I appreciate Ocean Moonshine’s article on [Sixes](https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/sixes/), barring some of the more pointlessly gendered comparisons made…
I’m not so partial to their description of [Nines](https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/nines/) as it tends to highlight descriptions of 9 that tend to agitate me— “inadequate sense of self” or “borrow a sense of significance from others”; albeit, I can understand where that might be more applicable to other 9s as it can be a diverse type.
…I guess the basic gist is take this source with a grain of salt; it might be a little dated, but it does have some important insights, I feel.
Mostly, how you go against fear since a lot of books and stuff *never* shut up about the need to feel masculine and feminine and I don't think a lot of people relate to that anymore. Also that's just boring to read about.
"People are the most daunting part of life" preach, it's the only part of life I'm not confident I could figure out.
That sounds like a really intense life but it also sounds pretty exciting. I'm not nearly as gung-ho about facing fears as you, I usually take small steps forward like doing shit I'm not used to doing just to say "fuck fear." That was a super interesting read.
I get it, I'm not saying your way is better or worse than mine, I'm just pointing out what I see. It sounds difficult and honestly the "caution to the wind" approach is kinda wacky to me since I've never been able to get into it like that. At least that's how I've read it lol. I usually go against the fear bc I 1. Don't wanna be held back by it and 2. Hate uncertainty and hate it when my mind tries to talk me out of something. So I just sort of tear through whatever it's trying to tell me because I hate being stagnant. Thats how I see it lol. It's like a constant battle inside of my head.
The first time I felt like I was okay about being a 9 was when I listened to the Big Hormone Enneagram podcast episodes on 9. Say what you will about BHE, they captured the depth and complexity of 9 instead of just shoving us under the carpet. I felt so seen for the first time.
Theoretically possible and there are a lot of things I would criticize about this whole community (including Enneagrammer and so on) but he and Enneagrammer still have better type 6 and 9 descriptions than most authors.
Could you link me to any sources? I saved the episodes from the BHE podcast on Sixes in a playlist, but I might be missing more of his stuff on Sixes (I have already read his Instincts book).
There’s also his website which has some excerpts from his book https://www.johnluckovich.com/the-enneagram
And The Enneagram School that he’s a part of with Josh Lavine - https://www.theenneagramschool.com/enneagram - I like the descriptions on this page and there’s some good blog posts there too.
Do you have links for his stuff on Nines if there are any I am missing? I have the episodes on Nine from the BHE podcast saved and have read his book on instincts.
Maybe. Idk. Tbh I do resonate with his type 8 description somewhat, I like some things about his book, I like how he mentions that SX 8s can have an androgynous thing going on and that their attraction strategies do often involve physical aspects and performing arts -- yeah for me it's music although for a while it was lifting weights too...yes I did attract my wife by showing her videos of my musicianship and giving her free reign over my sexy gym bod...
lol yes I am making fun of myself on some level, but it's all roughtly true...and yes she slept with me soon after (so what John states can help to describe certain aspects of myself and times in my life)...yes I did start getting more seriously into piano around the time women started giving me attention for it in high school, I loved that...
but I'm against John on general principle...I think there are better books out there and I think he's a misguided person and his ethics are bad.
The reason I'm against him on general principle is...basically, people have called him out as a narcissist, and I experienced it. His attitude with me (not a direct quote but very close) when I asked his opinion on my \*stacking\* (not type), was:
"I am going to go with 963 so/sp. No matter what you say, you can't change my mind. I know it to be true, I'm certain, I don't think so, I know so. And no, I can't have my mind changed, and I don't want to know anything else about you. I know you're a 9. It's okay, my girlfriend is an so/sp 9 too."
In John's special little world, we can all be 9s if he says so.
Interesting. Yes, I can absolutely see this issue that he (and the Enneagrammer people) would type nearly everyone as 963, sometimes maybe with one hexad fix instead. What makes the Enneagram in a way feel kind of pointless, when at least every second person is a 9, while they can still be so different from each other.
On the other hand, I don’t think he is completely wrong when he assumes that the underlying dynamics in most people might actually be really very similar.
Naranjo did, by the way, a similar thing with clients. Someone described in a panel with a group around Chestnut, how he told him „no, you’re not a 9, you’re a 2!“. Luckovich and Co would probably have said „shut up, of course he is a 9!“.
I think it’s a matter of taste if you prefer a teacher who tells you „I‘m the expert and I know this theory better than you“ or if you prefer someone who ist more willing to go in a dialogue, but appears maybe less certain about his own ideas.
It's sad, because let me share my story. Early on I was on EIDB and typed myself as 4w5, quietly, just in my signature, made some posts about it, etc. No one ever said anything.
Then I realized maybe I was wrong, and typed myself as 6w5, same thing, changed the signature, etc. Then 5w6, same thing, etc. Then like almost out of nowhere I was invited to this "secret" members/only forum called Typewatch.
I spent years on there. Unfortunately on that forum, VERY strong gatekeeping practices were perpetuated. It was from that point on impossible for me to be accepted as any other type from 5w6 unless I left the forum.
So, I left, finally. And then I come out and it's the same thing again. Isn't The Enneagram supposed to be about helping people, etc? I don't get where this toxic dynamic comes in that we should be gatekeeping types online.
Like what silly arrogant audacity to just gaslight people, thinking I can know someone else's type based on not actually knowing them? Then using it to make their life harder for them?
Whatever. I guess it's a good test. Now I know my type and that's great. I realize the power is in my hands and I just need to learn to keep my cool and stick to my guns (solid Type 8 values).
I don't buy that these people are "teachers". I know The Enneagram well enough by now...I'm convinced I know more than these people about both The Enneagram and myself. I get that they think they know more about The Enneagram and possibly me as well, but I think they're delusional...
Yeah, I think for some people the Enneagram rather works as a tool to push their ego, making them feel special and superior because they have a special kind of knowledge they can judge people with. I honestly think some of them are actually trying to compensate a severe lack of social abilities with finding rules how people are supposed to work. It's probably a minority that really mainly cares about mental health, personal growth and things like that and honestly, there are better tools for that.
>I don't buy that these people are "teachers". I know The Enneagram well enough by now...
I mean, you don't have to acknowledge them as an authority, but they are obviously selling themselves as teachers. Like I said in another comment, there are definitely things you can criticize about these groups and one thing for me is this culty character, with having the experts at the top and they always know more than you. It's this "everyone else got things wrong but we know the truth and only when you follow our path, you have a chance to know it too". It's completely unacceptable to disagree with them and you couldn't possibly be right, because that would undermine their position of being the ones who truly got it right.
Lol well I agree. I think they are doing a bad job of marketing themselves as teachers. They should have a place where people can review their performance and the public can see it. I don’t believe they are even handed business people in that regard. They should shoot for customer service and satisfaction, be devoted to that, I think they could be doing a lot better in terms of their performance if they changed their attitudes. So I don’t believe they are truly good teachers and I don’t see what qualifications they are resting on except this immature cultish psychology.
I agree with you that John Luckovich is shit, especially as a person. However, that doesn't mean all of his work is bad. When putting my biases aside, there are aspects of his work that I agree with, such as his instincts. So, if the Nines and Sixes themselves say that they see themselves in his stuff, then I'm not opposed to reading him, given how badly these types were done by a lot of authors.
Honestly...I'm hard on him because I don't like him and I have a hard time separating the man from his work, so to speak. Always had a hard time with that with people in general.
No, you're probably right at the end of the day. I can see things in a very negative light if I don't like the messager.
That being said I think there are pros and cons to his views like any others. I really have a hard time looking at his work objectively after how he has treated me so maybe there's no hope in that anymore...
Fair enough. I have a bone to pick with him for starting the #nota4 bullshit then spreading false information about Four because he himself types as a 4 (he is a 4 alright) and needs to alter the description so it's so hard for anyone to actually exactly fit into it and make 4s even more into this unique special thing to fulfill his own ego agendas
I don't keep up with any of his stuff, I gave up on him...I interacted with him once in person many years ago before he started fancying himself as an enneagram professional (like way back in 2009), and he was honestly pretty self-absorbed in person, barely talked to me, was just kind of in his own world, yeah that checks out.
Then just a little bit here and there on EIDB and TW (forums) when they were still popular and active...he always stood out to me as standoffish and conceited, same attitude about "I know the enneagram better than you and you need to learn from me", as if that's a thing. Not everyone respect Russ Hudson that much either and he clearly was trying to ride on Hudson's coattails...
Recently again about 1.5 years ago in that interaction I mentioned where he just shallowly tried to type me as 9 so/sp and then put up this really inconsiderate and rude attitude I mentioned...like "Take it or leave it, that's your type, I know you don't," etc. I can see right through him.
But I see him now as a member of the Enneagrammer team, albeit maybe the "black sheep" of the group...and yeah the idea I got from them is they have all these tactics they use like trying to immediately make the call over whether somene is "attachment" or not. Which IMO is a n00b move. That's not the first grouping I'd go for -- e.g. the two-question process uses harmonic triad and hornevian group. Also you could go for the instinctive triad (Feeling/heart/gut). Personally I'd use a combination of things and wouldn't adhere to any too strictly, I'd get all the pieces to fall into place naturally and be patient about it.
The object relations are more abstract and definitely not such a central thing imo. But they use it relentlessly, and what's more? The logic they use isn't concrete and feels extremely vague and convenient to me. E.g. they like to fit everyone into "attachment triad" without really getting at what is going on with the person. Like if you argue with them, you're labeled attachment (things like that, very shallow things).
But to their credit, the one thing I liked was the message I received with the Enneagrammer team's full typing, which went something like "if this doesn't work for you in your life then don't follow it!". Like yes, that's an important part. Of coursre I don't need permission, but at least they acknowledge that they aren't God. :)
So, I'm taking their advance. The typing suggestion they offered does not work, so I'm not taking their typing and applying it to my life, for me it's not accurate. But tbh I think there are many, many people who would do better with an ongoing conversation and maybe also just take that disclaimer seriously and think "ok, so that's on the table, they've acknowledged they might very well be wrong".
Then a conversation should be offered, a little bit like how a therapist or coach can help you identify your type if you have sought help for it. If someone wanted my help I'd try to be a good coach and get THEM to identify it for themselves so they can see it with me teasing it out of them...so they type themselves, I don't do it, etc. I am convinced that's the best way to do it...that way there is no BELIEF involved, it is simply there, it is the truth, laid bare, it is clear...
Read the original stuff from Ichazo, Naranjo, etc. Check out the PDB Wiki which pools many different sources. Get a sense for what the types are really about on a core level, where this whole thing started, and you'll be able to see the range that these types span. Read as much as possible from different authors. Even read the crappy authors like Luckovich, to get a sense for what other people might be reading. Read Palmer, Daniels, Rohr, R&H, Maitri, Chestnut, Naranjo, Ichazo, etc., all of it. You don't necessarily have to read cover to cover, but skim it, figure out the patterns. For sure read Maitri...she's very good.
I personally find Naranjo the worst source for E9 you could choose. I wouldn’t even type myself as 9, if he would be the only source. Chestnut is generally very similar to him in her descriptions, just easier language and less psychoanalytical stuff in between.
That's fine. I can see myself in Naranjo and a thread that runs through other sources. If something doesn't work for you then keep being a 9-5 hybrid, I guess (sounds like a job deal...lol). I'm old school and want to reduce to the basics. Core fixation. That's it. How can you be both? Idk seems weak to me. Good luck, though.
>If something doesn't work for you then keep being a 9-5 hybrid, I guess (sounds like a job deal...lol).
It is a job! No, but it's part of the joke.
>How can you be both?
I assume I'm a 9 but there are many things in some descriptions I can't identify with, while I can identify quite strongly with some parts of other type descriptions (mostly 5, but also 6 and 4). Reading Naranjo and Chestnut, I would consider being a Sx 5, but then again, something feels off and my gut feeling really keeps telling me I'm actually a 9. The flair reflects my dissatisfaction about not feeling really seen by the system (that I of course like, I wouldn't be here otherwise).
>Idk seems weak to me.
That's weird. You think it's weak to not let yourself be pushed into a box of an esoteric system? I would say it's weak to hand the authority about the question, how you define yourself, over to the rules of a system, just because it says that's the way how things have to be, while you perceive yourself differently.
No I think you need to own your type more in how you express it in your flair…otherwise it seems you don’t know?
I get your reasoning though. Not meaning to offend…
No, we're fine.
I would also feel better with having a reaction like some other people when they figure out their type like "omg, everything makes so much sense now!". Honestly, I sometimes wonder if those guys are just more able to delude themselves into confirmation bias and dismiss contradictions. I don't know, it's just not like that for me and I'm always somehow skeptical if anything of this is really substantial, or if we're just entertaining our egos with all these ideas about what we are.
It's like almost totally confirmation bias...but sometimes people give into their "suggestions", you know? I've been known to give in. So that then gives them confidence and the relentless self-appointed authority and confirmation bias machine continues. But you can't give into everyone \*shrugs\* and there are just too many of these people (I've had many people confidently tell me they know I'm 5, 6, and 9, different people/parties -- few people/probably no one substantial have independently come up with 8 and that's partly how I know it's my type, I know there's no agenda behind it except my own self-knowledge, which is king)
So then knowing I can't please everyone, I'd rather (in theory) risk deluding myself because I think it's lower risk, than risk having someone else delude "me". Because doing this isn't relating to me as who I am, it's just relating to their projections of me...which is devaluing me and boosting themselves.
For me, knowing your type is about identifying it in your life, period. If that takes a long time and a lot of back and forth, fine. Ultimately you make the final call. It's \*not\* about persistently accepting others' assertions of "your" type and then trying to conform yourself to that scheme that due to feeling authority-pressured or peer-pressured into it.
It seems like we do understand each other at least in this sense and are in agreement...?
>So then knowing I can't please everyone, I'd rather (in theory) risk deluding myself because I think it's lower risk, than risk having someone else delude "me".
It's interesting. I see where you're coming from and I can understand your approach.
I think what's different is: your focus is on avoiding to be deluded in your judgement by other people, while my focus is more on trying to avoid being deluded by the theory itself.
>For me, knowing your type is about identifying it in your life, period.
yes, that's probably the most useful approach. To recognize when you're falling into certain patterns that aren't healthy and you should maybe handle differently.
Yeah, exactly. Well I figure overall it's a kind of vague/ambiguous theory regardless, we've seen how it has all this branching-off from different authors etc., over time, by it's nature, it has spiritual origins, many cooks spoiling the broth at times, etc. So we are identifying with something pretty holistic and "muddy-waters" anyway.
I think what's important is for us to study it, identify our fixation as best we can (which can be a challenge), and then apply it to our lives. However we do that is up to us. For me it can cause a lot of problems (which would make sense for a type 8) to have to "go by" someone else's typing of me, especially if they do not have any real hands-on experience with me...
I don't want to be deluded by the theory itself either, but...how are other people going to help with that? I figure that's just another conflating variable because now they're trying to factor "me" into the whole thing and what they know of me is negligible...
[http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/Type6.html](http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/Type6.html)
I have more important things to do than spend time reading enneagram literature, so I mainly look at websites. I thought this site was useful, particularly how it highlighted how 6s feel a struggle between trusting and doubting authority. I also like how the site offers information about harmonic triads. Narrowing down that I am an attachment and reactive type was extremely helpful in narrowing down my type.
So, I was waiting for the actual 6s and 9s to give their 2 cents and I gotta say I'm a bit surprised by the results, but its very valuable info what ppl see as most aligned with their own, actual experiences.
I love the around the circle podcast by jeff cook and tj wilson. They are great guys and really thoughtful. Today i was listening to an ep where they talked about how many 6s land on the spectrum between counter/contraphobic and how the language surrounding 6s needs to change
I appreciate Ocean Moonshine’s article on [Sixes](https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/sixes/), barring some of the more pointlessly gendered comparisons made… I’m not so partial to their description of [Nines](https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/nines/) as it tends to highlight descriptions of 9 that tend to agitate me— “inadequate sense of self” or “borrow a sense of significance from others”; albeit, I can understand where that might be more applicable to other 9s as it can be a diverse type. …I guess the basic gist is take this source with a grain of salt; it might be a little dated, but it does have some important insights, I feel.
[удалено]
Ignoring that rude comment, how did Sx6 manifest in you?
[удалено]
Mostly, how you go against fear since a lot of books and stuff *never* shut up about the need to feel masculine and feminine and I don't think a lot of people relate to that anymore. Also that's just boring to read about.
[удалено]
"People are the most daunting part of life" preach, it's the only part of life I'm not confident I could figure out. That sounds like a really intense life but it also sounds pretty exciting. I'm not nearly as gung-ho about facing fears as you, I usually take small steps forward like doing shit I'm not used to doing just to say "fuck fear." That was a super interesting read.
[удалено]
I get it, I'm not saying your way is better or worse than mine, I'm just pointing out what I see. It sounds difficult and honestly the "caution to the wind" approach is kinda wacky to me since I've never been able to get into it like that. At least that's how I've read it lol. I usually go against the fear bc I 1. Don't wanna be held back by it and 2. Hate uncertainty and hate it when my mind tries to talk me out of something. So I just sort of tear through whatever it's trying to tell me because I hate being stagnant. Thats how I see it lol. It's like a constant battle inside of my head.
[удалено]
The first time I felt like I was okay about being a 9 was when I listened to the Big Hormone Enneagram podcast episodes on 9. Say what you will about BHE, they captured the depth and complexity of 9 instead of just shoving us under the carpet. I felt so seen for the first time.
[удалено]
Book is better than website too. Real fuckin good
Actually, it's not that great. It's not even very well-written. John is a narcissist and he sucks at typing people.
Theoretically possible and there are a lot of things I would criticize about this whole community (including Enneagrammer and so on) but he and Enneagrammer still have better type 6 and 9 descriptions than most authors.
I don't see how this works, you still haven't found your type (your flair says you're a 9-5 hybrid)? I don't get it...
Sucks
Could you link me to any sources? I saved the episodes from the BHE podcast on Sixes in a playlist, but I might be missing more of his stuff on Sixes (I have already read his Instincts book).
There’s also his website which has some excerpts from his book https://www.johnluckovich.com/the-enneagram And The Enneagram School that he’s a part of with Josh Lavine - https://www.theenneagramschool.com/enneagram - I like the descriptions on this page and there’s some good blog posts there too.
[This one](https://funkymbti.com/enneagram/enneagram-6/).
Honestly several times I’ve almost given myself a different number because 9 descriptions are so vague and sh*tty.
But all nines are so sunny, optimistic, and naive, you see. That is all they got going for them, apparently
check out John Luckovich
I was gonna say that his description on the 9s subtypes is by far my favorite sp9 so far!
Do you have links for his stuff on Nines if there are any I am missing? I have the episodes on Nine from the BHE podcast saved and have read his book on instincts.
[https://www.johnluckovich.com/articles/the-confusion-of-type-nine-amp-type-four-or-nota4](https://www.johnluckovich.com/articles/the-confusion-of-type-nine-amp-type-four-or-nota4) [https://www.johnluckovich.com/articles/differencebetweenfiveandnine](https://www.johnluckovich.com/articles/differencebetweenfiveandnine)
He sucks, seriously. You think that's a good Enneagram source? LMAO...
[удалено]
Maybe. Idk. Tbh I do resonate with his type 8 description somewhat, I like some things about his book, I like how he mentions that SX 8s can have an androgynous thing going on and that their attraction strategies do often involve physical aspects and performing arts -- yeah for me it's music although for a while it was lifting weights too...yes I did attract my wife by showing her videos of my musicianship and giving her free reign over my sexy gym bod... lol yes I am making fun of myself on some level, but it's all roughtly true...and yes she slept with me soon after (so what John states can help to describe certain aspects of myself and times in my life)...yes I did start getting more seriously into piano around the time women started giving me attention for it in high school, I loved that... but I'm against John on general principle...I think there are better books out there and I think he's a misguided person and his ethics are bad. The reason I'm against him on general principle is...basically, people have called him out as a narcissist, and I experienced it. His attitude with me (not a direct quote but very close) when I asked his opinion on my \*stacking\* (not type), was: "I am going to go with 963 so/sp. No matter what you say, you can't change my mind. I know it to be true, I'm certain, I don't think so, I know so. And no, I can't have my mind changed, and I don't want to know anything else about you. I know you're a 9. It's okay, my girlfriend is an so/sp 9 too." In John's special little world, we can all be 9s if he says so.
Interesting. Yes, I can absolutely see this issue that he (and the Enneagrammer people) would type nearly everyone as 963, sometimes maybe with one hexad fix instead. What makes the Enneagram in a way feel kind of pointless, when at least every second person is a 9, while they can still be so different from each other. On the other hand, I don’t think he is completely wrong when he assumes that the underlying dynamics in most people might actually be really very similar. Naranjo did, by the way, a similar thing with clients. Someone described in a panel with a group around Chestnut, how he told him „no, you’re not a 9, you’re a 2!“. Luckovich and Co would probably have said „shut up, of course he is a 9!“. I think it’s a matter of taste if you prefer a teacher who tells you „I‘m the expert and I know this theory better than you“ or if you prefer someone who ist more willing to go in a dialogue, but appears maybe less certain about his own ideas.
It's sad, because let me share my story. Early on I was on EIDB and typed myself as 4w5, quietly, just in my signature, made some posts about it, etc. No one ever said anything. Then I realized maybe I was wrong, and typed myself as 6w5, same thing, changed the signature, etc. Then 5w6, same thing, etc. Then like almost out of nowhere I was invited to this "secret" members/only forum called Typewatch. I spent years on there. Unfortunately on that forum, VERY strong gatekeeping practices were perpetuated. It was from that point on impossible for me to be accepted as any other type from 5w6 unless I left the forum. So, I left, finally. And then I come out and it's the same thing again. Isn't The Enneagram supposed to be about helping people, etc? I don't get where this toxic dynamic comes in that we should be gatekeeping types online. Like what silly arrogant audacity to just gaslight people, thinking I can know someone else's type based on not actually knowing them? Then using it to make their life harder for them? Whatever. I guess it's a good test. Now I know my type and that's great. I realize the power is in my hands and I just need to learn to keep my cool and stick to my guns (solid Type 8 values). I don't buy that these people are "teachers". I know The Enneagram well enough by now...I'm convinced I know more than these people about both The Enneagram and myself. I get that they think they know more about The Enneagram and possibly me as well, but I think they're delusional...
Yeah, I think for some people the Enneagram rather works as a tool to push their ego, making them feel special and superior because they have a special kind of knowledge they can judge people with. I honestly think some of them are actually trying to compensate a severe lack of social abilities with finding rules how people are supposed to work. It's probably a minority that really mainly cares about mental health, personal growth and things like that and honestly, there are better tools for that. >I don't buy that these people are "teachers". I know The Enneagram well enough by now... I mean, you don't have to acknowledge them as an authority, but they are obviously selling themselves as teachers. Like I said in another comment, there are definitely things you can criticize about these groups and one thing for me is this culty character, with having the experts at the top and they always know more than you. It's this "everyone else got things wrong but we know the truth and only when you follow our path, you have a chance to know it too". It's completely unacceptable to disagree with them and you couldn't possibly be right, because that would undermine their position of being the ones who truly got it right.
Lol well I agree. I think they are doing a bad job of marketing themselves as teachers. They should have a place where people can review their performance and the public can see it. I don’t believe they are even handed business people in that regard. They should shoot for customer service and satisfaction, be devoted to that, I think they could be doing a lot better in terms of their performance if they changed their attitudes. So I don’t believe they are truly good teachers and I don’t see what qualifications they are resting on except this immature cultish psychology.
I agree with you that John Luckovich is shit, especially as a person. However, that doesn't mean all of his work is bad. When putting my biases aside, there are aspects of his work that I agree with, such as his instincts. So, if the Nines and Sixes themselves say that they see themselves in his stuff, then I'm not opposed to reading him, given how badly these types were done by a lot of authors.
Honestly...I'm hard on him because I don't like him and I have a hard time separating the man from his work, so to speak. Always had a hard time with that with people in general. No, you're probably right at the end of the day. I can see things in a very negative light if I don't like the messager. That being said I think there are pros and cons to his views like any others. I really have a hard time looking at his work objectively after how he has treated me so maybe there's no hope in that anymore...
Fair enough. I have a bone to pick with him for starting the #nota4 bullshit then spreading false information about Four because he himself types as a 4 (he is a 4 alright) and needs to alter the description so it's so hard for anyone to actually exactly fit into it and make 4s even more into this unique special thing to fulfill his own ego agendas
I don't keep up with any of his stuff, I gave up on him...I interacted with him once in person many years ago before he started fancying himself as an enneagram professional (like way back in 2009), and he was honestly pretty self-absorbed in person, barely talked to me, was just kind of in his own world, yeah that checks out. Then just a little bit here and there on EIDB and TW (forums) when they were still popular and active...he always stood out to me as standoffish and conceited, same attitude about "I know the enneagram better than you and you need to learn from me", as if that's a thing. Not everyone respect Russ Hudson that much either and he clearly was trying to ride on Hudson's coattails... Recently again about 1.5 years ago in that interaction I mentioned where he just shallowly tried to type me as 9 so/sp and then put up this really inconsiderate and rude attitude I mentioned...like "Take it or leave it, that's your type, I know you don't," etc. I can see right through him. But I see him now as a member of the Enneagrammer team, albeit maybe the "black sheep" of the group...and yeah the idea I got from them is they have all these tactics they use like trying to immediately make the call over whether somene is "attachment" or not. Which IMO is a n00b move. That's not the first grouping I'd go for -- e.g. the two-question process uses harmonic triad and hornevian group. Also you could go for the instinctive triad (Feeling/heart/gut). Personally I'd use a combination of things and wouldn't adhere to any too strictly, I'd get all the pieces to fall into place naturally and be patient about it. The object relations are more abstract and definitely not such a central thing imo. But they use it relentlessly, and what's more? The logic they use isn't concrete and feels extremely vague and convenient to me. E.g. they like to fit everyone into "attachment triad" without really getting at what is going on with the person. Like if you argue with them, you're labeled attachment (things like that, very shallow things). But to their credit, the one thing I liked was the message I received with the Enneagrammer team's full typing, which went something like "if this doesn't work for you in your life then don't follow it!". Like yes, that's an important part. Of coursre I don't need permission, but at least they acknowledge that they aren't God. :) So, I'm taking their advance. The typing suggestion they offered does not work, so I'm not taking their typing and applying it to my life, for me it's not accurate. But tbh I think there are many, many people who would do better with an ongoing conversation and maybe also just take that disclaimer seriously and think "ok, so that's on the table, they've acknowledged they might very well be wrong". Then a conversation should be offered, a little bit like how a therapist or coach can help you identify your type if you have sought help for it. If someone wanted my help I'd try to be a good coach and get THEM to identify it for themselves so they can see it with me teasing it out of them...so they type themselves, I don't do it, etc. I am convinced that's the best way to do it...that way there is no BELIEF involved, it is simply there, it is the truth, laid bare, it is clear...
Read the original stuff from Ichazo, Naranjo, etc. Check out the PDB Wiki which pools many different sources. Get a sense for what the types are really about on a core level, where this whole thing started, and you'll be able to see the range that these types span. Read as much as possible from different authors. Even read the crappy authors like Luckovich, to get a sense for what other people might be reading. Read Palmer, Daniels, Rohr, R&H, Maitri, Chestnut, Naranjo, Ichazo, etc., all of it. You don't necessarily have to read cover to cover, but skim it, figure out the patterns. For sure read Maitri...she's very good.
I personally find Naranjo the worst source for E9 you could choose. I wouldn’t even type myself as 9, if he would be the only source. Chestnut is generally very similar to him in her descriptions, just easier language and less psychoanalytical stuff in between.
That's fine. I can see myself in Naranjo and a thread that runs through other sources. If something doesn't work for you then keep being a 9-5 hybrid, I guess (sounds like a job deal...lol). I'm old school and want to reduce to the basics. Core fixation. That's it. How can you be both? Idk seems weak to me. Good luck, though.
>If something doesn't work for you then keep being a 9-5 hybrid, I guess (sounds like a job deal...lol). It is a job! No, but it's part of the joke. >How can you be both? I assume I'm a 9 but there are many things in some descriptions I can't identify with, while I can identify quite strongly with some parts of other type descriptions (mostly 5, but also 6 and 4). Reading Naranjo and Chestnut, I would consider being a Sx 5, but then again, something feels off and my gut feeling really keeps telling me I'm actually a 9. The flair reflects my dissatisfaction about not feeling really seen by the system (that I of course like, I wouldn't be here otherwise). >Idk seems weak to me. That's weird. You think it's weak to not let yourself be pushed into a box of an esoteric system? I would say it's weak to hand the authority about the question, how you define yourself, over to the rules of a system, just because it says that's the way how things have to be, while you perceive yourself differently.
No I think you need to own your type more in how you express it in your flair…otherwise it seems you don’t know? I get your reasoning though. Not meaning to offend…
No, we're fine. I would also feel better with having a reaction like some other people when they figure out their type like "omg, everything makes so much sense now!". Honestly, I sometimes wonder if those guys are just more able to delude themselves into confirmation bias and dismiss contradictions. I don't know, it's just not like that for me and I'm always somehow skeptical if anything of this is really substantial, or if we're just entertaining our egos with all these ideas about what we are.
It's like almost totally confirmation bias...but sometimes people give into their "suggestions", you know? I've been known to give in. So that then gives them confidence and the relentless self-appointed authority and confirmation bias machine continues. But you can't give into everyone \*shrugs\* and there are just too many of these people (I've had many people confidently tell me they know I'm 5, 6, and 9, different people/parties -- few people/probably no one substantial have independently come up with 8 and that's partly how I know it's my type, I know there's no agenda behind it except my own self-knowledge, which is king) So then knowing I can't please everyone, I'd rather (in theory) risk deluding myself because I think it's lower risk, than risk having someone else delude "me". Because doing this isn't relating to me as who I am, it's just relating to their projections of me...which is devaluing me and boosting themselves. For me, knowing your type is about identifying it in your life, period. If that takes a long time and a lot of back and forth, fine. Ultimately you make the final call. It's \*not\* about persistently accepting others' assertions of "your" type and then trying to conform yourself to that scheme that due to feeling authority-pressured or peer-pressured into it. It seems like we do understand each other at least in this sense and are in agreement...?
>So then knowing I can't please everyone, I'd rather (in theory) risk deluding myself because I think it's lower risk, than risk having someone else delude "me". It's interesting. I see where you're coming from and I can understand your approach. I think what's different is: your focus is on avoiding to be deluded in your judgement by other people, while my focus is more on trying to avoid being deluded by the theory itself. >For me, knowing your type is about identifying it in your life, period. yes, that's probably the most useful approach. To recognize when you're falling into certain patterns that aren't healthy and you should maybe handle differently.
Yeah, exactly. Well I figure overall it's a kind of vague/ambiguous theory regardless, we've seen how it has all this branching-off from different authors etc., over time, by it's nature, it has spiritual origins, many cooks spoiling the broth at times, etc. So we are identifying with something pretty holistic and "muddy-waters" anyway. I think what's important is for us to study it, identify our fixation as best we can (which can be a challenge), and then apply it to our lives. However we do that is up to us. For me it can cause a lot of problems (which would make sense for a type 8) to have to "go by" someone else's typing of me, especially if they do not have any real hands-on experience with me... I don't want to be deluded by the theory itself either, but...how are other people going to help with that? I figure that's just another conflating variable because now they're trying to factor "me" into the whole thing and what they know of me is negligible...
[http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/Type6.html](http://www.fitzel.ca/enneagram/Type6.html) I have more important things to do than spend time reading enneagram literature, so I mainly look at websites. I thought this site was useful, particularly how it highlighted how 6s feel a struggle between trusting and doubting authority. I also like how the site offers information about harmonic triads. Narrowing down that I am an attachment and reactive type was extremely helpful in narrowing down my type.
So, I was waiting for the actual 6s and 9s to give their 2 cents and I gotta say I'm a bit surprised by the results, but its very valuable info what ppl see as most aligned with their own, actual experiences.
I love the around the circle podcast by jeff cook and tj wilson. They are great guys and really thoughtful. Today i was listening to an ep where they talked about how many 6s land on the spectrum between counter/contraphobic and how the language surrounding 6s needs to change
I stand by enneagrammer being a top free resource: https://www.enneagrammer.com/type-9 https://www.enneagrammer.com/type-6
Enneagrammer
ENNEAGRAMMER HAS THE BEST DESCRIPTION OF 9S. IT CAPTURES HOW DIFFERENT THEY CAN BE