Enneagram type Gilly

[Ezra]

Ah, that's the word I was looking for. Well spotted. Attention seeking, too, but definitely narcissistic.

Hold up, speak for yourself. I'm arrogant, but I'm not narcissistic. I'm certainly not in love with myself. Perhaps others see it that way, but I'll tell you now - I am not in love with my image.

Any thoughts, Ez?

Is that relationship also called Super-Ego? I don't use "Look-Alike", so I can't tell what relationship you're referring to.

you're obviously over-analyzing. there's no way you're a beta NF, nor are you IEE. gamma is out of the question lol...ILE is obvious...

Nice argument, Tyson. We will listen to you from now on.

[Blaze]

ezra. c'mon, dude.

[Ezra]

ezra. c'mon, dude.

What?

[strrrng]

Nice argument, Tyson. We will listen to you from now on.

lol...sorry, it's just blatantly clear to me. I'd be willing to explain more if necessary.

btw, your artificial directness is quite silly

[strrrng]

@Gilly and "Ez," there are definitely similarities there. You both strike me as 6w7 so/sx, and are both at similar points in your life (coincidentally with similar interests of study). I think the stage you're at carries more anxiety than almost any other age, and given that the head triad of the enneagram is characterized by anxiety, this only amplifies it in you guys, which is why I believe you have displayed some 3 disintegration (narcissistic bs), which possibly contributed to mistypings for both of you (i.e., Ezra thinking ESTp).

[discojoe]

@Gilly and "Ez," there are definitely similarities there. You both strike me as 6w7 so/sx, and are both at similar points in your life (coincidentally with similar interests of study). I think the stage you're at carries more anxiety than almost any other age, and given that the head triad of the enneagram is characterized by anxiety, this only amplifies it in you guys, which is why I believe you have displayed some 3 disintegration (narcissistic bs), which possibly contributed to mistypings for both of you (i.e., Ezra thinking ESTp).

What part of Enneagram 6 applies to either of them?

[Stormy]

As for being a Three, well, I generally glom onto the interests and ideal personas of those I tend to be hanging around with.

That's equally applicable to E6 (and E9), both being in the Attachment Triad.

[strrrng]

What part of Enneagram 6 applies to either of them?

a certain groundedness

[Stormy]

a certain groundedness

E6 isn't very grounded - it's in the center of the Strategy Triad, prone to over-analysis and projecting worst-case scenarios into the future.

[Gilly]

you're obviously over-analyzing. there's no way you're a beta NF, nor are you IEE. gamma is out of the question lol...ILE is obvious...

Maybe to you. I'm still not convinced.

Hold up, speak for yourself. I'm arrogant, but I'm not narcissistic. I'm certainly not in love with myself. Perhaps others see it that way, but I'll tell you now - I am not in love with my image.

Narcissism doesn't always mean you're in LOVE with yourself. Literally, yeah, but in context it's meant to be taken with a grain of salt. Really it just means that we think highly of ourselves or over-value specific aspects of our personalities or physical selves.

Or maybe you don't. But it seems like it.

Is that relationship also called Super-Ego? I don't use "Look-Alike", so I can't tell what relationship you're referring to.

Not, it's look-alike, as in two partners who share their creative function but not their first.

a certain groundedness

lol, you're kidding, right? I definitely don't see myself as grounded in much any way.

[Gilly]

lol...sorry, it's just blatantly clear to me. I'd be willing to explain more if necessary.

I'm certainly not convinced so easily, so please, enlighten us.

[strrrng]

E6 isn't very grounded - it's in the center of the Strategy Triad, prone to over-analysis and projecting worst-case scenarios into the future.

well, 6's seek a "stable ground." I was alluding to the contrast with the 7, who is idealistic, running towards the future and, to some degree, away from the internal pain.

Gilly being a 6w7 makes sense because he would have the idealism and experience-seeking attitude that would come with the wing, but it wouldn't be his core. This obviously will spark some flames, but compare him to ashton, who is the epitome of a 7.

as for why he's ENTp, it's a duh. (Gilly pm me if u care, it would probably make more sense there).

[strrrng]

stormy, could u paste some good enneagram links? you seem to know a lot

[discojoe]

Where the hell is George's Fi? Look at him compared to Kim. There's no similarity whatsoever.

[Gilly]

Where the hell is my Ti? I can't seem to stick with one type for 30 days. That seems like weakness in "static logic" to me. I do fine with logic, but that's mostly because I made a point of learning about it when I studied political theory (and especially after you ripped my worldview to shreds ).

[Stormy]

well, 6's seek a "stable ground." I was alluding to the contrast with the 7, who is idealistic, running towards the future and, to some degree, away from the internal pain.

It's true that E6s seek stable ground to a greater degree than E7s, but unless they're Healthy, they end up ruining any position of security they can by constantly testing it - they expect their support-systems to fail to such a degree that they actually bring it about; they're inner instability undermines the stability they build up externally.

stormy, could u paste some good enneagram links?

The Enneagram Institute
Official site of the Riso and Hudson system, which developed the Levels of Development, has good free tests and an active forum.

The Enneagram...Info from the Underground
A sort of indie Enneagram community, not linked to any specific system although it has material about the Enneagram's initial inception via Gurdijeff, Naranjo and Ichazo, good info, especially regarding Instinctual Sackings for each Type, slow-moving forums populated by old-schoolers.

Rob Fitzel -The Enneagram
Good info about Triads and Levels.

[strrrng]

thanks man

[Gilly]

Convo between me an strrrng (bits and pieces, mostly for analysis rather than its actual content):

gilligan121787 (6:43:33 PM): so ILE
gilligan121787 (6:43:35 PM): let's hear it
whitenite246 (6:43:43 PM): well
whitenite246 (6:43:44 PM): how about this
whitenite246 (6:44:13 PM): I'm not good at explaining things in detail...so point out things that you think are/aren't related to ENTp and then I can say shit
gilligan121787 (6:44:20 PM): well
gilligan121787 (6:44:34 PM): Tanehem seems to think that my inability to reach a conclusion about my type is an indicator of weak Ti
gilligan121787 (6:44:43 PM): I don't seem to be able to stick with one line of reasoning for very long

----

whitenite246 (6:45:50 PM): that post you had
whitenite246 (6:45:59 PM): in non-socionics theories
whitenite246 (6:46:03 PM): that was Ti as shit
gilligan121787 (6:46:18 PM): but that's one incident
gilligan121787 (6:46:19 PM): on the whole
gilligan121787 (6:46:23 PM): I show weak Ti behaviors more often
gilligan121787 (6:46:38 PM): I see the holes in the theory because I think about it a lot
whitenite246 (6:46:45 PM): it's the way you do it that's Ti
whitenite246 (6:46:47 PM): structure
gilligan121787 (6:46:51 PM): well no shit
gilligan121787 (6:46:54 PM): Socionics IS a structure
gilligan121787 (6:46:58 PM): you HAVE to use Ti to use socionics
gilligan121787 (6:47:04 PM): it's that simple
whitenite246 (6:47:04 PM): yea but you can tell when ppl process it differently

----

gilligan121787 (6:48:14 PM): I have the ability to dissect a theory,
gilligan121787 (6:48:25 PM): My actual BEHAVIORS
gilligan121787 (6:48:27 PM): in most instances
gilligan121787 (6:48:34 PM): make more sense with me having weak Ti.
gilligan121787 (6:48:36 PM): I am scattered
gilligan121787 (6:48:40 PM): I am not methodical
whitenite246 (6:48:42 PM): so what
gilligan121787 (6:48:46 PM): So...
gilligan121787 (6:48:50 PM): That is what Ti is about
whitenite246 (6:48:53 PM): its called EP
gilligan121787 (6:49:02 PM): but most ILEs
gilligan121787 (6:49:06 PM): have SOME kind of consistency
whitenite246 (6:49:34 PM): that those traits are definitively function-related
whitenite246 (6:49:40 PM): you're a hyper motherfucker
gilligan121787 (6:49:56 PM): People can be hyper and not scattered.
whitenite246 (6:50:06 PM): describe this scatteredness
gilligan121787 (6:50:14 PM): I just have no consistency in the way I think
gilligan121787 (6:50:25 PM): I just take whatever is in front of me
gilligan121787 (6:50:37 PM): and assume that it is the most important thing to come along so far
gilligan121787 (6:50:45 PM): completely disregarding my past trains of thought
gilligan121787 (6:50:47 PM): all my prior logic
gilligan121787 (6:50:53 PM): and practically start from scratch
gilligan121787 (6:51:01 PM): based on whatever seems important at that time
whitenite246 (6:51:03 PM): Ne
whitenite246 (6:51:04 PM): duh
gilligan121787 (6:51:09 PM): yeah
gilligan121787 (6:51:11 PM): with weak Ti!
whitenite246 (6:51:13 PM): no

[Gilly]

More:

-----
whitenite246 (6:52:21 PM): the way you talk...is alpha
gilligan121787 (6:52:23 PM): ...
whitenite246 (6:52:24 PM): and wtf
whitenite246 (6:52:25 PM): Te
whitenite246 (6:52:27 PM): yea right
gilligan121787 (6:52:28 PM): that's GREAT reasoning.
gilligan121787 (6:52:41 PM): "yea right"
gilligan121787 (6:52:42 PM): "wtf"
gilligan121787 (6:52:47 PM): "the way you talk is alpha"
gilligan121787 (6:52:48 PM): wtf?
whitenite246 (6:52:49 PM): stop describing stupid traits
gilligan121787 (6:52:52 PM): I thought you had me pinned.
gilligan121787 (6:52:57 PM): What else do I describe?!?!
whitenite246 (6:52:58 PM): that only lead to convoluted bullshit
gilligan121787 (6:53:01 PM): I am describing tendencies
whitenite246 (6:53:04 PM): I do have u pinned
gilligan121787 (6:53:06 PM): That's what Socionics is BASED on.
gilligan121787 (6:53:08 PM): TENDENCIES
whitenite246 (6:53:11 PM): let's see
whitenite246 (6:53:17 PM): no you're missing the point
gilligan121787 (6:53:20 PM): Ok
gilligan121787 (6:53:22 PM): So explain the point
whitenite246 (6:53:34 PM): stupid little traits that could have multiple causes should not be used because they are not reliable
gilligan121787 (6:53:40 PM): umm
gilligan121787 (6:53:43 PM): that's EVERYTHING
gilligan121787 (6:53:50 PM): EVERYTHING can be attributed to something beyond socionics
whitenite246 (6:54:01 PM): ok exactly
gilligan121787 (6:54:02 PM): the point is the consistency in it's manifestation in personality
gilligan121787 (6:54:19 PM): is scateredness, lack of total thinking-through
whitenite246 (6:54:24 PM): ok first of all
whitenite246 (6:54:30 PM): you're EP without a doubt
gilligan121787 (6:54:31 PM): not basing things on total logic as opposed to what is in front of me
gilligan121787 (6:54:36 PM): well
gilligan121787 (6:54:38 PM): unless I'm EIE
---
whitenite246 (6:54:57 PM): you're impulsiveness or w/e does not imply bad Ti
gilligan121787 (6:55:09 PM): I'm not saying it's just impulsiveness
gilligan121787 (6:55:16 PM): stop reframing my thoughts to make them fit your point
whitenite246 (6:55:37 PM): convolution
gilligan121787 (6:55:38 PM): It's the fact that EVERYTHING I do is done with almost no regard for logical consistency
whitenite246 (6:55:42 PM): lol
whitenite246 (6:55:43 PM): ok
gilligan121787 (6:55:47 PM): Except when I'm focusing on logic
whitenite246 (6:55:47 PM): well, I'm not gonna go down that road
-----
gilligan121787 (6:56:42 PM): I'm talking about the greater consistencies in my thought process
whitenite246 (6:56:43 PM): you act like a scattered fuck, but you analyze shit with Ti
gilligan121787 (6:56:47 PM): no shit
whitenite246 (6:56:51 PM): ok then
gilligan121787 (6:56:51 PM): because we talk about Ti shit all day long
gilligan121787 (6:56:52 PM): duh...
whitenite246 (6:56:56 PM): doesnt matter
gilligan121787 (6:56:58 PM): Socionics IS Ti

[strrrng]

lol^^the most fulfilling convo of my life

[Gilly]

lol, it actually was a lot of fun.

<3333 buttsecks

[Ezra]

lol...sorry, it's just blatantly clear to me. I'd be willing to explain more if necessary.

Explanations are always necessary. Otherwise no one takes you seriously. Like now, for instance. You're a walking joke.

lookalike relations are also known as business/cooperative relations (the one where you have the same creative function, but not the same base function)

superego is a different one.

No then, Gilly, I'm not sure Lookalike does fit you and I.

@Gilly and "Ez," there are definitely similarities there. You both strike me as 6w7 so/sx, and are both at similar points in your life (coincidentally with similar interests of study). I think the stage you're at carries more anxiety than almost any other age, and given that the head triad of the enneagram is characterized by anxiety, this only amplifies it in you guys, which is why I believe you have displayed some 3 disintegration (narcissistic bs), which possibly contributed to mistypings for both of you (i.e., Ezra thinking ESTp).

Yeah, because that's me.

Narcissism doesn't always mean you're in LOVE with yourself. Literally, yeah, but in context it's meant to be taken with a grain of salt. Really it just means that we think highly of ourselves or over-value specific aspects of our personalities or physical selves.

What's the difference between vain and narcissistic?

Where the hell is my Ti? I can't seem to stick with one type for 30 days. That seems like weakness in "static logic" to me. I do fine with logic, but that's mostly because I made a point of learning about it when I studied political theory (and especially after you ripped my worldview to shreds ).

That's just Ti creative. Look on the wiki. It tells all.

[Ezra]

Gilly also has a better sense of humour about himself. I just get annoyed taking the piss out of myself, or I feel uncomfortable in some way. It's not the humiliation but the attempts to act as if it's something to take the piss out of. I just can't be bothered. It's "great, I fucked up, let's move on".

[Blaze]

What?

you're not narcissistic? how's that?

[aka-kitsune]

Gilly being a 6w7 makes sense because he would have the idealism and experience-seeking attitude that would come with the wing, but it wouldn't be his core. This obviously will spark some flames, but compare him to ashton, who is the epitome of a 7.

Doesn't really "make sense" to me.

The 6s I've known have more of an "affiliative" core. They're looking for approval, connection to a group. They define themselves in terms of group or "nongroup" connection. Either the faithful, dutiful one or the rebel. And often, because all 6s are both phobic and counterphobic, vacillate between both states occasionally. I haven't noted this kind of behavior in Gilly. At least from what I've seen on this board. 7s are inherently narcissistic, and seek freedom from "definition" in order to do as they please. They want to blaze a trail which others just seem to follow on their own. 6s actually seek definition, even accepting negation in lieu. They're also more comfortable in positions of authority, because to some extent, most of their actions are proscribed by their orientation to authority figures.

Really, though, my litmus test is the common "bristle" that I always note in 6s. An edgy defensiveness that always lies pretty close to their surface. 7s aren't usually defensive or negative, tending to avoid unpleasant feelings and people who provoke them. They might say they experience pain, but they don't stay long with those experiences, preferring to distract themselves in more gamesome pursuits. 6s are usually skeptical and often cynical. 7s are boundless optimists and ultimately reframe whatever they find to be unpleasant.

[Ezra]

you're not narcissistic? how's that?

Etymology

After Narcissus, the fictional Greek hero who became obsessed with his own reflection.

Pronunciation

/ˈnɑːsəˌsɪzm/

Noun

narcissism

1. Love of oneself.
2. Sexual desire for one's own body.


I fit neither of those definitions. Hence, I am not narcissistic.

[Stormy]

Etymology

After Narcissus, the fictional Greek hero who became obsessed with his own reflection.

Pronunciation

/ˈnɑːsəˌsɪzm/

Noun

narcissism

1. Love of oneself.
2. Sexual desire for one's own body.


I fit neither of those definitions. Hence, I am not narcissistic.

I think this is a more appropriate definition:

narcissism
noun
...2. A psychological condition characterized by self-preoccupation, lack of empathy, and unconscious deficits in self-esteem.

[Blaze]

I think this is a more appropriate definition:

narcissism
noun
...2. A psychological condition characterized by self-preoccupation, lack of empathy, and unconscious deficits in self-esteem.

yep, pretty much.

[Gilly]

:/ I'm actually a very empathetic person. I just like a lot of things about myself There is also an equal amount that I don't like about myself. I just like to highlight the good stuff because, well, because I'm insecure.

[Ezra]

I think this is a more appropriate definition:

narcissism
noun
...2. A psychological condition characterized by self-preoccupation, lack of empathy, and unconscious deficits in self-esteem.

Lack of empathy: yes. Self-preoccupation: partly. Unconscious deficits in self-esteem: no.

[strrrng]

Lack of empathy: yes. Self-preoccupation: partly. Unconscious deficits in self-esteem: no.

lol...

[Gilly]

Unconscious deficits in self-esteem: no.

How would you know? :wink:

[Ezra]

How would you know? :wink:

If this symptom of narcissism was completely unconscious, how could narcisissm be diagnosed in a person in the first place? How could you know someone was narcissistic? How can you observe the unconscious?

[Stormy]

If this symptom of narcissism was completely unconscious, how could narcisissm be diagnosed in a person in the first place? How could you know someone was narcissistic? How can you observe the unconscious?

Subconscious symptoms are only necessarily outside ones own awareness - they aren't necessarily unobservable objectively. 'He subconsciously scratched his arm' means he scratched his arm without being aware of it, which could be seen by anyone around him.

[aka-kitsune]

If this symptom of narcissism was completely unconscious, how could narcisissm be diagnosed in a person in the first place? How could you know someone was narcissistic? How can you observe the unconscious?

Narcissistic personality disorder is quite different from your everyday average narcissistic tendencies. We all have the capacity for being a bit too self-absorbed. Diagnosis would imply a very specific level of impact on your life as well as your impact on others around you. I delved into the concept of "malignant narcissism" a while back when attempting to understand someone in my life. As a result I'm pretty careful not to carelessly throw the term around.

Here's a link to way more info than you'll ever need to know about narcissism in case you're interested:

http://samvak.tripod.com/faq1.html

[strrrng]

Ezra, if I'm being honest, I do think you have an unconscious lack of self-esteem. It's just something you can sense, I think. I mean, I'm not saying you lack confidence or ne thing...you seem to have a solid belief in your abilities...I just think your whole presence can be too contrived at times and confusing...

I would say the same for Gilly, although with him it's more of this childish insecurity, whereas with Ezra it seems more like a literal deficit (not huge, just there).

[Gilly]

Look, the point is, excessive overconfidence in one's self or abilities tends to be compensation for some kind of internal belief of personal shortcoming. Everybody has shortcomings, and unless you want to claim that you're TOTALLY accepting of them in all ways, which you couldn't because you can't know your subconscious, then you can pretty much guarantee that you're making up for it in some way or another. Some people happen to do their making up by (among other things) over-achieving, some by being overly acquisitive or placing significance on material possesions, and some by puffing out their chests and claiming their admirable qualities overtly. You and I happen to fall into the last category, with people who are usually labeled as "narcissistic" to some degree.

[strrrng]

Look, the point is, excessive overconfidence in one's self or abilities tends to be compensation for some kind of internal belief of personal shortcoming. Everybody has shortcomings, and unless you want to claim that you're TOTALLY accepting of them in all ways, which you couldn't because you can't know your subconscious, then you can pretty much guarantee that you're making up for it in some way or another. Some people happen to do their making up by (among other things) over-achieving, some by being overly acquisitive or placing significance on material possesions, and some by puffing out their chests and claiming their admirable qualities overtly. You and I happen to fall into the last category, with people who are usually labeled as "narcissistic" to some degree.

ya forrall....this ties into the who idea of polarities that we discussed.

[Ezra]

Ezra, if I'm being honest, I do think you have an unconscious lack of self-esteem. It's just something you can sense, I think. I mean, I'm not saying you lack confidence or ne thing...you seem to have a solid belief in your abilities...I just think your whole presence can be too contrived at times and confusing...

I would say the same for Gilly, although with him it's more of this childish insecurity, whereas with Ezra it seems more like a literal deficit (not huge, just there).

I just don't see it. I mean, psychologically, I'm a pretty healthy guy. If everyone had said unconscious lack of self-esteem, then I could flow with that (I'm not special in any way). But no one has ever commented on my lack of it, and I don't see it. Hence, there are no grounds whatsoever for arguing that I have poor self-esteem. To my mind, it's not even worth discussing. If Gilly feels he has this, fair enough; we are not similar in this way. If not, then again, fair enough. I see similarities between us, but I don't think we're the same type; I just think that there's something functionally similar about us (probably not leading function).

[Gilly]

Please read my post.