Aspects of sx/so

[Eliza Thomason]

@Kim, we once discussed sx/so, and you did not see how I could be this (same as what you are). I do agree with you that you and I are different, yet for me, I see us as differing expressions of the same stacking. I have been meaning to explain this, but have not yet found the original article that made it so clear to me. However I just found an excerpt quoted below that does explain it partly. So I will start this thread so you can see that, and also so that others who see themselves as a variants of sx/so can see if they find themselves here better.

I know that the following link is too simplistic of an explanation for stalkings. While it certainly describes some to a "t", it also leaves many people out of any one of those categories. Here: http://theenneagram.blogspot.com/200...stackings.html

The tests I have taken and the longer explanations I have read make me sue that according to the Enneagram theory, I am sx/so. Yet my fit to any of the types in the above article is not great - I am one of he "left out". So I wanted you to see another explanation of sx/so stacking that did have a place for me that fits. As you can see, the three differnt sx/so's come across quite differently, so much so that you would think they are all different stackings. So then you can see how three very different people can be sx/so. Also @AdamStrange, who is sx/so, (and I agree) - I would be interested in your thought on this too.:

From: http://typewatchenneagram.blogspot.com/


Fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. - pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.

Flirter sx/so - strong sx, moderate soc, weak sp. - highly sociable and extroverted per type, flirtatious interaction style, more coy than firesiders but more risque than coolsiders.

Coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. - pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.

Kim and Adam, I woudl be interested in which of those you think you are. Kim, I am pretty sure you might be "Fireside". Correct me if I am wrong! You are like a flame. A flame of life. ..I wonder which you are, Adam? I am pretty sure I am "Coolside"... while also not personally being a political activist, especially since I think politics are all fixed, and politicians uninspiring. But substitute something else for politics (And I can explain how I personally do this! But I don't want to bore people, and I think it might!). Also, I think the first link seems to be describing "Firesides" only when defining sx-first....

I think I am Coolside but I lean to "Flirter" when socializing IRL, yet its something I have learned to consciously cool down and put a veil over because I do not want my intentions to be misunderstood, and when I am just "being myself", they sometimes are. (I writing I have time to think about what comes out of me, and how it might be misunderstood, so I can rethink it, and edit).

An example that sticks out in my life follows. Years ago when I began my first position as a teacher, our school was a "new" organization in an old school, the result of summertime district massive re-organization. We had a brand-new first time principal who had previously been district administration. I was brand-new to teaching along with another, the rest were transfers from other schools and as well as a group of veterans. To break ice before the start of the schoolyear, there was a happy hour event at a local spot for all the staff. All of us were a bit awkward and everyone checking everyone out. The principal was there, as was her husband - who was a principal in a neighboring district. There was all that wariness about new colleagues, no one much talking to the principal, and no one at all talking to her husband, who was observing a bit awkwardly. There were hesitations to be the conversation-starter, and none of the "starters" were getting too far yet. And I would not be the one to address the group - only be the responder to the one who is addressing the group. But in order to start socializing, I went for the one-on-one, which is my normal social approach, particularly directed to one not talking at all, to draw out what it interesting about them. So, completely oblivious to how this might look to others, I tried to engage the principals husband to talk about himself, with smiles and encouraging questions, attempting to get to some interesting talk from my interlocuter, probably with lots of positive encouraging responses. I was notably the youngest there, just out of college, so a generation gap there, and people don't know me, so maybe misunderstood - but while I was talking, the principal - my new boss - says loudly, "Hey! That's my husband!" -- silencing ALL, turning all heads to me,which i hate, and I am sure I who went completely white and then completely red, completely humiliated, because to flirt with anyone's husband - much less my boss's! - would be the last thing I would do adn teh accusation - in front of all - shocked me.

(in the above incident, with all looking at me, I do recall the more mature staff - mostly female - having some looks of curiosity observing my startled reaction, also "knowing" looks - like "she deserved it, she was flirting with the boss' husband", the boss looking at me triumphant as if she had caught me in something, and the husband looking pleased to be "flirted" with - I wasn't flirting! - and keenly observant of my emotional reaction to being confused. I was definitely no good at standing up for myself and hated being started at by the group so my next move was to seek for any other conversation to comment on...

Yes, so I was just socializing like I normally did. Which sometimes did make people think I was seeking relationship or something when I was not.

So incidents like this made me put a "veil" over this way, to "subdue" it. When I socialize now I am constantly subduing, and I have had practice. I'm older now, with gray hairs to prove it. However, I abhor the idea of being considered a "cougar" - I do not need a young male's attention to feel young - not only do I not care about feeling young I hate the idea of that motive - it feels like using people, which I abhor - so I still have reason to subdue, so as not to be misunderstood in that way. (I actually hate being misunderstood, so, I strive to make my actions clear socially). Another defense against this assumption which I practice is to immediately establish and validate the person's relationship, or mine, talking about his wife, i.e., and engaging their wife if she is there - and I tend to talk to the wife instead, to be safe (and really in the same way I would have talked to the husband) or I talked about "my husband". (Which was harder to do when i was single for so long before I remarried, and so I sort of stopped socializing at that time).

So, these are the "veils" that I put on my sx/so very much cool down and subdue the expected traits I'm bolding with red here, which is quoted for sx-first in that first link I gave:
intense, assertive, aggressive, impulsive, focused, idealistic, and relationship and adrenaline "junkies".

(I can definitely own "intense, impulsive, focused, idealistic and relationship -focused").

There are other longer explanations of aspects of sx/so that I have read that I can't locate right not though..

[Samson]

Your entire description of the happy hour event sounds incredibly Social to me. The way you introduce the event: position as teacher, "new" organization in an old school, summertime district reorganization, new principal who previously had been district admin, others were transfers, group of veterans,... etc
All this is Social talk: someone's place in the world as they are in relation to others.
Nothing in there describes Sx dominance to me, not even the accidental flirting. In fact, this is exactly So/Sx 's approach to the world. One-to-one in order to make the whole of the social happening more inclusive. Sx in service of So.

Also, you strike me as very sync-flow, for what it's worth. Not wanting to bore people, wanting to make the awkward person feel included... That's not contra-flow

Sync-flow Social seems about right to me: So/Sx

[Eliza Thomason]

Your entire description of the happy hour event sounds incredibly Social to me. The way you introduce the event: position as teacher, "new" organization in an old school, summertime district reorganization, new principal who previously had been district admin, others were transfers, group of veterans,... etc
All this is Social talk: someone's place in the world as they are in relation to others.
Nothing in there describes Sx dominance to me, not even the accidental flirting. In fact, this is exactly So/Sx 's approach to the world. One-to-one in order to make the whole of the social happening more inclusive. Sx in service of So.

Also, you strike me as very sync-flow, for what it's worth. Not wanting to bore people, wanting to make the awkward person feel included... That's not contra-flow

Sync-flow Social seems about right to me: So/Sx

Well the first post to a question is often the least-thought-out one so this is no exception. Please note I did not post it because I needed help trying to figure out what my type is. You don't know me and you don't know what I know of Enneagram. So to clarify: I am not asking random opinions of my type, but for commentary of the three different kinds of sx/so, which I posted. I bolded it, so you should be able to see its the focus of the post.

Are you so-last? Its hard for me to understand how you could miss that this was not any everyday social gathering, and that's why it merited explanation. Contrary to your conclusions about this one event, which was unusual and not typical, I will add some other explanations just in case you are a thinker and I am not wasting my time. I don't know. I have been to about 3 happy hours in my entire life. Its not something I normally do, as I would rather be home with my husband or visiting with one friend, enriching that friendship, rather than be at a social event. I get anxiety about upcoming social events, and I have to deal with it all week before it happens, like I am now for an event next weekend. They make me nervous, so I only go to ones I feel I need to go to in order to be true to my values, then I take time preparing my mind and self to eliminate as many possible areas of anxiety before the event. They always turn out fine, and always the anxiety beforehand seems to have been a waste, but it doesn't ever change the fact that I do not seek social events.

In the case of my story above, I was beginning a profession I spent countless time and money preparing for; its a time of a frightening monumental step into adulthood, and you don't want to do the wrong things, and when your new colleagues and your new boss are going out to happy hour and invited you, you con't say, "Naw, happy hours don't interest me.".. You go and do your best. However, @Samson, you seem to imply that sx/so's contraflow would be "- excluding, eliminating, separating, contradicting, subverting, reforming, rupturing" - even in this extreme situation, this social pressure for your work, would, if they felt nervous about socializing like I did would see that only, and be "contra", saying, "No thanks, new boss who extended the invitation, and, no thanks, new colleagues stopping at my door to make sure I am informed - "I am going to be separate and contradictory and eliminate myself from this unwanted event as I'm not feeling it." No, I do not think all sx/so would all be like this. I do not think we are slaves to our Socionics type or Enneagram stackings but instead normal people rise to the occasion, and do basically what's expected, particularly at key moments, even if we don't feel happy or competent about it.

So you don't know me and I would not ask your opinion til I had a sense that you did, or until I saw evidence that you know something of stackings, beyond the stereotypical quiz-result things, which I am too familiar with. I am looking for something beyond that.

@silke, I respect your thoughts on Socionics and Enneagram, so I wonder what you think of those three types of sx-first. Do you agree, that the popular perception of sx-first is of a "Fireside". Also, what do you think, in that 2nd link, of the quoted explanations of the three kinds of sp-first and the three kinds of so-first?? Also, can you tell me of a good online source for articles that goes into the different divisions of instinct stackings with more detail, like these?

Also further down that page is another explanation of sx-first types:
seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

That "wanderer" really speaks to me - it seems like such an apt explanation of my life experience, something I have grown into over time - sx with brakes. Exactly. I have become increasingly like that over time as I try to match my values with who I am in the face of changing life circumstances. And the longer article I once read that I cannot find gives an even better explanation. None of the other stackings have a description that hits me as well as that "wanderer" one does, so, again, I feel that's me.

[Aylen]

Well the first post to a question is often the least-thought-out one so this is no exception. Please note I did not post it because I needed help trying to figure out what my type is. You don't know me and you don't know what I know of Enneagram. So to clarify: I am not asking random opinions of my type, but for commentary of the three different kinds of sx/so, which I posted. I bolded it, so you should be able to see its the focus of the post.

Are you so-last? Its hard for me to understand how you could miss that this was not any everyday social gathering, and that's why it merited explanation. Contrary to your conclusions about this one event, which was unusual and not typical, I will add some other explanations just in case you are a thinker and I am not wasting my time. I don't know. I have been to about 3 happy hours in my entire life. Its not something I normally do, as I would rather be home with my husband or visiting with one friend, enriching that friendship, rather than be at a social event. I get anxiety about upcoming social events, and I have to deal with it all week before it happens, like I am now for an event next weekend. They make me nervous, so I only go to ones I feel I need to go to in order to be true to my values, then I take time preparing my mind and self to eliminate as many possible areas of anxiety before the event. They always turn out fine, and always the anxiety beforehand seems to have been a waste, but it doesn't ever change the fact that I do not seek social events. In the case of my story above, I was beginning a profession I spent countless time and money preparing for; its a time a frightening monumental step into adulthood, and you don't want to do the wrong things, and when your new colleagues and your boss are going out to happy hour, you con't say, "Naw, happy hours don't interest me.".. You go and do your best.

So, which of the three are you?? Probably you are Firesside, and you fit sx-first perfect, so you don't bother to learn about the other kinds of Sx-first, instead just say "you are not in my group". I get it, but I think you are taking a shallow approach. Otherwise, you could give me an intelligent viewpoint of what is the difference between a coolside sx-first and, I don't know, maybe a darkside so/sx? That would be a be worthwhile to consider, vs. what you said about me when you don't even know me. I would not ask your opinion til I had a sense that you did, or until I saw evidence that you know something of stackings, beyond the stereotypical quiz-result things, which I am too familiar with. I am looking for something beyond that.
@silke, I respect your thoughts on Socionics and Enneagram, so I wonder what you think of those three types of sx-first. Do you agree, that the popular perception of sx-first is of a "Fireside". Also, what do you think, in that 2nd link, of the quoted explanations of the three kinds of sp-first and the three kinds of so-first?? Also, can you tell me of a good online source for articles that goes into the different divisions of instinct stackings with more detail, like these?

Also further down that page is another explanation of sx-first types:
seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

That "wanderer" really speaks to me - it seems like such an apt explanation of my life experience - sx with brakes. Exactly. I have become increasingly like that over time as I try to match my values with who I am in the face of changing life circumstances. And the longer article I once read that I cannot find gives an even better explanation. None of the other stackings have a description that hits me as well as that "wanderer" one does, so, again, I feel that's me.

You do seem syn-flow>contra flow.

From another angle, the stackings can be seen aligning into two groups, each group moving in reverse direction to the other, which is an indicator to look for some underlying opposite compulsive thrust between them. Briefly stated, from the perspective of human inter-relations, they seem to be as follows:

Flow #1: sp/so —> so/sx —> sx/sp :: Compelled toward people/participation/involvement
Flow #2: sp/sx —> sx/so —> so/sp :: Compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people

The usual disclaimers apply…
a) A given person’s Enneagram type will modify and integrate with these expressions — potentially altering these themes significantly — as will personal history and current psychological state
b) The descriptions of the characteristics of these flows won’t translate into simple literalizations of behaviors; the discussion of these opposite directions is to get at a quality of the substrate material from which these flows and their respective stackings are formed

Integrating these directionalities with the Bhavacakra associations, the magnetic alignment of Flow #1 can, again, be seen turning toward others…as their earthbound collectivist themes convey: ‘animals’, ‘humans’ and ‘hungry ghosts’…in contrast to Flow #2, the non-human non-terrestrials: ‘gods’, ‘titans’ and ‘Hell’.

Flow #1
sp/so (animals) = practical cooperation ~ revering the work of the harvest, the beasts of the field, the ‘fat of the land’
so/sx (humans) = multifaceted/multidirectional attraction ~ the radiant festival of the four corners of the Earth
sx/sp (hungry ghosts) = urgent bonding / ‘unfortunate’ belonging ~ the perpetually orthogonal embrace of the seeker/searcher
Deeply human, compelled toward the process of humanity. Involved.

Flow #2
sx/so (gods) = cultural revolutionary ~ attractive social catalyst, steering popular culture/the arts/the cultural zeitgeist in a new direction using potent new creative forms
so/sp (titans) = culture warrior ~ social change by force and/or eternal higher principle, the booming thundering ‘voice of God’, the loftiest educators and highest clerics
sp/sx (Hell) = acultural solipsism ~ counterculture original, underbelly exposure, smoldering mysterian, the fermenting underground, cool & detached
Outliers, antisocial, energetically autonomous, chemically provocative, reverse-flow change catalysts. On some level, successfully rejecting the human condition…their own and that of others. Priest-gods of their own cult and eco-system.

sx/sp

Quote
'yin mode of seducing' is actually a bit redundant, but is meant to emphasize the receptive nature of sx/sp even at the overtly sexual range.

example, say a marilyn monroe who is perceived as hypersexualized, yet was fairly passive in a seductive style or 'yin mode' of drawing a pursuer rather than doing the pursuing. a sx/so would tend to act in the yang or pursuing role. same game but different roles.

the tractor beam of the seducer is like an event horizon, few can ignore their pull. the sx/so counterpart is the fireside range, a blazing yang which is sharply polarizing in its attracting/repulsing effect. like a test to reveal its true mates, the sx/so fire burns the wood and spares the gold.

seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

sx/sp seducer (weak sp) - sx in full command produces an active recruiter of potential mates; but being sx/sp this remains in the yin mode of seducing. charismatic and overtly sexualized, arguably the most purely sx of all stacks and ranges. draws from so/sx shadow to liven up sx into an erotic playfulness and to keep sx far ahead of their relatively nominal sp. an emotional yearning to their mating ritual; an inherently unstable range that can lead to a pattern of serial heartbreak. often confused for sx/so.

sx/sp mystifier (midrange) - the range where the mystique of the sx/sp stack is at its strongest. unconsciously attracts with intense eye contact and other sx feelers, but holds back enough to give them a kind of untouchable or hard to get close to quality. depending on their true intentions this can either frustrate their sx or reward their functional sp cooling system. like midrangers of all stacks, there's a seemingly casual approach to meeting their variant needs as the secondary instinct is kept both in play and at bay, and others may wonder what they really want.

sx/sp wanderer (strong sp) - the most clasically 'blocked' of the sx's, often exchanging intimacy in favor of the more immediate pleasures of the body. paradoxically the most wandering and restless of the sx/sp's. pulls from sp/so to ensure the sx flood is contained by the sp levee, which can provide a sense of stability at the expense of seeming put off by others. sex can mean a hollow satisfying of the instinct while more vulnerable feelings are suspended. quietly charged but muted, and can seem self pres first.

Are you considering sx/sp now as a "wanderer"? I know from your posts and things you shared why you type sx first. I don't remember your core enneagram type. What is your tritype?

[Eliza Thomason]

You do seem syn-flow>contra flow.

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.

[FONT=Arial]
Are you considering sx/sp now as a "wanderer"? I know from your posts and things you shared why you type sx first. I don't remember your core enneagram type. What is your tritype?]

No! Not sp first. When I have done stacking tests it is consistently sx/so/sp though close, not a big lean. And the descriptions fit. I am iw2. For a long time I thought I was 2w1, but on closer examination I am convinced I am a 1 not a two. But no doubt the wing is 2. This is true on 1 vs.2:

1 vs 2: Ones are much harder on themselves than twos. Twos can think highly of themselves merely by seeing themselves as considerate of others. Even when twos are self-critical, they have more of a pride in being self-critical. Twos being image-center first won't hesitate to have outbursts of emotion, which seems like a lack of self-control to the one.

and this is true about 1w2:

1w2s in contrast sees the 1w9 focus as too detached from humanity and have a more practical morality focus, for example things between people like ethics and etiquette. The 1w2's focus on where to fix things is more in the trenches due to their 2 wing. They value connections between others above abstract ideals in terms of application of principles.

Yes, I can see now that I misread that - it apparently applied to sp first, but yet, that's how I am. A lot of brakes on. Partly due maybe to E-I, wanting to do it right. Not wanting to hurt people and step on toes, either. (when I do I honestly feel I am hurting Jesus). Wanting to live to my principles and awareness that that is all above me (the things I know to be right and good)..

I am not much fluent in Enneagram, though I have read a lot of books on it some time back, and have done a bunch of reading online. Its not my favorite. I prefer Socionics. However the things that I have read and studied in Enneagram I do feel I "get".

I will let you know when I find that tri-type. At the time I figured it, it really did fit with what as written on that tri-type. Sort of curious now.

P.S. I am so sp-last... I am supposed to be paying bills today, which are late, and the day is seriously slipping by..
P.P.S. If you send me a link to a reliable tri-type test or two I may take it again. (Then I can compare it to what I scored before, if I find it)..

[Aylen]

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.


No! Not sp first. When I have done stacking tests it is consistently sx/so/sp though close, not a big lean. And the descriptions fit. I am iw2. For a long time I thought I was 2w1, but on closer examination I am convinced I am a 1 not a two. But no doubt the wing is 2. This is true on 1 vs.2:

1 vs 2: Ones are much harder on themselves than twos. Twos can think highly of themselves merely by seeing themselves as considerate of others. Even when twos are self-critical, they have more of a pride in being self-critical. Twos being image-center first won't hesitate to have outbursts of emotion, which seems like a lack of self-control to the one.

and this is true about 1w2:

1w2s in contrast sees the 1w9 focus as too detached from humanity and have a more practical morality focus, for example things between people like ethics and etiquette. The 1w2's focus on where to fix things is more in the trenches due to their 2 wing. They value connections between others above abstract ideals in terms of application of principles.

Yes, I can see now that I misread that - it apparently applied to sp first, but yet, that's how I am. A lot of brakes on. Partly due maybe to E-I, wanting to do it right. Not wanting to hurt people and step on toes, either. (when I do I honestly feel I am hurting Jesus). Wanting to live to my principles and awareness that that is all above me (the things I know to be right and good)..

I am not much fluent in Enneagram, though I have read a lot of books on it some time back, and have done a bunch of reading online. Its not my favorite. I prefer Socionics. However the things that I have read and studied in Enneagram I do feel I "get".

I will let you know when I find that tri-type. At the time I figured it, it really did fit with what as written on that tri-type. Sort of curious now.

P.S. I am so sp-last... I am supposed to be paying bills today, which are late, and the day is seriously slipping by..
P.P.S. If you send me a link to a reliable tri-type test or two I may take it again. (Then I can compare it to what I scored before, if I find it)..

Ok, I was unsure if you were considering sx/sp because you related to the "wanderer".

Sexual/Social


The instinctual energy of this subtype is the most at odds with their dominant Oneness. This subtype is the most intense. They are looking for perfection in everyone they are close to, not just their spouses. They can be very charismatic and engaging. They can also be very persuasive, like the social/sexual. If they have an opinion you are going to hear about it. It’s very important for them to be understood. They are outwardly competitive. Like the social/sexual, they too may be mistyped as other enneatypes. The anger that is under the surface with the other instinctual variants of type One is much more likely to be apparent with this subtype. You always know where you stand with them. They can mimic type Eight’s energy in this regard. On the high side, this type is warm and engaging, but on the down side this same energy can bring with it the full brunt of the One’s anger and the need to be right.

https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/one-stacks/

[Kim]

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.

Which i would consider sync flow and so first. Everyone wants to express their views, that is not being contra. Sx first will not forego pushing against and stirring the pot for the sake of social harmony. Social harmony can only be created by pushing against forces that threaten it.

[Eliza Thomason]

I'm sp first and procrastinate the hell out of doing that stuff. Somehow, I actually have really good credit though. I think that's purely because I don't like to spend what I don't have and I like to keep my debts low because it will stress me out emensley otherwise. Not enough people seem to give a fuck about debt, but it's actually very important to me. I will usually put my extra/birthday money/etc. twords my bills rather than buy some frivolous thing that I don't need.


I had an sp last roommate who would constantly make impulsive purchases and would get herself into tremendous debt. She would get herself into trouble and not be able to pay her bills, so she'd cry to her boss about it and end up getting loans from her then owe her boss money. Girl was a mess.

I like to avoid stress too so I like to avoid debt and live within my means... but I am not so disciplined (though I aim to be). I tend to budget by keeping a vague balance in my mind (close to overspending, so I better be careful, or, budget is generous currently so I can spend - not even using any figures. I actually live on faith basically. When I was married we had the fruits of stability, living within our means and a steady income. After divorce it was frightening with my unsteady pay and paying rent and bills. I just learned to live on faith. I figured one day I would marry a man who was "set" and could give me back the stability taken away with the divorce. Well when I met my husband, he said, "I am a ruin" and really things were not looking too good for him financially. But I fell in love, and I figured, my lessons of trusting God for finances were hard won, and I wouldn't not waste that lesson, but keep in trusting Him. Our budget is tight but we live within in our means and our happiness is each other. And our biggest expenditure is our big renovation project. For that we are always asking the intercession of St. Joseph - who will have a place in this new room. So long story short, my budget is vague and I trust in God for my finances. Because I don't like to worry about it...

[The Exception]

Breaking news:

I have now changed my stacking to so/sx/sp

I had a real-time chat last night with the person who created this website. He said so/sx/sp was clear from my vibe. So was type 5. He then went to say that an so/sx 5 can frequently be mistyped. This type of 5 is less withdrawn, pulled more towards people, more emotionally expressive, which is true when you compare me to a more 'typical' 5.

I was surprised about SP last. After all I am strongly independent and self-sufficient. I often think about my own mortality and the like. I am good at saving money and I'm quite cautious physically. But he said, these are all typical 5 traits, especially when combined with a 6 wing. He then went on to mention that I don't seem particularly 'grounded', rather out of touch with my body. Which I have to admit is true. I don't really pay much attention at all to my body unless I experience some sensation of discomfort. I could just be a spirit floating in the sky with no body at all and I'd be perfectly content as long as I could still think or feel things.

I'm also definitely more syn-flow as well.

It's always good to get validation from others. More points for SO.

[Samson]

@Eliza Thomason

Whether social gatherings make you nervous or not doesn't mean one can't be Social dominant. Preferring to stay at home doesn't mean one can't be Social dominant. Being Social dominant does not equal being sociable or enjoying social events.

My post was commentary on how you explain your version of "Sx/So Coolside", which I disagree with as I see it as a good example of So/Sx. Since you basically used yourself as an example for this "Sx/So Coolside", any comment on your example will be a comment on your self-typing. Telling people they can't do that is telling people not to post unless they agree with you.
You do seem to underestimate just how (consistently) polarizing Sx/So can be.

You're giving a ton of reasons why this instance was an exception, why even contra-flow people would act the way you did. One golden rule I have with typing is that if you have to make too many excuses for one's type, like saying you're Sx/So except you're different from other Sx/So's because your So is just so much more strong..., then chances are you're overcomplicating type. Keep it simple. Type should be obvious, it shouldn't have to be explained through exceptions.


Also, you say

I do not think we are slaves to our Socionics type or Enneagram stackings but instead normal people rise to the occasion, and do basically what's expected, particularly at key moments, even if we don't feel happy or competent about it.

You are assuming a lot of things about a lot of people. I, for one, disagree entirely with what you think "normal people" do. I don't do "what's expected, even if we don't feel happy or competent about it."
But then, I just might not be a "normal person" either...

You may do this. But, and this is something we can take away from these type theories, not everyone operates the way you do.

[Kim]

I can't respond in great detail, but to me, "coolside sx so" just does not sound sx first, but rather so/sx. I am not sure I find this distinctions all that useful...I suppose we all can to some extent temper our natural inclinations, but if tempering is our go-to habit, then we might have mistyped ourselves.

I am tired, so just a few thoughts:

I self-typed based on the presence of these. All of this applies to me, including the unhealthy parts:

primary concern
intense experiences, connections, and contacts, wide-ranging and exploratory, in order to find something to "complete" them inside (ski jumps, deep conversations, exciting movies)

primary focus:
people and attractions promising intense energy and charge

primary ambition:
looking outside themselves for the person or situation that will complete them, and then obsessing over that completing element

primary stresses:
lack of intense mental or emotional stimulation, lack of an intense connection or experience

coping methods: (unhealthy)
scattered attention, lack of focus, sexual promiscuity, intensely avoiding intense experiences and connections with a fearful and dysfunctional attitude toward sex, intimacy, and other intense "completing" experiences, as is skewed by the secondary instinct

And the relative weakness of these:

primary concern:
physical safety, comfort, and well-being; securing an orderly and aesthetically pleasing way of life (food, clothing, money, housing, and physical health)

primary focus:
security, comfort, and well-being of the environment (lighting, temperature, comfortable furniture, aesthetics, food quality)

primary ambition:
using practicality and financial sense to create a secure environment in the home and workplace (paying bills, acquiring skills to ensure the orderly flow of life)

primary stresses:
money, sustenance (how they will get food, when it will come, if they will like it, if it fits their diet)

coping methods: (unhealthy)
over-stocking, overbuying, overeating, overpurging, oversleeping, undersleeping, overindulging in aesthetics or comfort foods, mistreatment of comfort and security as is

[Adam Strange]

@Kim, we once discussed sx/so, and you did not see how I could be this (same as what you are). I do agree with you that you and I are different, yet for me, I see us as differing expressions of the same stacking. I have been meaning to explain this, but have not yet found the original article that made it so clear to me. However I just found an excerpt quoted below that does explain it partly. So I will start this thread so you can see that, and also so that others who see themselves as a variants of sx/so can see if they find themselves here better.

I know that the following link is too simplistic of an explanation for stalkings. While it certainly describes some to a "t", it also leaves many people out of any one of those categories. Here: http://theenneagram.blogspot.com/200...stackings.html

The tests I have taken and the longer explanations I have read make me sue that according to the Enneagram theory, I am sx/so. Yet my fit to any of the types in the above article is not great - I am one of he "left out". So I wanted you to see another explanation of sx/so stacking that did have a place for me that fits. As you can see, the three differnt sx/so's come across quite differently, so much so that you would think they are all different stackings. So then you can see how three very different people can be sx/so. Also @AdamStrange, who is sx/so, (and I agree) - I would be interested in your thought on this too.:

From: http://typewatchenneagram.blogspot.com/


Fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. - pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.

Flirter sx/so - strong sx, moderate soc, weak sp. - highly sociable and extroverted per type, flirtatious interaction style, more coy than firesiders but more risque than coolsiders.

Coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. - pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.

Kim and Adam, I would be interested in which of those you think you are. Kim, I am pretty sure you might be "Fireside". Correct me if I am wrong! You are like a flame. A flame of life. ..I wonder which you are, Adam? I am pretty sure I am "Coolside"... while also not personally being a political activist, especially since I think politics are all fixed, and politicians uninspiring. But substitute something else for politics (And I can explain how I personally do this! But I don't want to bore people, and I think it might!). Also, I think the first link seems to be describing "Firesides" only when defining sx-first....

Sx..........86%
So..........62%
Sp..........10%

This probably makes me a "Flirter", @eliza. However, I both make regular contributions to political causes, and have been told that I am impossible to ignore in a group. I think I'm different when I'm in a ltr (then, I don't flirt), but right now I'm not, so......Flirter.

[Aylen]

I just read the three examples of sx firsts that I gave, above, and it seems to me that it could be connected in the following way:

Sx/so 8 = Fireside
Sx/so 7 = Flirt
Sx/so 1 = coolside

SX-8 - Anti-social tendency. Rebellious. More provocative than SO, SP. Out front saying "my values are different from the norm". Hysterical, emotional 8. Possession of the scene in total, a little like being the center. Power comes through seductiveness and fascination. Colored feathers.

SX-7 - Heavenly. Glutton for things of the higher world. Dreamer. Passion to imagine something better than [stark] reality, to embellish reality. Looking at all things with optimism of someone who's in love. Too enthusiastic. NN to go for the sweetness of the imagined over ordinary reality. Need to fantasize. Rose-colored spectacles. Oral optimistic character (I think this was a Freudian reference). "I'm OK, You're OK" - which is a therapeutic theme for anyone but a 7.

SX-1 - An animal in heat. Anger infuses desire. "I have to have it and I have a right to it." Example: diamond mines in Africa - feeling that "I did the work to get the diamonds and what would the Africans use them for anyhow? They don't know what to do with diamonds, they don't appreciate them." The conquistador. I have a right to what is wanted. No shame in wanting what's not appropriate - asks "Why Not???" in response to questions of appropriateness. Rhinoceros of a person

Fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. - pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.


Flirter sx/so - strong sx, moderate soc, weak sp. - highly sociable and extroverted per type, flirtatious interaction style, more coy than firesiders but more risque than coolsiders.


Coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. - pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.



I am sure correlations can be made with the other core types as well but I have not read the whole book yet since I mainly focused on my own type.

[Eliza Thomason]

I just read the three examples of sx firsts that I gave, above, and it seems to me that it could be connected in the following way:

Sx/so 8 = Fireside
Sx/so 7 = Flirt
Sx/so 1 = coolside







Fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. - pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.


Flirter sx/so - strong sx, moderate soc, weak sp. - highly sociable and extroverted per type, flirtatious interaction style, more coy than firesiders but more risque than coolsiders.


Coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. - pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.



I am sure correlations can be made with the other core types as well but I have not read the whole book yet since I mainly focused on my own type.

Aylen, thanks for all this excellent information. I am once again having trouble determining my E type. I thought it was E1 but all this emphasis on anger - it doesn't fit. Anger comes out rarely in me. Being annoyed or mad at a person does happen, an I can stick with it for as long as a week, while I debate what is just and right in the situation, and I am always reluctant to act on anger. And, it just doesn't last. It can be strong in the beginning, but it doesn't last. I had seen E's anger as a darkside issue, and I saw myself as havign anger turned inward. I do get angry at injustice, and I will speak/act strongly on that...

As to the different sx and so types, I related least of all to 8, most to 7, in a far-off way, (I might be in my tri-type - it was either a 7 or a 4 in my tri-type, but not both of those - I can't remember) and only. The sx-one description is only vaguely relate-able, but the anger thing - everyone who knows me woudl say this is not me. This is reminding me why I am Enneagram is not a favorite - the patterns and definition just seem elusive. Well, I ought to take a test again. I will sometime. This week has a lot going...

My ex was a so-first and a 6... that one was real clear, particularly the darkside of 6 for him...

I am seeing sx-first as wanting to be one-on-one with people, and in an intimate relationship. Also I consider my relationship with God to be intimate. I see so-first as those in social situations who are more group-aware and less wanting to reveal personal details - and personal details I look for and seek out in persons/strangers because they are the gems that help me to know who they really are. Always a beautiful thing, like a wonderful discovery to see the uniqueness of a person. I see so-first as being admirably aware of the right thing to do socially, while its something I have to work at. I also am not a joiner, at all. I bulk against belonging to a group, and I question they way they do things when I am in one. I see others that seem to be so-first, and I am not like them; they exceed me in social situations and in group-belonging. So I am thinking for me, not so-first. I see that I am far more into one-on-one than others, always having a date or a best friend (except no dating after divorce for me; I chose not to date - I waited on God to choose that for me - figuring I chose SO wrong before - and He unexpectedly brought me my Dh - making me think that God thinks I am better off in a good intimate 1:1, not as a part of a holy order of nuns as I was open to if He wanted that for me -- almost as if God was saying, 1:1 is better for you, not group) - all these things make me think sx-first. Besides the fact that I came out as sx-first every time I tested for stacking. So - eh - I am open to considering other E types, other stacking, but it has to make sense to me. And I have to understand why they test results are wrong...

[Aylen]

Aylen, thanks for all this excellent information. I am once again having trouble determining my E type. I thought it was E1 but all this emphasis on anger - it doesn't fit. Anger comes out rarely in me. Being annoyed or mad at a person does happen, an I can stick with it for as long as a week, while I debate what is just and right in the situation, and I am always reluctant to act on anger. And, it just doesn't last. It can be strong in the beginning, but it doesn't last. I had seen E's anger as a darkside issue, and I saw myself as havign anger turned inward. I do get angry at injustice, and I will speak/act strongly on that...

As to the different sx and so types, I related least of all to 8, most to 7, in a far-off way, (I might be in my tri-type - it was either a 7 or a 4 in my tri-type, but not both of those - I can't remember) and only. The sx-one description is only vaguely relate-able, but the anger thing - everyone who knows me woudl say this is not me. This is reminding me why I am Enneagram is not a favorite - the patterns and definition just seem elusive. Well, I ought to take a test again. I will sometime. This week has a lot going...

My ex was a so-first and a 6... that one was real clear, particularly the darkside of 6 for him...

I am seeing sx-first as wanting to be one-on-one with people, and in an intimate relationship. Also I consider my relationship with God to be intimate. I see so-first as those in social situations who are more group-aware and less wanting to reveal personal details - and personal details I look for and seek out in persons/strangers because they are the gems that help me to know who they really are. Always a beautiful thing, like a wonderful discovery to see the uniqueness of a person. I see so-first as being admirably aware of the right thing to do socially, while its something I have to work at. I also am not a joiner, at all. I bulk against belonging to a group, and I question they way they do things when I am in one. I see others that seem to be so-first, and I am not like them; they exceed me in social situations and in group-belonging. So I am thinking for me, not so-first. I see that I am far more into one-on-one than others, always having a date or a best friend (except no dating after divorce for me; I chose not to date - I waited on God to choose that for me - figuring I chose SO wrong before - and He unexpectedly brought me my Dh - making me think that God thinks I am better off in a good intimate 1:1, not as a part of a holy order of nuns as I was open to if He wanted that for me -- almost as if God was saying, 1:1 is better for you, not group) - all these things make me think sx-first. Besides the fact that I came out as sx-first every time I tested for stacking. So - eh - I am open to considering other E types, other stacking, but it has to make sense to me. And I have to understand why they test results are wrong...

I think knowing your core type is important when it comes to figuring out your instincts. One on one intimate relationships can be valued by any type and I don't think it is the best predictor of sx first. Sx first is not one on one. Sx first is a bit more primal than the other instincts. Sp in hardly primal these days unless you are living somewhere where you have to physically fight for daily survival. Anyone with internet is probably not facing those issues.

I think this may explain it better than I can.

The three instincts–self-preservation, sexual, social

Self-pres is the first instinct to evolve. Bacteria have it. The organism finds the proper environment—how am I doing? Orientation to survival and comfort. Humans have a complex nervous system. Self-pres checks in with the body—not enough or too much? The body reports on self-pres needs. Animals will do what they need to do in the moment. They don’t have to stick to a schedule. They are attuned. Root brain. Oldest, deepest, instinct. “I must survive.” Humans are kind of distant from basic survival needs. That is, we have more sophistication, with a wider sphere of comfort, and complex regulation. Once survival is taken care of, we aim for comfort.

Self-pres orients to practical concerns. Energy is conserved, out of a sense that there’s only a finite amount. Same with time. Gayle talked about aborigines—they don’t waste energy because they believe that each life has a finite amount—and when you use it up, you’re done for. In neurotic self-pres, there is fear of not having enough resources. This fear can distort the natural use of the instinct.

The instincts affect how we show up in relationships. For self-pres, there’s a focus on nesting, domesticity, life partner, building a home with someone—that’s the fantasy, anyways.

Sexual – is NOT one-on-one. One-on-one—romance—is a heart issue. This is sometimes mistaken for an instinctual choice. In Nature, sexual reproduction helps to genetically diversify the species—conduces to survival. Russ calls this instinct “attraction.” It’s aggressive, competitive, single-minded, on display, the animal finds smells, stimulation. Use of energy is intensely creative, fiery, go-get-it, a life-and-death matter. E.g. salmon swimming upstream to mate and die.

We live in a sea of magnetism—attraction/repulsion—we don’t control this, or what we are drawn to. Most being-drawn doesn’t lead to the sexual act. We’re turned or not. It is what it is. You can’t fight mother nature. Attraction is smarter than social needs. Russ and Gayle gave the story of how someone has shown that arranged marriages conduce to a more stable society but one which is more susceptible to being wiped out by epidemics. Attraction has an unconscious intelligence. (pheremones).

In relationship, there’s desire for endless engagement and fascination. One is captivated energetically by someone or something. Not after domestic simplicity. One can have the sexual instinct operating with friends—being in the heat. Stimulated, energized.

All instincts play into sexuality. Self-pres is the body-to-body part—cuddling, autonomic regulation, sensuality. Sexual—waves of energy—riding the waves, force between the people. Doesn’t need to be actively physical. Social—sharing of energy. Affection, bridge between the primal instinct and emotional life. In good sex, all three instincts combine—warmth (self-pres), energy (sexual), affection (social).

Social – is not the same as socializing. There’s concern about the well-being of the other, caretaking, adaptation. This instinct is aimed towards species survival and evolved with mammals and some insect species. Species where society is organized to protect the vulnerability of mother and child. Organisms with more complex nervous systems take longer to be viable. The social instinct provides a holding environment.
Emphasis on cooperation and roles aimed at mutual survival. A need to be involved and contribute. A desire to be wanted and accepted. This is an instinct—hardwired. Need a group viability for a sense of well-being. Reciprocity. Attunement to hierarchy, political awareness. Ability to read people. A recognition of when behavior is damaging to group survival. Formation of unconscious clusters where mutual support is an issue. Can manipulate the environment. Has an understanding of what groups can accomplish.

I can always tell when I am in the presence of an sx first irl. Online I just take someone's word for it and imagine there is a lot they are not sharing about themselves if they type sx first and it isn't obvious in their posts. I see a lot of sp and so first in most posts.

Mistyping by tests is very common too since people tend to answer the questions based on their mood or state of mind in the moment. Sometimes it is wishful thinking and sometimes it is misunderstanding the questions. I think one's life is a better testament to their instincts than any test. When answering the questions you have to look at your life as whole and not just based on what you're currently experiencing. A lot of people "in love" or infatuated type sx first even though they are not. Anyone can fall madly in love, I imagine, or become obsessed with another person. That alone does not point to sx first instinct. It is a pattern of behavior and impulses that would be easy to date back to childhood. I can easily see sx first instinct dating back to my earliest childhood memories and further back than that when I ask my mom and others who have known me since I was a small child.

Below is the summarized versions of the types I found here. If any seem more probable let me know and I will send you the description from the book. I was raised by an E1 so/sp mother and the description of so 1 fits her pretty well.
Edit: My stepdad was an E1 sp/so and it fits him too.

Look at the essence of each type, try to be objective about yourself (can be hard to do). I suggest asking a good friend who will be honest with you when doing this. This may lead to some strange conversation where misunderstandings can be resolved. There are things we do not want to acknowledge in ourselves so a good friend with no qualms about hurting feelings might be even more useful.

It would be nice if they are tactful people but not everyone is. Do not ask anyone who loves you so much they do not see or want to admit any flaws. Also do not ask anyone you sense may have jealousy or personal biases against you on some level. They will make you seem worse than you are. :/ Just ask someone you trust to be truthful even if it might be a little painful to hear. If you don't want to put the effort into it then perhaps enneagram is not something that will be helpful in your quest for self knowledge and understanding.

I hope this is helpful in some way. It took me a while to really get to the heart of my own type and motivations. I have fluctuated from one extreme to the the other on the scale of health levels. I am firmly in the healthy range right now but I know I am one major crisis away from slipping backwards. Then I will be faced with choices that I hope to make with full conscious awareness of the consequences, good or bad.I have to be a bit more diligent and aware of what I am doing. I am getting there.

Naranjo's Profiles of Instinctual Variants

This is a summary of Naranjo's presentation of enneagram types and instinctual subtypes at the International Enneagram Association Conference. Naranjo commented that he doesn't like to teach enneagram types as simply information to be memorized but that learning enneagram should be experiential, that enneagram is like a map that organizes various types and levels of spiritual work, not a spiritual practice in itself.

Related links:
Naranjo's instinctual variants discussion thread
Intro to Naranjo's "Character and Neurosis" (pdf)
27 Subtypes by Beatrice Chestnut (soundcloud)

NN is short for "neurotic need".


1s generally: SX are the reformers, minding others' business, perfecting others. SO are perfect already. SP worries too much. Problem of morality vs. moralism

SX-1 - An animal in heat. Anger infuses desire. "I have to have it and I have a right to it." Example: diamond mines in Africa - feeling that "I did the work to get the diamonds and what would the Africans use them for anyhow? They don't know what to do with diamonds, they don't appreciate them." The conquistador. I have a right to what is wanted. No shame in wanting what's not appropriate - asks "Why Not???" in response to questions of appropriateness. Rhinoceros of a person

SO-1 - Unadaptable. Rigid, school teacher mentality. "I'm going to tell you how it is." Aristocratic. My way is right; others must adapt to me. Tendency to adhere to a particular way of doing things, like a scholar who is such in every sense of the word, but hangs on to a bad accent and grammar from his or her home country and refuses to adapt to new environment. The model. The one that already knows and doesn't need to learn from others. NN for superiority. Make others wrong to have power over them.

SP-1 - Passion for worrying. Not just behavioral - there's a need to worry. Need to know how it's going to happen. Fusses over details. Must have everything taken care of.


2s generally: "helper" is not a good word for 2. They're not really helpful but strategically helpful. Inconsistent with offers of help.

SX-2 - Seducer. Expression of feeling and compliments to get your allegiances. Dangerous beauty - needs to have a hold of you, might eat you up. Needs to seduce, desire for other. Helen of Troy - woman for whom men went to war and lost their lives. Wants EVERYTHING - wants someone to give them everything - it might be material, might be pampering, whatever - but they want everything to come from the other. Some people of this type fill the archetype of the dumb blonde because they might not feel like they need to develop their intellect.

SO-2 - Leader type. Wants to be important. Ambition to stand above, to have influence and advantages. Stuffy. More civilized, less voluptuous than SX, more adult than SP.

SP-2 - More childlike than the other two subtypes. There is inherent cuteness, less adult. "Infantile" by psychoanaytic standards. "ME" is the most important, in a child like way, a child-like importance. Wants to be loved just for being. Their needs for love is quite naked. They use remaining little for gain. Pretend to be unadulterated.


SX-3 - Wants to be good in a different sense of the word - beautiful, attractive, masculine or feminine depending on gender. They are pleasers. It doesn't have to be sexualized - it's way more subtle than that. A woman might have a passion for family and being so good, needing those close to her to see her as wonderful. Promotes and supports "key" others.

SO-3 - Corporate greed, so concentrated on doing something right that they don't see the flaws in their methods. Compassion for brilliance, doing job as best as can be done. Worldliness. Prestige - need everone's approval, not just some people's. Isn't in DSM IV as having anything wrong with this type[this note may apply to 3s in general].

SP-3 - Has the vanity of having no vanity. So determined to be good, to be how a person should be (good housewife, good father, good worker, good monk, etc) and that implies vanity. Difficult to recognize SP 3 as a 3. NN is to be good. Security - autonomy - taking care of one self. Do for self 1st. The kind of person that you go to for advice.


4s generally: The subtypes among 4s are more differentiated than with other enneatypes - more striking differences between these.

SX-4 - Shameless. Even if it's shameful, I will stil get what I want, do anything to satisfy my desires. The more I complain, the more I get (this strategy works well as child, but not as adult). Viking ENVY, cannabalistic drive, competitive hate. Oral aggression - wishing mixed with anger. Sin of Cain - I envy you therefore I kill you. If I envy wealth, I start a revolution. Hateful, outspoken with anger, envy as competition.

SO-4 - laments too much, too weepy, too often the victim, self-sabotaging, oversensitive, suffering more than others. NN to suffer - a child suffers to attract mother's love/attention - the way to happiness is through tears. Depends too much on others to ease suffering. Feels guilty for any wish. Most shameful. NN for self-abasement, compares self to others and winds up at the bottom of the ladder. Uncompetitive, insisting something's wrong with me.

SP-4 - Loves suffering. Person who's learned to swallow a lot. Has learned to endure pain without wincing. "see how much I don't complain, don't ask for things - can you love me now??" Passion/NN is to endure - makes a career of enduring. Trains self in pain, like Lawrence of Arabia putting out the match with his fingers, able to endure the desert even the Arabs couldn't. Masochism.


5s generally: Are the most monochromatic - it's hard to tell the subtypes apart

SX-5 - Not easy to see the difference at first. But if you engage them in conversation long enough, you'll find they are passionate about the one person (usually someone they can't find). Search for absolute love and it's too hard for others to pass the test. Very easily disappointed. Looking to trust in another - the one that will be with you and for you no matter what, beyond the level of marriage vows. Romantic. The non-5 among 5s, though not completely apparent until you touch the spot. Example is Chopin - he was described as like an oyster with powdered sugar inside. He was aristocratic & stiff, and open only to a few people in his life. But his feeling life was expressed through music.

SO-5 - More out there, totem. Need for super ideals. Relates to ideas, not people. Like Midas - wants everything he touches to be gold. Looking for super value, the elixir of meaning. Image oriented. So obsessed with idea loses engagement in life. NEED for extraordinary. Polarity between extraordinary-ness and meaninglessness. Everything is meaningless unless ultimate meaning is found. Need for ultimate instead of what is there.

SP-5 - The most 5ish 5. Passion for sanctuary/hiddenness. Needs to be walled in, hides like a wolf in its lair. Needs to keep people out thru castle walls. Problems with expressiveness - the least expressive type.


SX-6 - The counterphobic, turning against fear. Strength. Bulldog. More barking than biting, fierce looking. NN for intimidation. Best defense is an attack. These are the mad men who go against danger. Naranjo told a fable about a guy who bought a gun to shoot birds that were invading his house (? something like that), then accidentally shoots his guardian angel.

SO-6 - Cold, prussian character. A little like 3 in efficiency. Duty is utmost - but that doesn't mean they actually do their duty, but that they are concerned about it all the time - NN to have those points of reference. Disconnected from intuition. Can be very precise and intolerance of ambiguity.

SP-6 - Fear of no protection. Warm, teddy bears, want to feel the warm embrace of family, where there are no enemies (family of utmost importance to this type). The alliance former - makes bargains "I won't hurt you, you won't hurt me", bringing people together in the presence of a common enemy. Allows too much ambiguity. Rabbit.


SX-7 - Heavenly. Glutton for things of the higher world. Dreamer. Passion to imagine something better than [stark] reality, to embellish reality. Looking at all things with optimism of someone who's in love. Too enthusiastic. NN to go for the sweetness of the imagined over ordinary reality. Need to fantasize. Rose-colored spectacles. Oral optimistic character (I think this was a Freudian reference). "I'm OK, You're OK" - which is a therapeutic theme for anyone but a 7.

SO-7 - pure, too pure, counter-gluttony, concerned about diet, image, etc (new age fashion culture an example). "I will define myself anti-pig". They sacrifice gluttony - it's the postponement of desires for the ideal. Have gluttony for recognition of their sacrifice. Want to be seen as very, very good. Trying to be good according to social consensus. Goodness for applause. Reach ideal of perfection, but it's not innate perfectionism, it's efforted.

SP-7 - Keeper of the castle, makes alliances, family oriented, but not in the real sense of the word. The family game can be played anywhere - "I'll be family with you and expect same of you; we band together to create a mafia." Partisanship, corruption. Self-interest is behind the alliance, but it's denied. Opportunistic. Has to make every experience into an advantage. Gluttony is excessive concern for self-preservation so they make deals at every possible opportunity. There is no conversation that doesn't lead to business - nose is always in the air for opportunity.

8s generally: don't seek self knowledge, gravitate towards cynicism, hardening. Love issues are not accessible. A lot of repression of tenderness & inner child

SX-8 - Anti-social tendency. Rebellious. More provocative than SO, SP. Out front saying "my values are different from the norm". Hysterical, emotional 8. Possession of the scene in total, a little like being the center. Power comes through seductiveness and fascination. Colored feathers.

SO-8 - Punitive in defense of mother. A social anti-social. Example: a mother is abused by husband, the 8 child violently defends mother - it's a violence of solidarity. Ichazo used the word "friendship" for this subtype. Naranjo's word is "complicity". Related to loyalty. Child in example becomes anti-father, therefore anti-school, anti-authority, anti-intellectual. Underneath is something like an oedipus complex - to get mother love. It's hard to see the need for mother beneath the loyalty. Hard to make love-needs conscious (this is true with everyone, but more with this type). Most loyal of the 3 subtypes. The only 8 intellectual is the social 8.

SP-8 - Satisfaction. "It's mine; I have to get it." Intolerance of frustration of desires. Most armed of 8s. Doesn't need to talk too much. Lion only moves when hungry. No nonsense, no word play. Exaggerated selfishness. Know how to do business, bargain, get upper hand over anyone. Survival is the utmost. More action, not talk.

9s generally: Very loving people but deep down don't feel loved, they are resigned.

SX-9 - Union/fusion/symbiosis/confluence. Needs to be through another. Fuses with one other. Use relationship to feed your being because you don't stand on your own 2 feet - stands through the other. Suspicious tenderness. Nobodies, not living with passion. Too dispassionate. "Nowhere Man". Not noticable - wallflower. Erased from family picture. "She eats but no one has seen her chew." Betrays own needs.

SO-9 - Jolly good fellow. Light hearted, merry. Passion of participation, to feel a part of. Doesn't feel a part of to begin with, feels doesn't have what it takes to fit. Very mindful of group "other"; they fuse with the group. Good leader, unselfish, sacrificial. Passion of paying for ticket to group admission. Workaholic. Believes not to show pain or weigh others down with own woes.

SP-9 - Appetite. Sancho Panza. I eat therefore I am. I sleep, I have, I want creature comforts. No metaphysical level of thinking. Can't talk about Being. Substitution of bottle for mother's breast was so complete that they are fused with their body. "Homo economicus" - the double chinned banker. Very practical people.

[maniac]

I like to view the instincts as a separate thing from the types. Naranjo sets (or did, these descriptions are old) stereotypes that aren't true and that may prevent you from typing correctly. For example I dont relate to the description of sx 4 that much. It makes it seem like sx 4 is outgoing and very openly aggressive which I and most sx/sp 4s arent. I dislike descriptions that say "x instinct are like this". Theres also huge differences between for example sx/sp 4 and sx/so 4. I dont know if youve already figured out what your blindspot is, but if you haven't you should figure that out first. What drains your energy, and what do you neglect?

sx: the sense of being only one half of a person
soc: being "for" someone else or some group, and an urge for a place in the groups structure
sp: me and my body, my energy, my money, resources, food, health, and needing to stockpile these for fear of them running out

It will be easy to figure out which one of these you value, relate to, the most, and the least, if you look deep inside and be honest with yourself.

If you figure out your your blindspot but have a hard time deciding which instinct you value the most, you could take a look at synflow/contraflow.
Synflow is compelled towards people/participation/involvement.
Contraflow is compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people.

[Aylen]

I like to view the instincts as a separate thing from the types. Naranjo sets (or did, these descriptions are old) stereotypes that aren't true and that may prevent you from typing correctly. For example I dont relate to the description of sx 4 that much. It makes it seem like sx 4 is outgoing and very openly aggressive which I and most sx/sp 4s arent. I dislike descriptions that say "x instinct are like this". Theres also huge differences between for example sx/sp 4 and sx/so 4. I dont know if youve already figured out what your blindspot is, but if you haven't you should figure that out first. What drains your energy, and what do you neglect?

sx: the sense of being only one half of a person
soc: being "for" someone else or some group, and an urge for a place in the groups structure
sp: me and my body, my energy, my money, resources, food, health, and needing to stockpile these for fear of them running out

It will be easy to figure out which one of these you value, relate to, the most, and the least, if you look deep inside and be honest with yourself.

If you figure out your your blindspot but have a hard time deciding which instinct you value the most, you could take a look at synflow/contraflow.
Synflow is compelled towards people/participation/involvement.
Contraflow is compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people.

When I first read this description of sx 4 I was pretty annoyed by it but after further reflection, I found it to be pretty accurate but a lot of it was subconscious. I can also relate to parts of the sp 4 because I was taught to "endure" and keep my mouth shut when I should have said something. Over time all this enduring was too much and I kind of went full on sx with no brakes. I don't relate much to the so 4 descriptions. I have felt shame but it is not the way I see it described in the book. I relate to the description of the Mystifier midline sx 4 more than the seducer or wanderer but I have been all three.

The Sexual Four: “Competition”


In the Sexual Four subtype, the inner motivation is envy, and its manifestation as competition. These Fours don’t feel consciously envious so much as they feel competitive as a way of muting the pain associated with envy. If they can compete against another person they perceive as having more than they do and win, they can feel better about themselves.

Sexual Fours believe it’s good to be the best. Most people want to present a good image to others, but Sexual Fours don’t care very much about image management or being liked. For them, it’s better to be superior. They are highly competitive, and their intense focus on competition takes the form of actively striving to show that they are the best.

People with this subtype tend to have an “all or nothing” belief related to success: if success is not all theirs, they are left with nothing. This pattern leads to excesses related to their efforts to achieve success, and it also generates feelings of hate.

Sexual Fours are usually arrogant, despite having an underlying sense of inferiority. In the face of the pain of feeling misunderstood, an arrogant attitude is adopted as overcompensation—a means of being recognized. These Fours like to be part of “chosen” group, and they can be very elitist. They may refuse to feel indebted to anyone, and they may have the sense that they have the exclusive right to feel offended by the lack of consideration of others. Any criticism or reproach is seen as an affront or disqualification.

Envious anger dominates the expression of this subtype’s unconscious instinctual impulses. Sexual Fours’ deeper instinctual motivation is about a refusal to suffer the pain brought about by envy, and a need to reduce suffering by projecting the responsibility for meeting their needs onto others and minimizing others’ accomplishments in comparison with their own.

Sexual Fours “make others suffer” because they feel that they have been made to suffer and so need some sort of compensation. They may seek to hurt or punish others as an unconscious way of repudiating or minimizing their own pain. Naranjo observes that this tendency of this Four can be summed up by the phrase, “Hurt people hurt people.” Externalizing pain helps them ease their inner sense of inferiority. Their relationship to suffering can thus best be understood as a refusal to suffer. This gets expressed as an active insistence on their needs being validated and met. (They want with anger.) More shameless than shameful, Sexual Fours are vocal about expressing their needs; they rebel against any shame connected to their desires. This subtype follows the life philosophy that “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.”

When others experience Sexual Fours as demanding, this can lead to a pattern of rejection and anger: Sexual Fours get mad when others don’t meet their needs, but their demanding nature causes people to avoid or reject them, and then they get angry about being rejected. This type can thus get trapped in a vicious cycle when rejection leads to protest and protest leads to rejection.

The Sexual Four is more assertive and angrier than the other subtypes. Naranjo refers to this Four as the “mad Four” as opposed to the “sad” (Social) Four. These Fours can be very outspoken with their anger because expression of anger is their way of defending against painful feelings. When they unconsciously turn their pain into anger, they don’t have to feel their pain anymore.

These Fours may even seek to hurt or punish others as a way of repudiating or minimizing their underlying pain. They feel justified in pointing to others as the source of their own deprivation or frustration, which serves as both a distraction from their own role in their suffering and a plea for help and understanding.

Naranjo says that this Four subtype can be the angriest personality among the Enneagram types. They may express envious anger as a way to establish or assert power when they feel inferior at a deeper level, which can be a way to manipulate situations to their advantage. (This kind of anger was the impulse behind the French revolution: “I envy the rich, so I’ll organize a revolution.”) And Sexual Fours can be very impulsive. They want things immediately and have little tolerance for frustration.

Naranjo calls this type “Competition,” and Ichazo called it “Hate.” While this type can be both hateful and competitive, it is important to remember that the competition and hate expressed by this Four represents a deeper need to project their sense of suffering and inadequacy outward. The painful sense of envy felt by the Sexual Four can motivate a wishing with anger, or a sense of “I’ve got to get what I need, both to convince myself that my needs aren’t shameful, and to feel better about myself with respect to others.” Their competitiveness and anger is a compensation for and a defense against the hurt they feel underneath.

These Fours like and need emotional intensity. Without intensity, everything can seem unbearably dull and boring. When Sexual Fours want somebody’s love, they can be very direct about asking for what they need, or they can become “extraordinary”—make themselves seem special and attractive and superior—in an effort to attract it. In line with their natural intensity (fueled by both their heart-based emotional temperament and their sexual instinct), these individuals tend to be more present and available in relationships because they don’t deny or avoid many of the factors that can inhibit others relationally, like anger, neediness, competitiveness, arrogance, and having to be liked all the time. However, at times it may prove difficult for them to maintain a loving attitude because they confuse sweetness and benevolence with being false or insincere.

Sexual Fours are most likely to be confused with Type Eights or Sexual Twos. Like Eights, they have easier access to anger than most types, but they differ from Eights in the wider range of emotions they regularly feel. Naranjo points out that Eights often don’t need to get angry, whereas this Four frequently feels misunderstood or envious, so they may show anger more often. They can also look like Sexual “Aggressive-Seductive” Twos (because both types can be aggressive and seductive in relationships), but the Sexual Two is more oriented toward pleasing others.

Roger, a Sexual Four, speaks:

The all-too-cumbersome online tests often report I am an Eight or a Three, but I know full well that I am a Sexual Four. My greatest friend in the world, my Type Five elder sister, once leaned over at an Enneagram workshop and underlined the word “hostility” in a description of the Sexual Four with her finger and told me, “You need to work on that.” I had to listen to her feedback because she has known me my entire life and so must be a reliable reporter. Of course, I had a finger to offer her regarding the work I thought she might have yet to address in her own life.

Instead of feeling anything vulnerable in my personal life, I will often go to anger. Instead of experiencing myself as ordinary or less-than in my professional life, I will often go to competition, aggression, or even hostility. I don’t relate to the descriptions of the over-sensitive, complaining (Social) Four: I go after my enemies or perceived adversaries who I feel threatened by directly rather than hanging out too long in discomfort. I also go after my objects of desire directly, and there are many. It may seem Threeish and Eightish that I need to be on top professionally and personally. But although I pride myself on being direct and honest rather than nice, I know I am not an Eight because my Focus of Attention and my Achilles Heel is definitely Envy; it invigorates me to go after what I want (or take down the person who got what I didn’t get). I know I am not a Three because I take more pride in being one-of-a-kind than in being successful. I own that I can come across as arrogant and even hostile if I feel threatened. This has not always served me well in either personal or professional relationships and this kind of response saddens me. Luckily, I have learned the value of staying with the softer feelings, experiencing my vulnerability, being with a great partner, and being one amongst many.

The Self-Preservation Four: “Tenacity” (Countertype)


The Self-Preservation Four is the countertype of the Four subtypes, and so it may be difficult to identify this person as a Four. Although this Four experiences envy like the other Fours, they communicate their envy and suffering to others less than the other two Four subtypes do. Instead of talking about their suffering, these Fours are“long-suffering” in the sense of learning to endure pain without wincing. These Fours are more stoic and strong in the face of their pain.

Envy is less apparent in the Self-Preservation Four because instead of dwelling in and expressing envy, this Four works hard to get what others have that he or she lacks. Instead of hanging out in their longing in a way that prevents them from taking action, they strive to get “those distant things” that give them the feeling of being able to obtain that which was lost. Whatever they get, however, never feels like enough.Self-Preservation Fours do not communicate sensitivity, suffering, shame, or envy, though they may feel all these things and they have the same depth and capacity for feeling as the other Fours. They learn to swallow a lot without complaining. Endurance is a virtue for them, and they hope their self-sacrifices will be recognized and appreciated, though they don’t talk about them very much.

Like the other Fours, Self-Preservation Fours feel a need to suffer in the unconscious hope that this will bring them love and acceptance; but unlike the other two, they suffer in silence. Their willingness to suffer without complaint is their way of seeking redemption and earning love. Thus, this Four makes a virtue of toughing out difficulties without talking about them, hoping that others will see this, admire them for it, and help them to meet their needs. Instead of displaying the need to suffer, they have a tendency to deny their envy and bear too much suffering and frustration as a result.As Naranjo explains, the other two Four subtypes are too sensitive to frustration. They either suffer too much or they make you suffer too much (as a compensation for their suffering). The Self-Preservation subtype is the countertype Four because they go to the other extreme, developing a high capacity to internalize and bear frustration. They make a virtue of resistance to frustration.

Self-Preservation Fours demand a lot of themselves. They have a strong need to endure, so they develop an ability to do without. They put themselves in situations that are tough. They test and challenge themselves. One of my clients with this subtype says that she “throws herself into the fire.” These Fours have a passion for effort—they engage in intense activity, and may often appear strained and tense. They may experience distress if their activity level slows down, and they can be compulsive about making efforts to achieve what they need to survive, even if their efforts don’t take them anywhere. In some cases, they may not know how to live without the stress and pressure they put on themselves. They don’t allow themselves the experience of living in or from their fragility.

Just as the (countertype) Self-Preservation Three wants to be seen as successful but displays humility about the work they do because they believe outward displays of vanity make them less worthy of respect, Self-Preservation Fours internalize their suffering and strive to get what they want in a more autonomous way than the other Four subtypes.

This Four tends to be a humanitarian with an empathic and nurturing disposition, someone who protests for the sake of others and is sensitive to the needy, the dispossessed, and victims of injustice. This is their way of projecting their pain outward, addressing it through others’ suffering instead talking about their own. They try to take care of others’ pain or work to ease the “suffering of the world” so they don’t have to fully deal with their own suffering.

While the other two Four subtypes can be dramatic, the Self-Preservation Four is more masochistic than melodramatic. For this subtype, masochism is the ego or personality’s strategy for getting love. Self-Preservation Fours devalue themselves in important ways, which can make it even tougher for them to do all the work they do to try to get the security and the love that they long for. Their attachment to enduring can be seen from the outside as masochistic, but it stems from a desire to earn love and acceptance through being strong and resilient. The motivation of this subtype stems from a desire for the parent to see that the child is not complaining, and instead is being a good boy or girl through not asking for very much.

These Fours may also masochistically enact a need to prove themselves by working against themselves: they make efforts to get what they need and want, but unconsciously work against themselves at the same time. They can be impulsive, but they will control and inhibit their impulses to get recognition. They may want to be happy, but they experience an unconscious taboo around happiness. They spend a lot of energy on being afraid of what’s happening instead of dealing with problems and making improvements, so they habitually postpone actions necessary to achieving what they want and then blame themselves for doing so. They wear themselves out seeking and striving in ways and places where they know they’ll fail, which ensures the perpetuation of a cycle of effort and devaluation. They may be ambitious, but they deny and work against their own ambitions.

Formerly called “Reckless/Dauntless,” but more recently referred to by the name “Tenacity,” these Fours move toward activities that require a large capacity for endurance as a way to earn love, without regard for the pain or the danger they may entail.

This Four subtype resembles a One or a Three. Self-Preservation Fours’ focus on autonomy, self-sufficiency, and working hard may make them look like a One; however, this Four feels a wider range of emotions—more ups and downs—than Ones, even if they don’t always express their feelings. Self-Preservation Fours can also look like Threes, especially Self-Preservation Threes, in that they work hard to achieve a sense of security and may be anxious; however, in contrast to Threes, these Fours will often work at cross-purposes, unintentionally thwarting their own efforts, whereas Threes tend to achieve what they are working toward. Fours also feel their emotions more than Threes do.

Interestingly, this subtype can also look like a Type Seven, which in some ways is the opposite of Type Four, because some Self-Preservation Fours express a need to be light. With all the enduring and efforting these Fours do, they may at times display the high energy characteristic of Sevens, and they may also have a need for fun and playfulness as an escape from having to tough things out all the time. This may account for the fact that there are some Fours who do not seem as melancholy as others—Fours that appear more “sunny” and lighthearted. However, these Fours can be distinguished from Sevens in their greater access to their emotions.

Marcy, a Self-Preservation Four, speaks:

For much of my life it was difficult for me to feel my true emotions because they were so buried; it just wasn’t okay to express emotions when I was growing up—the phrase I internalized from my childhood was, “Just suck it up and move on.” Plus, I’ve always had a stubborn streak, as if I’m the only one who knows how to do something right. My colleagues used to think I was a One because of my need for perfection. And it has sometimes been really difficult for me to connect with the passion of Envy in a meaningful way. But one day when I was thinking of someone I admired and how I came up short by comparison, and I heard my internal voice say “You’re not good enough,” I knew I was a Four. I really got the Envy bit then. Now my emotions arise more freely, in small impulses and bursts though, not like the bigger, wilder swings of emotions that you hear about with a lot of Fours.

Although I’ve meditated for many years, it’s still difficult to relax and to be calm in daily activity. It just seems like a waste of time not to be doing or accomplishing something. Even now when I feel my feelings, I catch myself trying to figure out what I can DO with them. I’ve always pushed myself to work hard to be successful because I wanted to prove myself by being really good at whatever I do and I have been fortunate in being rewarded for my hard work.

I also see the idea behind the former name of the Self-Preservation Four, Reckless/Dauntless, showing up in my behavior. In a way that seems counter to “self-preservation” I have a penchant for spending money to buy fine things and help others out, sometimes more money than I make. (My mother used to say that I thought money grew on trees.) It’s like I get this reckless feeling that money will always be there, so why not spend it on what I love? Plus, I tend to make snap decisions without really thinking it through. For instance, I left my job of 18 years and my 20-year marriage within a month of each other. Of course, the result was some pretty tough years but at least I began to feel my feelings!

I look at the essence of the description and it is fitting. I know health level is also important since a healthy sx 4 is not going to match up with the description as much as an unhealthy 4. I had years of therapy to deal with all this. I truly believe my family when they say living with me was like living with the devil, sometimes. I had a different face that I present to others. I was/am very competitive which is something I discovered through therapy. Sometimes it was off putting to others. Some people liked to cultivate that aspect of me and use it for their own gain. I knew they were doing it but in my mind I was not being used because I had my own motivations for going along with it.

I have had people tell me I had a superiority complex. I didn't see it at the time but once told I realized it was true and I worked on it. This is not all a sexual 4 is and not even the best description. I fit the main 4 descriptions a bit better but this is kind of my NN (competition). I am not a hateful person by nature but I recognize when I have hateful feelings, no matter how brief. I also know I have a temper. I downplay it but my family never lets me forget even though I have worked hard on it. They mostly joke about it now. I am a much better person now than I was when I joined this forum.

Enneagram is a very personal system and that is why people have to figure it out themselves. The description written above is not something I am proud of. It isn't even something most people would notice while talking to me. I have Fe to balance it out. I just want to live my life consciously from now on, to the best of my ability. An sx first 4 IEI is not going to be the same type of 4 as a another socionics type. They might not even be similar to another sx 4 of their own type. I believe tritype is important and I can relate my experiences best to people of my tritype and socionics type. Not that I have better friendships with them. I just kind of get them. The more numbers I have in common with someone the better I get them but even then we have unique experiences that helped shape us and how we interact with the world. I don't recall seeing descriptions of a 459 sx/sp being particularly outgoing. I have had my moments but they are few and far between, at least now that I am no longer using substances (including antidepressants) to cope with reality.

Edit: Now that I think about it, refusal to suffer > enduring. I was pretty defiant and refused to cry during punishments, as a child. I would just take what they dished out and refuse to give in. This was NOT punishment given by my mom or stepdad. It was a caregiver. When I was old enough to make it stop, I did.

Edit: removed link. I want to start a new thread, eventually.

[Chae]

I remember the +/- categorizations of a stacking, maybe it helps.

Basically, it depends on how you feel about So, Sp and Sx during their respective usage. How comfortable and easy it is when you express it. Because: scoring high in one instinct does not mean it is healthy. This is especially true when you deny a primary instinct, which causes you to strengthen it even more subconsciously. I received a 90% Sx preference result but I am not on good terms with all issues that the instinct entails. Hence: Sx minus, I relate negatively to it. My Sp is not my preferred mode of operation but I'm fine dealing with those activities. That means: Sp plus. My So could be plus because I have nothing against social circles but I do not actively participate as it drains me a lot, there is fear involved: So minus.

---> Sx -/Sp +/So -.

If @Eliza Thomason is, let's say, sx+/so- and @Kim is sx-/so+ that could already produce significant differences. Health level of expression is always underestimated, that goes for information elements and enneagram types as well.

PS: I try to find the source of this model, but I am sure neither the Fauvres nor Naranjo have talked about it, it is a newer development.

[Eliza Thomason]

@Aylen, thanks for the good info. I - sort of - look for to giving it a good consideration. I say sort of because once again Enneagram descriptions seem to me like "All of us are Psycho". I wonder: am I ignoring my dark side? I used to consider myself an 2w1 until I realized I never acted like the dark side at all, ever, so I could not be that. So I figured 1w2, and that seemed to fit, and its dark side I could at least imagine. (Plus, when I first learned Enneagram I thought I was E1, then I left it for a long time and came back and decided - and tested as - 2.) Though my anger as described above is not prominent. But that who list of E-types with sx/so/sp - none of those people are right. Then I wonder, could it be that none of these people have had inner healings? (or, they did not have loving secure lives?). My inner healing really changed me - they really were life-changing. Then I am thinking that I must be ignoring my dark side because I am not in a different category from others. Perhaps some Enneagram writers just concentrate on the dark side. Maybe that's it.

At any rate, our bank wants us to start using that chip card and has cut of the old one, so now I really have to find it.. and pay bills... and some entertaining this week...

[Aylen]

@Aylen, thanks for the good info. I - sort of - look for to giving it a good consideration. I say sort of because once again Enneagram descriptions seem to me like "All of us are Psycho". I wonder: am I ignoring my dark side? I used to consider myself an 2w1 until I realized I never acted like the dark side at all, ever, so I could not be that. So I figured 1w2, and that seemed to fit, and its dark side I could at least imagine. (Plus, when I first learned Enneagram I thought I was E1, then I left it for a long time and came back and decided - and tested as - 2.) Though my anger as described above is not prominent. But that who list of E-types with sx/so/sp - none of those people are right. Then I wonder, could it be that none of these people have had inner healings? (or, they did not have loving secure lives?). My inner healing really changed me - they really were life-changing. Then I am thinking that I must be ignoring my dark side because I am not in a different category from others. Perhaps some Enneagram writers just concentrate on the dark side. Maybe that's it.

At any rate, our bank wants us to start using that chip card and has cut of the old one, so now I really have to find it.. and pay bills... and some entertaining this week...

Yes, some enneagram authors do focus on the "dark side" much more than others and it looks way more dramatic all written down in one or two condensed excerpts rather than looking at someone's life as a whole. That was my problem with the description of of sx 4 I posted. I read that and thought, "What a horrible person! This is not me.". I had some help seeing that it was not as bad as I first took it. I assumed the description was describing the whole person and not just an aspect of them that was an underlying motivating force behind some of their actions.

That is why I said focus on the essence of what is written, not the exact words. I had to dig pretty deep into myself to even acknowledge my own dark side. Now that I have survived my teens, and early 20s, I am actually pretty pleasant to be around 90% of the time but that 10%.

It didn't help that I was seen by many therapists that had no clue what was wrong with me and why I did the things I did. Shame does play a part in childhood. That is probably why I became "shameless" at some point. It was an act of rebellion and taking control of my own life, the best way I could. I suppose I was a bit of a Jekyl and Hyde back then because I didn't know my own triggers or why I was so "different" from others (in my frame of reference).

I have a dark side but it is NOT my most prominent side and never has been. Competition can be healthy for example. If you are reading these things as "we are all psychos" then I think you may be misunderstanding it on a very fundamental level. I have no sadistic tendencies in me whatsoever and I am not intentionally cruel. I rarely get angry, tbh but when I do people tend to notice. If I am cruel it is usually due to lashing out and I feel terrible about it after. Probably worse than the person I hurt in most cases. I have no desire to see people suffer although I have my moments but it's more of a passing thought. I don't dwell on it.

I am not exactly broken up about it if someone who intentionally hurts me, or others I care about, suffers the consequences of their own actions. Even then I might end up feeling more compassion for them than I probably should. I might not tell them though. I mean the idea of hell is so repulsive to me that I stopped believing in any god that would allow eternal suffering and do nothing about it. I don't want to turn this into a religious debate though. I am just sharing that I am not a psycho wishing ill will on people and I don't go around getting in people's faces all the time either. I am not some avenger dispensing out justice. I am more assertive than aggressive unless I am just play aggressing. Anyway that is how bothered I am by the idea of other people suffering. I feel others pain more than I should and when I can ease it I will. I am just competitive and a bit arrogant but I am working on it.

I also go through bouts of intense longing for something I feel is missing but that is getting better as I get older and realize that I am not half a person. I am whole but another person can complement me. I do have a romanticized view of relationships, most of which I would not want to live out in reality (be careful what you wish for since you might get it) but I see tragic love as the ultimate sacrifice. It looks better on paper for sure. Not so romantic when you live it. I totally relate to every tragic love story I have ever loved as if it was written about me personally. I guess that is a more classic view on a 4.

Maybe you were just born very healthy and perfect (no darkside) psychologically and emotionally speaking? I am not being facetious here since stranger things have happened but if you are expecting the dark side to look psychopathic then you might be missing your own. If you related to 1w2 most before you read about sx first 1s then don't change your core type because of what I have posted. I actually think 1w2 is fine for you. My mom is a 1w2 and she is not a psycho. She is not perfect either and doesn't have to be.

[Rohan89]

A question for people who are more expert in this area:

What self actualization/growth tips would you have for a Fireside sx/so?

Obviously they have mainly the sx and not great so, poor sp.

So what is the way to success/fulfillment for them?
Should they seek a deep connection with things that improve them in a profound way- like spirituality, a certain career path etc?

This type reminds me of a boxing story like Mike Tyson - a troubled/wild person who found discipline/focus in a craft, and it elevated his life.

Now he seems very spiritual, as a practicing Muslim.

[Aylen]

A question for people who are more expert in this area:

What self actualization/growth tips would you have for a Fireside sx/so?

Obviously they have mainly the sx and not great so, poor sp.

So what is the way to success/fulfillment for them?
Should they seek a deep connection with things that improve them in a profound way- like spirituality, a certain career path etc?

This type reminds me of a boxing story like Mike Tyson - a troubled/wild person who found discipline/focus in a craft, and it elevated his life.

Now he seems very spiritual, as a practicing Muslim.

Self awareness

I am not an expert but I think working on your third instinct and using the growth tips for your core type will help. Plus at some point out of control sx instinct is going to burn you out and you will have nothing to show for it if you do not develop self-preserve instinct. You have to be more self aware in order to take charge of the instinct instead of letting it control you. 8s don't like to be controlled right? Don't let that instinct control your life?

What Supports Personal Growth

• Learn to compromise.
• Seek win-win solutions
• Practice healthy self esteem - welcome a sense of calm and quiet within
• Treat intensity as a way to mask vulnerability
• Notice the intensity and the impact on others as a practice of personal growth
• Apply only the appropriate amount of force in each situation
• Notice when helpfulness seems intrusive and controlling to others.
• Treat what seems like weakness as progress in letting self experience vulnerability
• Practice waiting and listening before taking action as a way to moderate impulsiveness
• Consider accelerating your progress with personal growth counseling

http://www.personal-growth-counselin...protector.html

~~~~~~~

Additional Key Themes for Reflection: Simply stop for a minute or so 3-4 times a day to center and reflect on one of the following:
Observing impulsivity or impulse to action. Simply stop and notice your urge to act and where this urge resides in your body. Pause and give yourself the gift of time and receptivity. Then take action befitting the situation.
Impact on others. Simply stop, breathe back down, and witness your impact on others, knowing your tendency to be over impactful. Then moderate your exuberant energy as best you can to fit the situation.
Distinguishing vulnerability from weakness. Simply stop and remind yourself that allowing in the vulnerability, the tender softness that accompanies genuine receptive force is a great strength to complement your exuberant active energy.

Short Reflections for Reclaiming the Essential Quality
With openhearted kindness toward yourself simply practice several times a day for a minute or so saying and living one of the following each for a few days at a time. Do these all with the receptive energy encompassed in the “may I”. Recall that the higher quality or virtue for type Eight is innocence meaning the purity of coming freshly without any power agenda to each situation.

• May I practice beginner’s mind, the innocence of coming freshly to each situation.
• May I be content with what is, in the present moment.
• May I experience the power and true mastery in non-action and no blame.
• May I embody gentleness and compassion.
• May I be receptive to the truth in all beings.

http://drdaviddaniels.com/growth-for-type-8/

[Rohan89]

As a Fireside sx/so, I thought I'd put out the names of some people I consider the Fireside, whether they are an sx/so or sx/sp. These are people who have a very strong sx instinct, weaker second functions (compared to other sx first) and obviously weaker third functions.

Mike Tyson
Conor Mcgregor
Dmx
Dennis Rodman
Heath Ledger

Extreme intensity to the point where they have, as someone above put it, no brakes

[RaptorsMavs]

I'm actual so/sx, being into debates and circumnavigating the globe of big picture perspectives and being really warm hearted and presenting.

But to be sx first, that would be like dynamite, volcanoes, annihilation, total domination. That kind of energy, drive, intensity, explosion, it would be crushing.