Aspects of sx/so

[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.