Conversation Between anndelise and chemical

13 Visitor Messages

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. I think I've only interacted with a couple of Ne-ILE, so take the following with a grain of salt. I think I'm a bit fuzzier in my thinking than Ne-ILE. I think we both question things, and question our perceptions or thoughts on something. But we have slightly different angsts. For example, their angsts tend to revolve around emotions, like whether or not they feel what they think they should be feeling, or how to know how someone else feels about them. Mine tend to revolve around whether or not what I'm perceiving is true/real or if it's just my biases and fears getting in the way. I feel more grounded when others express similar thoughts as me, while they've seemed grounded when others express similar emotions. It's like a "right emoting?" (ile) vs "right thinking?" (me) kind of difference. Like, they continue seeking input until someone expresses an emotion that 'rings true' to their own feelings...puts it into words for them. Which makes me fear that i might sometimes continue seeking input until I find something that 'rings true' to my thoughts...puts the right words together for me.
  2. Given you say this: "I'm sometimes at odds with Fi subtypes due to the difference in main focus of Ne vs Fi," I'm actually curious how your experience with ILEs contrasts. For example, how do you square up with Ne-ILEs vs Fi-IEE?

    And really I'm more asking how much you think the way you think is similar/different, not necessarily some kind of intertype relation thing.
  3. Yeah, I thought so. This is very consistent with how your description of Ti-polr sounded -- it sounded like it was coming from someone who is predominantly an irrational type, rather than from someone with strong Fi devaluing Ti. I wanted to see if the hunch is right!
  4. Ne subtype. Fi is one of the tools to serve my Ne. As is Te.
    I'm sometimes at odds with Fi subtypes due to the difference in main focus of Ne vs Fi. Not that I don't have a few strong values, but I'm constantly aware that there are many other values and povs just as legit, which often makes it difficult for me to provide a judgment call when asked about the ethics of a situation. I'd rather see a situation from a variety of perspectives than make a judgment call.
  5. I was just curious if you see yourself as the Ne or Fi subtype of IEE! (That is a flexible question, given I don't adhere to any particular version of those systems, the only common thing is one is more focused on Ne and the other on Fi)
  6. That's right; I use "aversion" instead of anxiety, not because Naranjo uses it, but because it actually makes a lot of sense in and of itself - aversion simply means there is something foreign to you. When there is something foreign, what can you do? You can try to make it less foreign. That is the innate response inherent to the very idea of foreignness. How do you render something foreign to you less foreign? Mind constructs - you understand it. At the extreme, you withdraw further and further into your own self, until you enter avarice, which is at the crossroads between fearing the outside and seeking the self-love of the image triad. I think 5w6 is more conscious that "things must be understood or else!" versus 5w4 almost is cut off from the outside totally and tends towards essentially self-satisfaction through cerebral activity.

    With E8, it is not acknowledging the feeling of foreignness directly but indirectly feels it - it attempts to close the gap between the self and all foreign entities by devoting its life to force and lust. This also explains why they have troubles acknowledging vulnerable emotions.

    Having read many different enneagram sites, this is the stuff I feel to be the core of it.

    The big difference between instinct and mind is simply that instinctual responses are spontaneous responses stemming from our innate and most basic drives to seek satisfaction. Mind types often struggle more with how you should respond to things - the reason is the more you view a situation as foreign, the more you are uncertain if your response to it could possibly meet it. Philosophically this is not knowing the position of the human being in a vast reality.

    Oh and E7 also is at crossroads, so where they acknowledge foreignness, they might view it as delectable, hence why gluttony gets the reputation for wanting to try some of everything. They do not refuse to acknowledge it, instead they acknowledge and try to rationalize it to their advantage, as a source of stimulation. They rationalize it as a way to satiate their still somewhat conscious instinctual side.
  7. Yeah, that was one of the things I caught of a bit of your writing. That 8 is the gut tinted with mind, 7 is the mind tinted with gut, etc. In the terms I'm considering, there would be Anger (mobilizing force) tinted with Anxiety, and Anxiety tinted with Anger (mobilizing force), etc. (There's more to the description than just the label of the Aversive Emotion, such as there being issues related to processing that emotion.) Anyhoot, good luck in your efforts, and enjoy.
  8. My viewpoint is actually quite simple in a way - I want to reverse the direction people see the types. The 891 are not types, but rather subtypes of being fixated in the instinctual center if you will. So I want to begin at instinct/thinking/feeling, and then look at the individual types as blends of those ones. As you move from instincts to feeling, the increasing question is whether the ego of the individual is entitled to an experience of worth (you see this at E1 with the instinctual irritation and resentment at nonperfection, and more so in the subsequent 2/3/4). The center type seems to simply address the question of its triad most directly. For instance, where the 8 may intensify its instincts, the 9 remains inertial (the difference between applying force and being at rest).
  9. Sorry, just thought i would add that yesterday I found this: http://enneagramassociation.org/imag...ELS.ARTHUR.pdf
    And I'm feeling like this is the right direction for me to go in, for understanding the enneagram, or something like the enneagram. So ignore my request yesterday. I wouldn't want you to feel like your time/energy was being wasted with me. I will continue to read the tidbits I catch of your discussing this with others, though. I'm always open to new ways of looking at things, and I appreciate your efforts as you publicly work this out for yourself. They are good learning opportunities for me.
  10. I've always had a problem with enneagram, trying to figure out how it would best describe me, and it consistently fails in terms of what I've found online. So a nontraditional approach is totally fine for me. If you're willing to share, I'd love to hear what you've come up with. Though I should warn that talking to me about enneagram might be like trying to teach an easily distracted child...as in ya can't assume I have prior understanding of a concept. I do prefer basic principles that can be arranged into a larger concept. I think thats why i have such a problem understanding the enneagram. The descriptions don't seem to come from any basic nodes. And if you don,t want to share (it's a lot of work, I know) then no problem. I can just continue to read the bits and pieces I catch. And i will reread what you wrote a few more times.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 13
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast