This thread is getting even more interesting.
Sent sans PC
This is a discussion on SO Instinct Thread within the Enneagram Personality Theory Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; This thread is getting even more interesting. Sent sans PC...
This thread is getting even more interesting.
Sent sans PC
Dare , belissima, it implied that there must be possibility for So mistyping too.
Look, i really have no clue on many of "stereotype in quotes" that you mentioned on your post. Are they coming in other forum because as I said i was just initially wondering why there are no So thread here but you already gone in length. I must miss something.
Please kindly direct me to resource for this but please no reddit, i don't like to waste my time there.
@Lord Pixel , you may help too milord.
Sent sans PC
Last edited by contradictionary; 05-06-2019 at 07:10 PM.
It took me a while to realize I was So first. Initially, I confused the idea of being Social first with the idea of actually being a social person, which is an easy mistake to make, of course, and it kind of makes me want the So instinct to be called something else in order to avoid such confusion, because I think it's pretty easy for people who are really So first, but extremely introverted/avoidant/out of place/reserved/whatever, to hear the word social and immediately realize they're not social at all.
I'm the least social person I know, and for the most part I'm too reclusive and really complete shit at even understanding social/group dynamics, but then pretty quickly I realized these things are what lead me to realize just how So first I am, and not due to me being something else(was pretty convinced I was Sp first for a while, and then Sx, and then Sp again), and as far as typology goes it's been the most helpful thing for me to understand the Social instinct.
So I think it's a combination of two things(just speculating) that likely there are many more Social dominants here and in other communities who are mistyped, and also Social dominant types who aren't mistyped but don't want to get involved in the fray and the shitshow that is typical of internet Enneagram communities which is what I typically do as an observer here, but I just wanted to share my experience, so...
Personally: I pursue intense interactions and intense experiences in general, but those pursuits are subsumed in service of my "social" ambitions or my quest for socio-cultural meaning. (Preoccupation with Ultimate Meaning is a feature of SO-dom type 5s especially, our SO-concerns can end up abstracted to the point of becoming a pursuit of objectivity through collective knowledge... I'm not sure how well SO dominants of other E-types will relate.) My engagement of SX is dependent on whether I'll be brought closer to understanding or identifying or embodying SO-derived "super values" or ideals in the process. Because it is (probably) my second instinct, my SX is less neurotic and compulsive... and more utilitarian, helping me to chase some kind of meaning by seeking out an appropriate role within society, helping to influence society in a way that is productive, especially through gaining greater comprehension of things that affect all of us. I pick it up and use it like a hammer, but I can put it back down, whereas with SO issues I am more likely to cling and ruminate. I "do" SX to chase SO.
A lot of the "intense" experiences I am drawn to having, interpersonal or not, sexual or not, are curated based on whether I can learn something from them that will help me to find my place in the world. I dive into them partly out of curiosity and can climb back out relatively unscathed if I need to. (If I get a little scathed... well... that's a learning experience.) E.g. Me chatting up a guy up at a bar in Beirut while traveling and then the next day taking a shady bus to meet him in Saida and letting him drive me through South Lebanon, conversing with him as he says some pretty horrific stuff about foreign workers and hits on me, and mostly being detached and bemused by all of it as it gives me an up close and personal opportunity to cross-section the guy's brain to see what it can help me learn about politics, society, the human condition, whatever... I've heard it said that SO/SX 5s come across as the most 7-ish of the 5s and looking at some of the things I get up to when I'm not going through a shy phase, I don't wonder at it.I'm probably more adaptable in SX-ish scenarios than in SO-ish scenarios, which I don't think is unusual. Because the primary instinct constitutes a kind of fixation, many people seem to be less adaptable when it comes to their dominant instinct than when it comes to their secondary. The second instinct in the stack is the one people are usually most comfortable experimenting with: the first instinct is hard to play with because it's taken so seriously and feels fragile, the blind spot is hard to play with because you don't like or aren't comfortable thinking about it. The middle instinct is more flexible... certainly I'm far more personable 1:1 than in larger groups. I am an extremely keen people-watcher but I feel the "pulse" of groups and the silent shifts of balance that occur within them so strongly, despite being otherwise somewhat disinclined to cope with them, that I usually keep a certain amount of psychological distance from "tribes" in practice.Just someone who can easily adapt to both scenarios?
You really have to account for how SO shows its influence in Withdrawn E-types, and for the fact that SO has subvariations that can come across as similar to the counterphobic stance in a 6. SO isn't just associated with social butterflies and "joiners," it's also associated with social anxiety, social criticism and little Ted Kaczynskis. Not all SOs are what you'd call "socially adaptable" as a result. IME Social 4s and 5s in particular can be very, very picky about who we associate with in any prolonged way, moreso than 4s and 5s with other dominant instincts.
SOs with SX as secondary tend to be a little less puritanical than SP-seconds are, though: I think the drive/ability to connect with others in a focused, psychologically intimate way makes us more motivated to see through others' eyes even when we don't share the same social values or philosophies, if only momentarily. SO/SPs are like the Tankies of the instinctual stackings.
Last edited by baitedcrow; 05-06-2019 at 09:17 PM.
If you think it's okay to bash sx/sx doms on this forum due to what sx people say on another, displaced aggression style, I have nothing to say other than that certainly explains why on this forum it's far more So-coming-out-of-the-blue-going-after-Sx than vice versa. I personally am only here so I have no idea what's going on other forums.
Fyi if you reread this thread you'll see the Sx bashing here quickly escalated beyond 'they say mean things about me' (elsewhere?) to criticizing our very nature.
Fortunately people are back on topic talking about their So instinct now so I see no reason to continue talking about this.
The main reason why I even feel like this is because I like Sx and Sx ppl . So I'm like wtf. And it's not just elsewhere it's on PerC and in your thread 2, just saying. Anyway yea I'm done talking about this.
And I could also cite sources off and on this site as well that are not even vent threads that shows the general attitude towards So types and Sx last.
You know what, I was all ready to put up a fight but after doing so more research I actually found that it's Neokortex doing alot of this So slandering even on other sites. I mean it's not just him, but alot of what I read was and the worst of it was him on multiple frikkin sites, wow.
Last edited by L P; 05-07-2019 at 01:59 AM.
While I don't necessarily agree with everything said, you have to be reaching dramatically to conclude that what was being criticized was SXs' "very nature." The main gist was: maybe people don't want to identify as SO because on forums like this one SO is mischaracterized, sometimes in a negative way, by posters who don't identify as SO but who may or may not be mistyped themselves (in other words, may or may not actually be SX, if that's what they think they are - could even be unknowing SOs)
Some seemed to think SX doms were the primary culprits. I don’t have an opinion on that - if anything I think people of unspecified stackings just think of times past when someone was catty toward them and made them socially uncomfortable, assume that person must have been SO-dom and then talk out of their asses about it like it's a certainty, misleading newbies in the process. But it shouldn’t be a big deal if other people do have that opinion, or even if they ad lib a little about things they find strange about SX doms. It could have been discussed without the fireworks.
Tbqh your posts in this thread are some of the most ironic I’ve seen on any forum in a while. (In the sense that you’re coming @ SOs by doing a whole lot of the stuff SOs are supposedly chronically guilty of… social policing, rabidly defending your in-group, attempting to manipulate conversation with disingenuous interpretations, telegraphing negative opinions in a shady/plausibly deniable way – you don’t bash SOs, you’re just pointedly “not surprised” that they’re being so naughty)
It’s a bit like you’re trying to prove your words wrong with your actions… and with some of your other words.
I’m going to ignore you because your meaningful contributions-to-silliness ratio is not really looking favorable to me and I don’t have the patience I used to with this place. Would like to be able to participate in further discussion if it occurs without seeing whining nonsense about how SOs are inhibiting SX supposed-differentness by making personal observations on the online behavior of some self-typed SX doms in a convo no one is forcing SXs to read, or something. Because this quite obviously isn't about SOs trying to inhibit SX-ness... if we could understand why some people really, really want it to be about that, then we'd get somewhere.
I’m glad your thread got 8 whole pages before some random came in and made something into an “incident.” I just think it’s too bad this one only got to 2. Good grief.
Last edited by baitedcrow; 05-07-2019 at 06:44 PM.