Gordon Ramsey, the typical Sp! He is harsh and disciplined, he work out (Self Preservation), run businesses and maintain them well. And other reasons.
Stereotypes and instincts
Gordon Ramsey, the typical Sp! He is harsh and disciplined, he work out (Self Preservation), run businesses and maintain them well. And other reasons.
Lol at the example and the way you presented itIt's sort of stereotypical yet working out and businesses are very Sp by default - the actual bias is that all cooks are Sp [and
types while we're at it]
The SO stereotype would be that they are nice social butterflies and acquainted with basically everyone.
The SX stereotype is that we're consumed by sexual desire and useless without a relationship.
Personally I had him So/Sx.Originally Posted by Tigerfadder
If you look at his shows you notice he is a group leader, who is pushing other people's buttons to get the best out of them and inspire them.
So/Sx is also called the coach or motivator.
If you look at the quick commercials of gordon, than you might see something else cause they only show his anger moments, but in his shows, he is a motivator/leader/inspirer. Not typical Sp characteristics.
I also think discipline is as common with So's as Sp's.
He's typed as LSI and LSE, and being ST rational pragmatist would make him appear strict and disciplined and maintain business well. In Kitchen Nightmares he doesn't penny pinch and splurges large sums of money up to hundreds of thousands of dollars to renovate restaurants he visits only one time. He also seems very scattered and careless, and will sometimes throw food around the kitchen and comment about things like cuts and burns without any afterthought. From my SP first point of view he's missing the SP instinct. Working out is taken up by many celebrities who want to look good on camera. SO/SX that @Jarno has suggested is closer to how he's shown (but may be not how he is, since we'll never know that).
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tual-Stackings
-- "At times this may make SP firsts look like enneagram head types, because they be in habit of planning to predict unforeseen mishaps or possible breaches in their security. In addition, the comfort seeking element to SP types can cause them to appear like gut types because of their desire to avoid too much complication or “fuss”."
Ramsay doesn't seek comfort and doesn't seem to be in the habit of planning or trying to predict possible mishaps. He is very dynamic and deals with problems as they come.
Ya he do push peoples buttons, do you think that make him So?
Thank youLol at the example and the way you presented it
The SO stereotype would be that they are nice social butterflies and acquainted with basically everyone.
The SX stereotype is that we're consumed by sexual desire and useless without a relationship.
I found this: From "The spiritual dimension of the Enneagram" book.
"There are three instincts, which Ichazo calls conservation, social, and syntony; and which Naranjo calls self-preservation, social, and sexual."
I just associate So always striving for depending on other peoples support. Those who rather figure out things for themselves would be So last?
Sp, conservation/self-preservation, would mean keeping a steady flow of security in life and if anything threatening it its bad. As long it is not threatened directly or indirectly everything is in order. Maybe those skilled in Sp can threat others Sp areas easy?
Sx, Sex or syntony. I find these to be the ones that are inlove with falling in love. Stereotypical these are the ones that crave strong connections with one person at the time and the rest of the world blurs.
Last edited by Tigerfadder; 12-24-2016 at 08:20 AM.
No pushing buttons is Sx. Focussed on the other.
Being a group leader/coach/teacher etc, is So. Focussed on the group.
He's not a whiner and against whining, oh i'm hurt, oh i'm tired, oh i cannot do this, oh this is too dangerous. All sp behaviour if you ask me :-)
maybe of topic but i have him as an EIE-Ni. Former member Expat here had him also as an EIE-Ni.
I was making my own stereotype list in another thread i believe it was called 'the six stacking types'.
I have Oprah Winfrey as an So/Sp, Muhammed Ali as an Sx/So. Ramsay as So/Sx.
I'm interested to know more, it's good to have stereo types. Probably Michael Jackson Sp/Sx ?
It seem when we try to instead of put instincts on ourself but on others it bring up confusion of what the instincts really are. It seem pretty straight forward, Sex/procreation/1on1 contact, Social (most straight forward) and Self preservation/conservation. It can be seen as the three main ways of organisms to continue to "live". The problem typing other people is the same in type at Socionics. I think having stereotypes can help to understand this more. I tried many times during the years (lol) but every time i come back to this topic it bring great confusion. Mostly I think is because people use this tool for themselves and not in a sophisticated way apply it to others. At wikipedia it says "Instinct or innate behavior is the inherent inclination of a living organism towards a particular complex behavior. " and later bring up examples of sea turtles reaching for the ocean after being hatched. I think it is when children try to grasp things and it is not reflex.
How can, for example, So be an instinct?
For this I think when your being is threatened you go to your social net to find support for you. When Sx you go to people you bounded deeply with and Sp you retreat to your place of stability and comfort. But if someone do not have a big group of friends, only a few but is So instinct, this person will also go to the one friend that they bounded deeply with. I guess So is not so much about friends after all. More of spreading out the "problems" to many people if possible while Sx will go the opposite even if many people around to the one they bounded deepest with. I guess?
Last edited by Tigerfadder; 12-25-2016 at 10:28 PM.
idk honesty, if you think so. ;p Instincts seem to be one of those things that are really hard to sense in other people you do not know in person, for me at least.
That's because instincts are something very personal, like enneagram, and should be looked at over a long period of time. I kind of feel similar about cognitive functions. When looking at your own instincts it is suggested to look back to your childhood even. When I discussed them with my family, they agreed that sx first fit me, even when I was a small child.
It is not something a stranger is usually going to pick up on, especially over the internet, even if you have the same stacking it might still be hard to spot. People I thought were sx first, when I met them, turned out to have other stackings. After you find out more of their history and observe how they prioritize things over a period of time it gets easier. Most people don't have that level of interaction with people online. That is why I don't really pay attention to celebrity typings and rarely do it myself unless I have read biographies/autobiographies. It is fun to guess sometimes but it is the equivalent to typing characters. It is easy to project types on characters because they don't have real motivations or cognitive functions so you can relate/not relate, like/dislike. I think that is kind of how people type in general even if some attempt to be objective, it is usually very subjective.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Stackings could be one of those things that correlate with what political views we have, or more, what political aspects we find important.
Last edited by Tigerfadder; 12-26-2016 at 12:44 PM.
Yes I've thought about that too.
There are a certain number of things that didn't work out very well with socionics, things that happened to be 'not type related'.
Some of these are actually more stackings related.
So far I think what kind of job you want, or your role for humanity is more defined by stackings than socioniocs.
Also what kind of politics you like.
Sx/So is against the elite, pro saying what you want, naming problems. (If i can speak for myself....)
If Che Guavara and Trump are also Sx/So I guess it could be correct.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote