Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 121 to 132 of 132

Thread: Stackings and Misconceptions

  1. #121
    Haikus silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,052
    Mentioned
    452 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemontrees View Post
    IMO

    So also has a mental hierarchy of who is more "important" in your world. It's not like sx, that immediate tug where you throw away what you're doing to chase the energy (is that sx?) It's more calculated, an awareness that you only have so much time so some people have to be put above others. If sx is in the second position, chemistry would play a big part in that, although things like loyalty, responsibility, would still be at the forefront.

    That's why some so ppl freak out over things like slow response times - anything to signal that they got "devalued"
    That calculated awareness of "important-unimportant" sounds like a 3 wing or core 3. 3s will hold themselves to these terms, but I'm not sure that this is social instinct related. Loyalty is the 3 integration to 6.

  2. #122
    Xaiviay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    SEI-Fe1 9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Volcana View Post
    I've never met anyone that cares more about losing their place in the big, wide community than about their close friendships and having a partner. It would require serious illness to be that far removed from deep connection.
    Soc instinct is not a mental illness or a 'problem with depth.' Being Soc dominant doesnt mean you care more about communities than people you're close to.
    Soc is actually the instinct that cares most about deep connection between two humans.

    I'm Sx/So, the love of my life is @Samson, blatantly Soc last. He really is not that taken with "connecting." The eros is high between us, and he does trust me and open up to me 100% - we have no lack of trust. But sometimes I have to remind him to get out of his personal corner to 'Share' - to remind him that we also need to bond.

    He loves this about me, as it is a basic human need; but he's just not as good at recognizing it. But he's very high Sx, so he does merge with the fascinating and alluring qualities about me, like getting deep into my fantasy novel, both dressing up to impress and allure the other, etc.
    This is actually completely turning around my concept of the social instinct. I always thought of it being about groups and social status, sort of like the social-first person must care more about their place in the hierarchy than their most intimate relationships, just like you said. And I thought 'yuck, some people really are just that way naturally?!' But if it's about bonding and deep connection...that is much more human. And wow idk, it might be my first or second instinct. The only bond I'm that motivated to maintain is the one with my lover, though...and family, to a degree...so I'm not sure what my instinct stack must be

  3. #123
    Allegra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    ESI 693 Sp/Sx
    Posts
    88
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The way I interpret it, syn-flow vs contra-flow strongly coincides with positivist vs negativist dichotomy.

    Synflow: sp/so —> so/sx —> sx/sp :: Compelled toward people, participation, involvement —-> Positivist
    Contraflow: sp/sx —> sx/so —> so/sp :: Compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people ——> Negativist

  4. #124

    Join Date
    May 2011
    TIM
    / / /
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silke View Post
    That calculated awareness of "important-unimportant" sounds like a 3 wing or core 3. 3s will hold themselves to these terms, but I'm not sure that this is social instinct related. Loyalty is the 3 integration to 6.
    Ha. "Important" is a word I've heard several people use, but now that I think about it... they were all social eights.

  5. #125
    Irime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    TIM
    LII 5w6 593
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This thread made me look for informations about instinctual stackings and while I still haven't typed myself, I came to one conclusion:

    Instinct stackings are about focus, not strength.

    The last instinct is called a blind spot and it's a very good term. Blind spot is the place of our visual field where image detection doesn't occur.
    Let's imagine a tree. It's a very important tree and we want it to grow tall and strong. But if we stand too close to the tree, we won't be able to take care of it properly - we don't see surroundings, therefore we don't have information about the soil, the weather, if our tree is lone or a part of some forest.
    Let's take a few steps backwards.
    Now we can see not only our main object of interest (tree) but also the surroundings. The object on which we focus our vision is the area of first instinct, the surroundings is our second instinct and there is still an area that we don't see, which is our blindspot. But at least now we can care properly about our tree and its surroundings.
    But sometimes we need to pay attention on more things than the tree - what if there is a madman with an axe behind us? To see our blindspot area we can do one of the two things:
    1.Take a few more steps bacwards. We can see everything but then our main object of interest becomes blurry, we cannot see it clearly and therefore cannot take care of it.
    2.Turn the head from our main object of interest. Change the focus. We don't want to lose the tree from our sight but we can do it for short time periods if we need to.
    That's why the last instinct is often underdeveloped when compared to the first two. We focus on it sporadically unless we make an active effort to get better in a given area. The second instinct can serve as a mean to develop the first instinct but also to keep it at bay.

  6. #126
    Volcana's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    At the crux.
    TIM
    SeFi 485
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    I’ve fought with and mocked you guys several times before (more with a previous account) but I just discovered and actually really like your Twitter @Volcana . Just wanted to say that.
    Wow thank you so much!! I'm so curious now who you are haha. But whatever, bygones. That's awesome that you liked my twitter
    This forum is a haven for art, archetypes, typology and more! Join the tribe.
    ----> ARCHETRIBE.COM <----

  7. #127
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by Gulenko
    Posts
    4,673
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Volcana View Post
    Wow thank you so much!! I'm so curious now who you are haha. But whatever, bygones. That's awesome that you liked my twitter
    It’s deep af

  8. #128
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by Gulenko
    Posts
    4,673
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allegra View Post
    The way I interpret it, syn-flow vs contra-flow strongly coincides with positivist vs negativist dichotomy.

    Synflow: sp/so —> so/sx —> sx/sp :: Compelled toward people, participation, involvement —-> Positivist
    Contraflow: sp/sx —> sx/so —> so/sp :: Compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people ——> Negativist
    I’m not sure how exactly it coincides (for example, how many Sx/So SEEs must there be?), but as I understand the concept of syn/contrflow, it does definitely seem to have a similar flavour or vibe to positivist vs negativist in how they’re described.

  9. #129
    A little intense. Phoenix Fire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Ελλάδα
    TIM
    ESI | 8 | Sx
    Posts
    226
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Director Abbie View Post
    I was discussing the stacking portion of the
    Quote Originally Posted by Director Abbie View Post
    recently-linked test with a friend and had some interesting realizations.

    Stackings are not related to strengths. They are about focusing on weaknesses.
    The enneagram itself is more about weaknesses and faults than is is about strengths.
    "
    Naranjo however presupposes all Enneagram types are pathologies, so to relate to any type suggests mental health issues."

    So an sx-first person would struggle with intimate relationships. This can include romantic relationships and/or close friendship. But it's an active struggle - something they focus on, not a passive "I'm just not good at that."
    An sx-last might be a very sexual person or have very close bonds with others, but it comes so easily that maintaining these relationships is basically effortless.

    An sp-first person could be neurotic about personal safety or well-being because it doesn't come naturally to them so they have to pay attention to get it right, whereas an sp-last may be naturally good at that sort of thing and can essentially ignore such things and still be fine.

    An so-first person might care more about how they're perceived by society though an so-last person could have higher social standing.


    So I am indeed sx/so. I focus on and struggle over close relationships. I rarely think about physical safety or well-being; that sort of awareness comes naturally to me, and I skip meals to talk to people because relationships are a higher priority and I can have a meal any ol' time.
    A common misconception is that sx equates to sex. I'm saying that even if that is the case to a degree, not only is it possible for an asexual to be sx-first, it may be more likely than for one to be sx-last.


    Another aspect I wondered about is whether stackings relate to how one would react to hardships. So an sp would close themselves off and focus on physical survival, an sx would push away acquaintances and cling to only the closest relationships, and an so would try to be around a lot of people to get through the situation.
    Thoughts?
    You had some interesting thoughts, and I agree with much of what you said here..

    "So I am indeed sx/so. I focus on and struggle over close relationships. I rarely think about physical safety or well-being; that sort of awareness comes naturally to me, and I skip meals to talk to people because relationships are a higher priority and I can have a meal any ol' time."

    I'm not sure this is really points for Sp, though. An Sp can forget to eat all the time (thus not thinking about it, same as you), for example. Whether or not a person is consciously focused on it is not necessarily indicative of anything. Someone might not consciously focus on Sp boundaries, or seeking comfort in food / temp / etc., etc., but that's what happens naturally--at times so much that they don't think about it any more than they think of breathing. Overall, strength and focus is often going to be one and the same, as that is their primary mode of operation and supposedly the main drive. For example, as an Sx Dom I might not always be able to connect to someone, but I still naturally know how to draw people in or push them away. Sometimes peopel can be balanced though. Perhaps your Sp and So are?
    🙞 Лаять сквозь намордник Пасть раскрыть до боли и кусаться сквозь намордник 🙜

  10. #130
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,359
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    If someone is dying so no longer concerned about their own sp, they might focus on getting things in order for their family members. They'd make arrangements, make sure funeral costs were covered ahead of time, set their family up well financially. Their sp would then be focused not on their own survival, but the survival and well-being of their relatives. The survival of their genes and such. Still sp, just redirected.

    ...[]...

    So, sexual energy too can be redirected. It's still lust, but could be in regards to ideas, wanting to gobble up every little piece of information of the ideas you're deeply drawn to, immersing yourself in the seeking, or problems so engaging you get excited just considering them and that you could spend years sorting them out and trying to solve them without growing tired of it.
    Yes Yes Yes!!!
    Since being with R, that energy that used to get me into so much trouble is now redirected into reading, studying, and being obsessive over certain types of ideas/concepts. If I could, this would be ALL I'd focus on...R and ideas, period. My neighbors and acquaintances laugh at me because I get so obsessive over a new project/study that it takes ALL of my energy and attention. I want to understand it ALLLLLL!!!!

    Alas, this obsessiveness means that my physical needs, nesting needs, and need for security gets dumped...which eventually gets behind sooo much that I've got to put a brake on the current obsession to focus on these things. But as I'm focusing on fulfilling these needs, I get bored and restless because I'm not as engaged as when reading/studying, and eventually I partake of a little reading to help ease that restlessness, and BOOM!!!!....I'm back into obsessively studying an idea/concept and my physical/nesting/security needs take a back seat.

    Sorry, I think you already know this about me, lol. But I was super excited when I read your post.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  11. #131
    Ree Seether MrInternet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    EII-H 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,485
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    high sx means you're a sexy Chad like me

  12. #132
    Revelations's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Connecticut
    TIM
    Gamma SF. E2 sx/so
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    K. I might be the stereotype..... but, there's never been a day that I've never thought about sex. Ever. Except maybe when I blacked out, and who knows, what I'm dreaming?? SO THERE, THAT'S THE RUB. DON'T NO ONE MAKE FUN OF ME FOR IT!!

    sx/so/sp--does this have to be here 'cause it's pretty absent in me

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •