Any Enneagram Enthusiasts?

Post Reply New Topic

Wondering if there are any enneagram enthusiasts out there.

I first came into contact with these concepts a few years ago and eventually typed myself as a 4w5 with a sexual/self-pres stacking. I find (and I know this is not a good idea, but I do it anyway) that I attempt to type people after I've interacted or known them for a while. I think I do this because I'm attempting to figure out how to deal with/approach them. But also, the whole concept/system fascinates me. Kind of like MBTI (on which I type typically as either an INFP or an INTP...since I'm borderline T/F I figure I'll just say INXP).

Sooooo......?

I thought enneagrams were some sort of pseudo-science rubbish done by Scientologists?

I think that they're quite groovy.

I don't know what Scientology has done with it, honestly.

From what I know of my primary sources (materials by Don Riso and Richard Hudson), the ideas that eventually lead to the development of modern Enneagram study began with G.I. Gurdjieff, then taken up by Oscar Ichazo, then by others. Also, a couple of Jesuit authors, Richard Rohr and Andreas Ebert, have tackled the system from a Christian (truthfully, Catholic) perspective.

When I think of it, I tend to wipe away the spiritual-type attachments and theory away and just concentrate on how it defines basic personality, which from what I understand, includes a primary "strategy" of how to approach, handle, and deal with the world. To me, this premise is similar to the premise upon which MBTI was developed. I think it can be used to narrowly define and put people in boxes, which is not helpful.

However, when you consider that there are as many different permutations of each personality type, and when you remember that it is only one way to look at and define personality, I think it can be rather helpful. Like for example, I am a type 4 (The Tragic Romantic) in the Enneagram system, which means I have a certain strategy to approaching life -- seeking to be unique and different. This could be done in either a positive way (i.e. I won't do something necessarily because my neighbor/co-worker/family member does it...I seek to be unique) or a negative way (I'll beat myself up for being too "ordinary" or think that I'm not worthy of being loved for being "different" or flawed).

And when you look at, say, celebrities of that type, you see those tendencies coming out in a positive or negative way too (positive example: Johnny Depp -- using his individuality in his craft of acting to lend a certain uniqueness and memorability to his characters; negative example: Michael Jackson, carving up his face because of perceived physical "flaws").

Some have tried to cross-reference it with other systems, notably the four humors or temperments (melancholy, choleric, phlegmatic, sanguine) and MBTI. The problem here is that while there are certain cases in which types will correlate with types (for example, I tend to see a lot of type 4 INFP's), there are an endless number of possibilities and so correlation is not easy -- you can't predict, for example, that an INFP *will* always be a type 4. They could end up as a type 9 (the Peacemaker) or a type 6 (the Loyal Skeptic) or even a type 5 (the Observer) or 1 (the Perfectionist).

Some have even tried to cross-reference the Enneagram types with the Sephiroth which make up the Tree of Life figure in Kabbalism (see The Enneagram and the Kabbalah (Worldcat Entry) or the Amazon Entry. The author theorizes that each of the types, which lines up with one of the sephiroth (sp???) are portions of the Divine personality which can manifest either positively or negatively.

Again, what you believe depends on you. A healthy skepticism is a good thing, but I would encourage people to check it out for themselves before dismissing it as some New Age, psycho-babble mumbo-jumbo. I find it quite fascinating indeed. But then again, I find most systems that attempt to define personality fascinating anyway. I partially attribute that to my attempts and desire to read and understand people...systemized approaches tend to help me find a place to start.

Scientology is totally different, though some of the origins of the enneagram and somde of the later developments get almost as strange.

But the version coming out of Riso, Palmer, etc. is a remarkably robust way of classifying personality.

I am 5w4, my wife 4w5, our son a 5w4 somewhat closer to the 4 line than I am, his good friend girl a 4w3, as is one of his musical associates. we are in regular communication about these and related topics with a 5w4 / 4w6 couple, my wife has a 4w3 nephew. All of us very much into the insights into our interractions with others coming from trhe Enneagram, and seemingly all would if we took the full battery come out somewhere on the spectrum, with a variety of sensory issues.

So - yes, in a word.

That's what I'm familiar with -- the Riso/Hudson material. I really need to go read Palmer and see how she presents the material.

I forgot to mention this, but I'm a 4w5.

I tend to think of type/wing/instinctual variant as not so much the explanation of "why" we do thing, but a classification of what kinds of strategies and actions people take. The "why" is part of the explanation too, and the *general* causes as well. For example, for Type 4, the search for personal significance (if I understand Riso/Hudson and Rohr/Ebert right) comes out of some fundamental loss or rejection. But it stops short of saying what kind of loss/rejection it could be. For some, it's a parent (usually father) dying young, or being lost to divorce. For others, that parent may be absent in some other fundamental way...puts his work before his family, might be emotionally absent, etc. Sometimes, it's just a loss a good, "happy" place or situation. But however you slice it, it's loss/rejection. But because each of the authors have stopped short of saying, "Losing a father while young always produces a type 4", that I respect that, because there are so many possibilities, sets of circumstances, etc.

And again, no two people of the same type look alike. Take Tim Burton vs. say, Jim Morrison. Both 4's, but a bit different in expression, behaviour, and motivation.

This also leads me to wonder how each of the 9 types might deal with being on the autism spectrum. For type 4, Tim Burton again comes to mind...that feeling of being lost, isolated, rejected, shut out, due to some degree of social impairment. That's come out in some of his work, namely "Edward Scissorhands". I would imagine that a 5 would focus more on information, maybe narrow, specialized interests. Again, these traits alone do not make an Aspie, but I think maybe type might influence which of the traits is perhaps most noticeable.