #2
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The enneagram is too arbitrary for me. It has its uses, though. People will always categorize other people, and it's better to call someone "a typical 4" than "one of those over-emotional touchy-feely drama queens". But the categories aren't really explained (as far as I know), they're just there as if they had dropped out of the clean blue sky. "Fives are like his, Sixes are like that... basta." That irritates me a little.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i gleaned some insight from the negative loops thing

  4. #4
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What's so great about Enneagram theory?

    What's the deal with all the interest in Enneagram typings? I thought Ichazo and Naranjo just kinda thought it up randomly.

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  5. #5
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I mean, I'm not calling anyone stupid or anything. But there doesn't even to be a real theoretical basis. I guess I just don't see the appeal.

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  6. #6
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    @cancer-the most accurate E type test is still less accurate than an 'average' socionic test

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,687
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe people don't care whether it has a theoretical basis, as long as it useful to them personally.

  8. #8
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JRiddy View Post
    What's the deal with all the interest in Enneagram typings? I thought Ichazo and Naranjo just kinda thought it up randomly.
    Personally I think that the Enneagram is, overall, an incomplete and imperfect system when compared to socionics. Still, I also think that it provides a way of looking at people, and types, from another angle, which is then helpful to understand them better, even from the point of view of socionics.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anamericancer View Post
    Yeah I don't get it either.

    I took the test once but hated my results. Very, very negative.
    Or at least I interpreted them as negative. It didn't sound like me either.
    That's the good thing about them -- that they focus on the negative sides of one's personality. That's why it is such a useful complement sometimes. It makes you see more aspects of yourself.

  10. #10
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    That's the good thing about them -- that they focus on the negative sides of one's personality. That's why it is such a useful complement sometimes. It makes you see more aspects of yourself.
    Which one are you Phaedrus?
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  11. #11
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Phaedrus Phive?
    Last edited by Cyclops; 04-17-2008 at 12:31 PM.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chopin View Post
    Which one are you Phaedrus?
    I am an extremely obvious self-preservationist Five. I don't really care which wing I have, but in general I fit the descriptions of 5w4 better than 5w6.

  13. #13
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    I am an extremely obvious self-preservationist Five. I don't really care which wing I have, but in general I fit the descriptions of 5w4 better than 5w6.
    reading the description it sure does sound like you w00t
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chopin View Post
    reading the description it sure does sound like you w00t
    Which description have you read?

  15. #15
    ~~rubicon~~ Rubicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chatbox
    TIM
    SEI, 9
    Posts
    5,268
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Which description have you read?
    http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/TypeFive.asp
    "Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."

  16. #16
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    @cancer-the most accurate E type test is still less accurate than an 'average' socionic test
    I can't be arsed defending it anymore, but I will say that if you don't look at it properly, then you're either a dogmatic bastard or someone who doesn't care about self-development.

  17. #17
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    I can't be arsed defending it anymore, but I will say that if you don't look at it properly, then you're either a dogmatic bastard or someone who doesn't care about self-development.
    Calm down. I never said anything against enneagram here. All I said is that the tests to find out your type for them are less accurate than socionic ones.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the enneagram tests themselves are probably better than any existing test for socionics, possibly excepting dmitri's old test, regardless of the overall usefulness of etypes

  19. #19
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    the enneagram tests themselves are probably better than any existing test for socionics, possibly excepting dmitri's old test, regardless of the overall usefulness of etypes
    Can you explain why you think that, please?

  20. #20
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'd say Socionics is a "cognitive" typology, whereas Enneagram is a "physiological" typology.

    It's like Socionics types , and Enneagram types

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    the enneagram tests themselves are probably better than any existing test for socionics, possibly excepting dmitri's old test, regardless of the overall usefulness of etypes
    Nonsense. Ganin's Turbo test is one of the most accurate tests there is. And a licensed MBTI test is much more accurate test for Socionics types than any Enneagram test.

  22. #22
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Nonsense. Ganin's Turbo test is one of the most accurate tests there is. And a licensed MBTI test is much more accurate test for Socionics types than any Enneagram test.
    Nonsense. You are the most accurate devil's advocate there is, believe me.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc View Post
    Nonsense. You are the most accurate devil's advocate there is, believe me.
    No. What I said is the objective truth.

  24. #24
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Calm down. I never said anything against enneagram here. All I said is that the tests to find out your type for them are less accurate than socionic ones.
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    the enneagram tests themselves are probably better than any existing test for socionics, possibly excepting dmitri's old test, regardless of the overall usefulness of etypes
    Thank you, niffweed. This is what I'm talking about, Cyclops.

  25. #25
    Gone. theMime.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,297
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    the enneagram tests themselves are probably better than any existing test for socionics, possibly excepting dmitri's old test, regardless of the overall usefulness of etypes
    agreed.

  26. #26
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Ennagram Type Stackings

    One of the problems I had with Enneagram coming into it was that so much of it seemed kinda arbitrary to me. Things like the paths of integration and disintegration as well as wings just kinda have to be taken at face value it seemed. Wings in particular seemed especially arbitrary to me, since they are based on the wing types being "next" to the primary type in the circle. If the types had been ordered differently, these wings could have changed tremendously. To demonstrate this, switch the types of the mental centers and the emotional centers for a second, so that 2 <-> 5, 3 <-> 6, and 4 <-> 7. If you did this, a "4" (which is a 7 in the normal enneagram) could have a "3" (6 normally) or "5" (2 normally) wing. Basically you'd have 7w6 and 7w2. Also, some people don't seem to fit the wing descriptions any where near as well as others.

    Anyways, my thinking is that there has to be a better way of breaking down enneatypes. Just throwing in instincts isn't really sufficient, I don't think, although they help. But there is one thing that is interesting about the instinct stackings that we can take away: they stack. They are rankings of which ones show up most prominently. So...if I'm so/sx, that means that I'm mostly social, next sexual, and then last self. What if we applied the same logic to types?

    First we'd have to try to boil down types to what they "are" in some sense. It appeared to me that the simplest way to do this was to divide types into centers and object relations. These are, if you are not familiar:

    Centers:
    ce - emotional: 2 3 4
    cm - mental: 5 6 7
    ci - instinctual: 8 9 1

    Object Relations:
    or - rejection: 2 5 8
    oa - attachment: 3 6 9
    of - frustration: 4 7 1

    So...my type (7) would be cm primary and of primary. But a 7 could have different secondaries in both of these stacks...for example, i'm cm/ce - of/oa. A shorter way of writing this would just be 7/3 or 7m3. While I don't think that this implies that I'm really driven or emotional like a 3 is, I do think that I am more...image oriented than some of the other 7s out there that may be 7m2 (cm/ce - of/or), 7m8 (cm/ci - of/or), or 7m9 (cm/ci - of/oa).

    More to come on this.

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  27. #27
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This seems to work, and has more basis than other enneagram hypotheses I've seen in the past. For example, you may have a trifix (mine is 4-6-8, for example), but all that really is, is another arbitrary demarcation denoting general tendencies. With this, the idea is based around object relations -- the most fundamental tenet of e-type interaction IMO. So, what you have, is essentially a "meta-wing" as you call it, based around the chain of object relations, which I think works better than just a trifix based on "this type feels like me." So, for example, I am ce/cm of/oa 4w3, which would produce 4m6 (the other option being cm/cg of/oa 4m9); but if we extended it, like instincts, I would be ce/cm/cg of/oa/or 4m6m8 (lolz). I still think the normal wing is important, because it seems to serve as a necessary filter to the primary fixation. But the meta wing seems more important on a background level, providing the layout of one's interaction with the world rather than just their traits. That being said, my 3 fixation is still stronger than my 6 fixation, but the 6 mindset is essentially how I operate from my other OR/center (and we do seem to operate from all three, in ways). It's important to note that the secondary object relation will always be caused by your wing, as it is essentially an appurtenance. The rest is a chain effect.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  28. #28
    JRiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indian Territory
    TIM
    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so
    Posts
    838
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    I don't see the point of any of this. It's just overcomplicating something that already worked.
    Saying that Enneagram "already works" is satisficing. While I generally like the way Enneagram describes things, I am not satisfied leaving parts that don't make a lot of sense to me just lying out there. I want to see how elements in a persons mind combine to make the several types and the variegated ways they manifest. This is an inquiry of that nature.

    Additionally, I think a big hold up for newcomers to Enneagram as a whole is that you have to kinda accept what it says, just because it says it and go from there. I feel like a process demonstrating how these traits arise could go a long way towards making the Enneagram more of a predictive model and less of an esoteric descriptive system.

    JRiddy
    —————King of Socionics—————

    Ne-ENTp 7w8 sx/so

  29. #29
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Personally I think it's splitting hairs. Everyone has each of the 9 types in them; what matters is where the emphasis is, what influences your mindset and daily activities the most. All of the sub-categories and such are simply matters of refinement based on personal preference.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JRiddy View Post
    One of the problems I had with Enneagram coming into it was that so much of it seemed kinda arbitrary to me. Things like the paths of integration and disintegration as well as wings just kinda have to be taken at face value it seemed.
    It's late, so I did not read the rest of your post past the first paragraph, but the enneagram is not that arbitrary.

    Think of the triads. The center of each triad has a problem where he denies that triads focus - sixes deny that they can provide security for themselves, nines deny that they have desires and instincts, and threes deny that they have personal feelings.

    Moreover, each of the wings of each center have their triad's problem limited, but take on the issue of the other triad they are touching. Looking at the Thinking triad, fives believe they can find secuity through reason, but are more antisocial due to it, while sevens believe they can find peace and security, but only by ignoring the downside (thinking triad coping mechanism) and indulging in sensations (instinctive triad coping mechanism).

  31. #31
    Board philosopher or bored philosopher? jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    884
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZTCrawcrustle View Post
    It's late, so I did not read the rest of your post past the first paragraph, but the enneagram is not that arbitrary.

    Think of the triads. The center of each triad has a problem where he denies that triads focus - sixes deny that they can provide security for themselves, nines deny that they have desires and instincts, and threes deny that they have personal feelings.

    Moreover, each of the wings of each center have their triad's problem limited, but take on the issue of the other triad they are touching. Looking at the Thinking triad, fives believe they can find secuity through reason, but are more antisocial due to it, while sevens believe they can find peace and security, but only by ignoring the downside (thinking triad coping mechanism) and indulging in sensations (instinctive triad coping mechanism).
    One can come up with a personality theory, and that theory can make a reasonable amount of sense, but the only way that it should be considered valid is if it is empirically sound. A lot of Enneagram theory might not be arbitrary, but one should form no opinion on its validity until it is actually demonstrated that the theory is valid or invalid. This applies more to theories that go beyond simple descriptions, and incorporate things like "wings" and models of functions that are not straightforward. In other words, the issue being discussed here is whether the Enneagram is arbitrary, but the bigger issue is whether it is valid.

    Jason
    LII

  32. #32
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    One can come up with a personality theory, and that theory can make a reasonable amount of sense, but the only way that it should be considered valid is if it is empirically sound. A lot of Enneagram theory might not be arbitrary, but one should form no opinion on its validity until it is actually demonstrated that the theory is valid or invalid. This applies more to theories that go beyond simple descriptions, and incorporate things like "wings" and models of functions that are not straightforward. In other words, the issue being discussed here is whether the Enneagram is arbitrary, but the bigger issue is whether it is valid.

    Jason
    There have been a few neurological studies linking types to specific chemical levels in the brain.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_m View Post
    One can come up with a personality theory, and that theory can make a reasonable amount of sense, but the only way that it should be considered valid is if it is empirically sound. A lot of Enneagram theory might not be arbitrary, but one should form no opinion on its validity until it is actually demonstrated that the theory is valid or invalid. This applies more to theories that go beyond simple descriptions, and incorporate things like "wings" and models of functions that are not straightforward. In other words, the issue being discussed here is whether the Enneagram is arbitrary, but the bigger issue is whether it is valid.

    Jason
    The critique of the enneagram came from its arbitrariness, so I addressed that. I made no assumptions as to the enneagram's validity. Besides, since the enneagram ultimately relies on your own subjective opinion of yourself, I really treat it no better than the MBTT, albeit the enneatypes come from mostly external behavior.

  34. #34
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZTCrawcrustle View Post
    The critique of the enneagram came from its arbitrariness, so I addressed that. I made no assumptions as to the enneagram's validity. Besides, since the enneagram ultimately relies on your own subjective opinion of yourself, I really treat it no better than the MBTT, albeit the enneatypes come from mostly external behavior.
    How would you know if it's arbitrary? Just because you haven't seen the patterns which it is based off of, does not mean it is arbitrary.

    The patterns are blatantly clear to me, as are their derivatives, and correlates with other fields of psychology and even science. It doesn't rely primarily on your "subjective opinion of yourself"; it is not some loosely-defined pop-psychology gibberish. The patterns are inherent facets of peoples' psychology, and bear strong reflections in external reality (i.e. what the object relations essentially are). Saying that it does "ultimately" rely on this is not only redundant and erroneous, but illustrative of your complete ignorance on the subject.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I argued that it was not arbitrary. Jriddy said he could not see the patterns.

  36. #36
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZTCrawcrustle View Post
    I argued that it was not arbitrary. Jriddy said he could not see the patterns.
    I think he meant that he couldn't see the intrinsic basis of the patterns completely. The manifestations themselves are quite easy to spot, but until one extrapolates the derivatives, the system can seem arbitrary.

  37. #37
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    If you can see the real and visible patterns of something, then it doesn't matter if it's not transparent enough for you to see the system by which it works. It's real. It works. Just because you don't know how and why, does not mean it is "arbitrary." Making up some overcomplicated cm, of, etc.-whatever-thing just so you can pretend to understand something more complex is pretty dumb.
    I agree with the part about making a system to model things which essentially doesn't render them any more substantial. But the delineation I was making to ZT (or whomever) was in reference to the idea of seeing things as arbitrary because you only see the ostensible manifestations without understanding the essential patterns.

    As per Riddy's idea, I think he hasn't explained it well enough, so it seems like alpha NT jargon. But he has explained it to me in some detail, and I can say that there seems to be a general basis for it, in regards to relative interactions of object relations focuses. Does this mean it somehow alters the fundamentals of enneagram? No—those processes are intrinsic to nature and unchangeable anyway. But it does offer a unique interpretation of those processes, if nothing else.

  38. #38
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    Oh, okay. To me, it just seemed like picking the two types you liked most and then making up a system to justify why it works. Or something. I dunno, I couldn't get myself to give it more than a skim.
    lol, yeah, it could seem like that on first read—just as the enneagram could seem like an mbti-esque version of subjective personality typing on first read.

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyway, having read the remainder of JRiddy's post, I think I, by and large, addressed it with my first post.

    As to why you cannot juggle the types around the enneagram, there is a logic to their madness.

    As to why, for example, there cannot be a 7/3 type is that sevens and threes have deficiencies and strengths in opposite areas. They can be similar, but only superficially so.

  40. #40
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JRiddy View Post
    One of the problems I had with Enneagram coming into it was that so much of it seemed kinda arbitrary to me. Things like the paths of integration and disintegration as well as wings just kinda have to be taken at face value it seemed. Wings in particular seemed especially arbitrary to me, since they are based on the wing types being "next" to the primary type in the circle. If the types had been ordered differently, these wings could have changed tremendously. To demonstrate this, switch the types of the mental centers and the emotional centers for a second, so that 2 <-> 5, 3 <-> 6, and 4 <-> 7. If you did this, a "4" (which is a 7 in the normal enneagram) could have a "3" (6 normally) or "5" (2 normally) wing. Basically you'd have 7w6 and 7w2. Also, some people don't seem to fit the wing descriptions any where near as well as others.
    Sorry but, what kind of proof is that? It requires the enneagram types to be a commutative group, a property that hasn't been mentioned anywhere (and that seems invalid, it's incosistent with the other properties); the ordering of types is an essential part of it.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •