DCNH subtypes and Enneagram

[Krig the Viking]

So I think I've figured out how Socionics and Enneagram are related. Here's my theory.

As described in this article, our psyches are composed of our Nature and our Persona. Nature being the immutable core of who we are, and Persona being the image we project to function in the world. Sociotype is an aspect of our Nature, and I believe the evidence indicates that Enneatype is an aspect of our Persona.

The reason for this is that, as described in the Enneatype Overviews listed on EnneagramInstitute.com*, Enneagram Types develop primarily as a result of one's relationship with one's parents. The first obvious correlation between Sociotype and Enneatype is that one's Sociotype, along with the Sociotypes of one's parents, will play a large part in determining the nature of one's relationship with one's parents. A person with a Duality relationship with both parents imay well become a Nine, barring extenuating circumstances, whereas a person with a Conflict relationship with both parents may be more likely to become a Four, barring extenuating circumstances.

However, I think the biggest link between Socionics and Enneagram is via the DCNH subtype system. Like Enneatype, in my opinion subtype is an aspect of the Persona, not the Nature (I'm sure JohnDo would disagree with me on that, but his conception of subtypes is misguided). Because they both belonged to the Persona, I instinctively felt that there must be some relationship between Enneatype and Socionics subtype, but I was looking at it backwards: I thought that one's subtype must determine one's Enneatype. I am now convinced that it is the other way around: one's relationship with one's parents determines one's Enneatype, and one's Enneatype determines one's subtype.

Essentially, Enneagram type determines the role one plays in one's family. Each role calls for a certain type of behaviour, which will require the use of certain information elements that may or may not be strong in one's Sociotype. Repeated use of these information elements results in a DCNH subtype.

For example: an LII 5 grows up feeling ambivalent about both his parents: he's not getting all the support and guidance he really wants from them, but he still feels that if he can figure out a role to play, he could win his parents' attention. However, no role to play is immediately apparent, so he withdraws to try to figure something out. They try to figure out the world, in order to figure out their place in it. This systematizing task requires a focus on Ti, leading to a Ti-Normalizing subtype.

On the other hand, an LII 4 grows up feeling entirely disconnected from both parents, and so gives up entirely on ever getting any support and guidance from his parents. Lacking role models, he therefore turns inward to his imagination in order to find information about himself. This task would require a focus on Ni, leading to an Ni-Harmonizing subtype.

Anyway, that's my theory. I haven't figured out all the details yet -- it does seem that types 4 and 9 correlate with the Harmonizing subtype, and 5 with Normalizing. How does all this match up with everyone else's experiences?



*Enneatype Overviews can be found at these links:
1—Enneagram Type One: The Reformer—Overview
2—Enneagram Type Two: The Helper—Overview
3—Enneagram Type Three: The Achiever—Overview
4—Enneagram Type Four: The Individualist—Overview
5—Enneagram Type Five: The Investigator—Overview
6—Enneagram Type Six: The Loyalist—Overview
7—Enneagram Type Seven: The Enthusiast—Overview
8—Enneagram Type Eight: The Challenger—Overview
9—Enneagram Type Nine: The Peacemaker-Overview

[Absurd]

Only the Normalizing subtype fits me. Correct.

[FDG]

Nah, enneagram is inborn. Inborn orientation towards life determines the relationship you will likely have with your parents.

[Creepy-male]

Nah, enneagram is inborn. Inborn orientation towards life determines the relationship you will likely have with your parents.

This is the view R&H currently favour. Additionally, the "nurture" part is now instinct. Self-pres is a result of a primary caregiver not being able to do they job in whatever way (the child must fend for themselves to fill in for this absent role), social is a result of cross-generational caregivers (representing a static, farming culture), and sexual is a result of a nuclear family unit (representing nomadic, hunter-gatherer cultures). I lost the link, and may not have explained it well, though.

I think you're onto something with Enneagram being a natural filter that prefers certain DCNH types, though.

As a total tangent... let's say I'm C-SEI and 9w1. Assuming SEI and 9w1 are inborn, what kind of childhood would produce a Creative subtype?

[Krig the Viking]

Nah, enneagram is inborn. Inborn orientation towards life determines the relationship you will likely have with your parents.

Is there an article on this somewhere?

[redbaron]

Nah, enneagram is inborn. Inborn orientation towards life determines the relationship you will likely have with your parents.

I agree.

[Gilly]

Enneagram isn't inborn. Maybe certain propensities, but personally I think these kinds of things are formed by our early assessments of necessary survival strategies.

[Absurd]

Enneagram isn't inborn.

Of course it is not inborn. That would be silly.

[Creepy-male]

Of course it is not inborn. That would be silly.

Absurd, even.

[Absurd]

Absurd, even.

Hmm ?

[redbaron]

Absurd, even.

damn you beat me to that joke! LOL

[electric sheep]

If enneagram was inborn wouldn't that take away from its dynamic aspect and our ability to change our behavior? I think it's mostly habits and defense mechanisms that we learn at a very early age that get solidified over time. These things are changeable.

[redbaron]

If enneagram was inborn wouldn't that take away from its dynamic aspect and our ability to change our behavior? I think it's mostly habits and defense mechanisms that we learn at a very early age that get solidified over time.

I dunno. I'm not one to believe that your enneagram type ever changes. I think you can certainly change the level of health and integration to become more balanced but I think you're probably always the same e-type, just as I think you're always the same socionics type. But who knows. I could be wrong. If it's something that occurs at a very early age, it's not easy to either confirm or deny.

[Absurd]

Absurd, even.

damn you beat me to that joke! LOL

Very funny

[Gilly]

If it's something that occurs at a very early age, it's not easy to either confirm or deny.

ding.

[Krig the Viking]

Nah, enneagram is inborn. Inborn orientation towards life determines the relationship you will likely have with your parents.

Upon further reflection, I really don't see how that could be possible. In my opinion, the strongest influence on how well one gets along with one's parents is Socionics intertype relations. I don't see how an Enneagram type would override that. For example, if everything else in the circumstances is normal, how could an ESE with ESE+LII parents be "disconnected" from his parents, as in types 1, 4, and 7? I just don't see an ESE being a 7 if his mother is an LII and there are no external extenuating circumstances.

While I'm still interested in seeing an article on the subject if anyone has a link to one, I suspect that what is being referred to when it is said that Enneagram type is "inborn" is actually, unwittingly, the Socionics type. Since one's sociotype doesn't change, and the sociotypes of one's parents don't change, if Enneagram type is in fact determined by sociotype relations then you could in an indirect sense say that Enneagram type is already essentially determined by the time a person is born.

Either way, though, I do expect that there will be a strong correlation between Enneagram type and DCNH subtype. I don't know if there will be a 1:1 correlation across all types, but I do expect to see that, for example, all ESE 9s will be Harmonizing subtype.

Now I just have to go about finding the Enneagram and DCNH types of a decent sample size of people, to see if there's any real-world grounding to what I'm saying, or if I'm just making unwarranted connections based on too little evidence.

[Khola aka Bee]

This is the view R&H currently favour. Additionally, the "nurture" part is now instinct. Self-pres is a result of a primary caregiver not being able to do they job in whatever way (the child must fend for themselves to fill in for this absent role), social is a result of cross-generational caregivers (representing a static, farming culture), and sexual is a result of a nuclear family unit (representing nomadic, hunter-gatherer cultures). I lost the link, and may not have explained it well, though.

I think you're onto something with Enneagram being a natural filter that prefers certain DCNH types, though.

As a total tangent... let's say I'm C-SEI and 9w1. Assuming SEI and 9w1 are inborn, what kind of childhood would produce a Creative subtype?

I would also be interested in responses to this question. Also, where is a good information source for further reading on DCNH types?

[electric sheep]

Upon further reflection, I really don't see how that could be possible. In my opinion, the strongest influence on how well one gets along with one's parents is Socionics intertype relations. I don't see how an Enneagram type would override that. For example, if everything else in the circumstances is normal, how could an ESE with ESE+LII parents be "disconnected" from his parents, as in types 1, 4, and 7? I just don't see an ESE being a 7 if his mother is an LII and there are no external extenuating circumstances.

You put too much faith in socionics. There are always extenuating circumstances. You suggest that there is an ideal enneagram outcome for each socionics type. So if an ESE has socionically ideal parents, you say he will not become a member of the frustration quadra (1,4,7). What kind of ideal ESE do you think an LII father/mother would raise?

While I'm still interested in seeing an article on the subject if anyone has a link to one, I suspect that what is being referred to when it is said that Enneagram type is "inborn" is actually, unwittingly, the Socionics type. Since one's sociotype doesn't change, and the sociotypes of one's parents don't change, if Enneagram type is in fact determined by sociotype relations then you could in an indirect sense say that Enneagram type is already essentially determined by the time a person is born.

Chicken or the egg. Is a person born sensitive to abuses of authority, and then once they experience this abuse they harden themselves against it and become a 6? Or are they actually subjected to situations where authority is consistently unjust so they decide to insulate themselves against it, thereby becoming a 6 in the process. How can you tell the difference?
Even with articles like this you still can't tell because the changes in brain chemicals could come as a result to real problems and real adaptations to those problems, and not just genetic predispositions. It's probably a combination of both. I don't know and neither do you. (unless you really do know, in which case I would like you to tell me how you know this)

edit: nevermind, I didn't read the article, here's what RH says:

We are quite cognizant of the debate on the relative contributions of nature versus nurture towards the development of personality. We have become convinced that nature determines type, but nurture determines health within the type, and interestingly also determines variant (Social, Sexual, and Self-preservation). We have formed a theory on the environmental basis of variant, and are developing a testing instrument to test our hypothesis.

Now you see I'm a little biased against genetics...

Either way, though, I do expect that there will be a strong correlation between Enneagram type and DCNH subtype. I don't know if there will be a 1:1 correlation across all types, but I do expect to see that, for example, all ESE 9s will be Harmonizing subtype.

You would have to find them first. I don't know any.

I dunno. I'm not one to believe that your enneagram type ever changes. I think you can certainly change the level of health and integration to become more balanced but I think you're probably always the same e-type, just as I think you're always the same socionics type. But who knows. I could be wrong. If it's something that occurs at a very early age, it's not easy to either confirm or deny.

I wasn't suggesting your enneagram type can change. You can move up and down, but not side to side. I'm guessing this is somehow related to the experience trap in that once certain lessons become ingrained in our deep subconscious it's very hard to unlearn them. You are theoretically able to overcome the problems related to your enneagram type--in other words, you can improve on the lessons you've already learned--but you can't completely remove them and insert new ones.

[silverchris9]

Enneagram isn't inborn. Maybe certain propensities, but personally I think these kinds of things are formed by our early assessments of necessary survival strategies.

I agree. I suspect sociotype also occurs by a similar phenomenon, but that the "nature" aspect of us (or the selfsame) is that which elects a specific strategy and emphasis, for reasons unknown but which could possibly involve an even deeper, inborn level of personality, character or the unity which spins out (or which can be spun out) into the ethos-logos-pathos trichotomy, a level of personality for which we do not have a measuring system (like quarks or maybe like "strings").

Anyway, regarding the original post, I think there is a somewhat naive acceptance of the Freudian commonplace that everything starts in childhood, but aside from that, I agree with a lot of the ideas, and I think you used the nature/persona dichotomy/distinction well.

[The Exception]

These are the enneagram associations I get the DCNH subtypes:

D = 8

C = 7

N = 1

H = 9

[FDG]

Yeah, that seems to work.

[Creepy-male]

Since DCNH subtypes have the side-effect of usually being the first thing one notices in a person, I think this is useful to the extent that it can point out how people are likely to be mistyped...

[Krig the Viking]

I've been trying to figure out a correlation between these two systems for quite a while. I'm not sure it's quite this simple, though. For example, would a C-LII really be a 7?

Trying to find a connection between these two systems feels like trying to put a puzzle together in the dark. Some of the pieces fit together quite well, but you're not sure if all the pieces are there, or even if these pieces are all from the same puzzle.

[Creepy-male]

I'd imagine a C-LII could at first glance resemble a 7, without necessarily being a 7. You may find a 9 inside (as was the case with one of my friends).

Assuming DCNH subtypes give off first-impression level signals, and that the ennegram on some level describes surface characteristics, the extent that these two correlate is the extent to which DCNH and the enneagram can map to one another.

Anyway, you can relax that nervous Fi, Krig, nothing you can say could potentially supervise me as hard as my LSE grandma calling me a feckless slug

[The Exception]

I've been trying to figure out a correlation between these two systems for quite a while. I'm not sure it's quite this simple, though. For example, would a C-LII really be a 7?

Trying to find a connection between these two systems feels like trying to put a puzzle together in the dark. Some of the pieces fit together quite well, but you're not sure if all the pieces are there, or even if these pieces are all from the same puzzle.

The base type still trumps subtype. I think 5 is most likely enneagram type for an LII, with types such as 1 or 6 not being uncommon. There are some LII 9's out there and I'll bet most of them are H subtypes.

Using myself as an example, I'm an H-LII. I'm a type 5 on the enneagram but type 9 isn't too far behind. I have had people suggest 9 as a type.


A C-LII might be an enneagram 5 with good access to type 7. They might display 7ish behaviors but they are not a 7.

[discojoe]

Can anyone provide any literature mentioning DCNH being the primary producer of first impressions?

[Creepy-male]

I don't think there's anything out there? I didn't mean to make it sound official or anything, it's just the impression I've gotten.

[munenori2]

I know barely anything about DCNH, but I am definitely a 9 and likely a harmonizing subtype.

[1981slater]

Some users familiar with the enneagram typed me as 7w6.

My self typing regarding DCNH is D.

[discojoe]

Well I also believe myself to be a D, but the first impression I make is usually a quiet, well-spoken, clean-cut, polite guy who thoughtfully listens and thinks before he speaks.

When amongst friends, however, I let loose with relentless emotionality, talkativeness, Fe-oriented speech and appeals. I also tend to take charge when leadership is needed in some situation. I authoritatively instruct and coordinate, usually with an eye on effectiveness rather than efficiency.

The Te aspect of Ds is shown when I am in the midst of a row with somebody over some kind of resource (time, activity, items, etc.). I have a way of coming out on top of these negotiations, almost always ending up with a more favorable settlement than my opponent. Joy will attest to this; she's complained on numerous occasions that I always get what I want, and I do so very reactively, emotionally, and intensely.

Anyway, the reason I mention all this shite is because I think it points to D, which seems counterintuitive considering the "strengthened" information elements of type D compared to my type and my various other subtypes.

[DirectorAbbie]

I'm a D1. There are 9 E-types and some only come in some socionics types. This needs a lot of refiguring.

[Galen]

If I cared about DCNH I'd call myself harmonizing. Also 6w5.

[Wynch]

Some users familiar with the enneagram typed me as 7w6.

My self typing regarding DCNH is D.

I tend to be a 7 without a wing, but I'm also a D.

[Creepy-male]

Yeah, I'd agree with D for you, DJ. I tend to give the impression that I'm an extrovert... until I drop out of social situations altogether I was also thinking of another case of an LII I knew from school who was always really animated and emotive, but that may have been because every time I saw him he was playing to a crowd of Fe egos.

It may have very little to do with DCNH.

[redbaron]

Can anyone provide any literature mentioning DCNH being the primary producer of first impressions?

DCNH is not my first impression of people. Usually it's instinct stacking.

[Aleksei]

It probably depends on type. I did this huge-ass correlation table of IE subtypes with MBTI and Enneagram once. Lemme find it...