SP Dominant people, how do YOU know your primary instinct is Self-Preservation? - Page 3

SP Dominant people, how do YOU know your primary instinct is Self-Preservation?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58
Thank Tree106Thanks

This is a discussion on SP Dominant people, how do YOU know your primary instinct is Self-Preservation? within the Enneagram Personality Theory Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; Originally Posted by Nissa Nissa Obviously a joke because of the laughing face, but I don't find it typist, or ...

  1. #21
    Type 5w4

    Quote Originally Posted by Nissa Nissa View Post
    Obviously a joke because of the laughing face, but I don't find it typist, or inaccurate, 'lack of boundaries' (or something like that) is as important for Type Two as 'maintaining boundaries' is for gut types (including sp-last gut types, obviously), I think that goes down to core of the type, I think type 2 is a good type to look at to see wtf sp even is

    just hoping i'll say something that'll make someone else say something and keep the conversation going, I have no idea what sp is...
    In the spirit of keeping the conversation going... :)

    Fwiw my homemaker mother was a 2 SP. From one perspective she had zero boundaries within our family (she had plenty of boundaries beyond the property line/my father/me though). She was incapable of even directly setting a boundary to her own child; "wait until your father gets home!" was what I'd hear if I ever sufficiently displeased her. If it was my (also SP) father himself who was behaving in a questionable manner, there was no recourse available to dependent/soft her -- she just swallowed it, perhaps silently growing a seed of resentment or 'distancing' herself.

    By comparison, no-boundaries-in-a-romantic-relationship SX me would never tolerate out-there behavior from my future husband -- I will speak my mind (even if I prefer to think on it first). In a way, speaking creates intimacy which reduces boundaries being held. Not saying something, even if you carry on in behavior, is very much placing a wall there (or perhaps is done due to the wall there). It's not always obvious what precisely people mean when they talk about boundaries/walls/distance. In one sense my dutiful mother was truly selfless, in another sense she very much held herself back.

    And the latter wasn't lost on me as a child. The crusts-cut-off lifestyle while my workaholic, savings-obsessed father earn$ away, was lovely & all, but let's get real. From my perspective it was as if two people got together and agreed to run a business called 'homemaking'. It was formal, cool like clockwork. No complaints, but no kisses either. My mother's behavior screamed 'devoted' but she never ran to the door upon his return. He was even more formal/colder (sp/so vs sp/sx). If these were Russian sleeper agents using this rouse as cover, that would have explained everything perfectly to my SX mind (somehow that would have been a relief). But no doubt they were just as baffled by my just-warming-up-here early SX antics (fortunately my mother had a sense of humor).

    It's interesting to note that it was only in SP things where it appears my mom had no boundaries. Really, it's just her currency, and of course it is -- she's SP. So, no surprise she gave materially ("you got caught in the rain? Let me make you something hot to eat"). Note that SP is the countertype for 2.

    I'm fascinated by where people put their boundaries both in terms of against what but also the position in relation to themselves (far out or not). My SP 6 father has walls in every direction, right up at the perimeter. Since I'm a 5 sx/sp I have quite a bit of variance in wall placement (it can be more like a gate with me). It's curious how 'instinctive' this is in people -- it doesn't seem either highly controllable or consciously chosen.

    I see enneagram instincts as fundamentally about boundaries & focus (walls could be considered a subset of focus -- like blinders that keep you from focusing on the 'wrong' thing). All SP, no matter what their core type is, are 'self' bounded -- they aren't fundamentally identified with anything beyond the self. My mom was a homemaker, she was giving -- but she was getting something out of it, it was still about her, it was still about SP. I don't discount what she did, I admire her very much (and SP generally), I just know the type 2 routine: 'doing it for you, for me.' Don't let appearances fool you.

    I also think that while core type very much influence the instinct we are talking ocean vs river here, hence this situation where a 5 daughter can look at her 2 mother and say, "my, what a large wall you had there mom" :) Not that I should talk -- I just wall up in a different context. All instinctual types do.

    Beatrice Chestnut says she's a SP 2 so hopefully her description of the type is reliable (even though there will still be variance, especially in regards to health level):
     
    The Self-Preservation Two - "Privilege" (Countertype)

    This "cute" Two expresses pride and a need for protection through youthful ways of gaining attention and affection. The unconscious strategy the Self-Preservation Two employs is to "seduce" like a child in the presence of grown-ups. This represents both an unconscious need to be taken care of and a sense that children are naturally loveable, inherently deserving of affection, and usually more readily liked than adults. This Two has a childlike quality in presentation and emotional expression-no matter how old they are, this Two looks youthful or young. While the Sexual Two can seem overly adult, wild, and seductive in the usual sense of the term, the Self-Preservation Two unconsciously aims to attract love and attention through being cute and expressing a childlike sense of need.

    As humans, we have a natural love of children, a biological imperative that ensures that we will care for children who are dependent on us for their survival. Children want and need to be loved not for what they do for others, but for who they are. This is a basic need of any child. So what is prominent in the Self-Preservation Two is this pure, young need for love. This Two "remains little" as a way of evoking care from others without having to ask for it, just as children shouldn't have to ask for love and care or aren't mature enough to articulate this kind of request directly.

    Self-Preservation Twos thus unconsciously draw on the universal love of children by adopting the stance of a cute, youthful person. This presentation is a way of inviting people to like them and take care of them, just as a child's "cuteness" inspires people to love them. This is their way of expressing the idea that, deep down, they want to be loved not for being pleasing or giving to others, or because of qualifications, performance, or achievements, but just because of who they are; they want to be loved for just existing. This Self-Preservation Two pattern has this person taking the position of the child in the family because a child's needs naturally come first.

    The name for the Self-Preservation Two, "Privilege," refers to the idea suggested by this personality: "I’m young, and therefore I'm the most important." This reflects this subtype's (unconscious) assertion of a kind of childlike priority, wanting others to place a special emphasis on meeting his or her needs. These Twos don't want to have to prove their importance to be important. Despite wanting to be the center of attention, they experience no accompanying feeling of having to do anything for it. They want to be seen without showing themselves.

    Self-Preservation Twos need to feel unique and special-they have a compulsion about being the "cute" girl or boy who is liked by everybody. They charm or "give themselves" to others to remain the favorite. They excel at being the teacher's pet.

    It's less easy to see pride in this type. The Self-Preservation Two is the countertype of the Twos; it's a Two that doesn't look like a Two. While the energetic direction of the flow of the Two personality (with its focus on seduction) is up and out toward others, the self-preservation instinct this Two has causes them to express more ambivalence about relationship. This Two moves toward others, but also has a "counter-move" away from others out of a need for self-protection. This Two is tender and sweet, but more guarded than the other Twos. [The underlined describes how my mother was perfectly]

    As might be expected from a more childlike character, the Self-Preservation Two is more fearful, less trusting, and more ambivalent about connections with others. Although these Twos may not be aware of how fearful they are-all Twos repress feelings-they may have a more pronounced need than other Twos to protect themselves in the presence of others, which might be perceived by some as an invisible "wall." The ambivalence about connection experienced by this type takes the form of mixed or conflicting feelings about establishing close connections with others, especially important or intimate others.

    Like other Twos, Self-Preservation Twos focus on meeting others' needs as a way of gaining love, but they also feel a strong opposing pull to hide or withdraw in light of the threat of disapproval and rejection inherent in interacting with others. On the one hand, people and relationships feel compelling and important, but on the other hand, being close to people seems fraught with danger because it includes the possibilities of losing oneself or being judged, taken advantage of, humiliated, or rejected.


    In this "youthful" Two, self-importance, irresponsibility, humor, playfulness, and charm are in the foreground. Until they engage in self-awareness work, this Two can be easily hurt and is hypertensive to slights or anything that might sound like criticism or disapproval. They may have tantrums or sulk or withdraw when upset. Feeling hurt can result in pouting, angry recriminations, or childish accusations. They may manipulate through an expression of feeling instead of stepping up and saying what they want or what they dislike.

    Dependency is prominent in this subtype, but mostly unconscious. These Twos, like other Twos, don't want to see themselves as needy or dependent on others, and yet they can engage in a pattern of remaining unconsciously dependent, wanting someone to take care of them, or engineering situations in which people end up taking care of them. Because of this childlike stance of (unconscious) dependency, the Self-Preservation Two has less freedom; a child, after all, is rarely, if ever, completely free. So these Twos often yearn to be free while at the same time yoking themselves to people in unhealthy or unconscious ways.

    Although, like other Twos, Self-Preservation Twos can be very competent, on a deeper level they don't want to have to take responsibility for themselves. The thought of taking charge of themselves fills them with anxiety. They can wonder: "What am I to do with myself?" They have an underlying desire to be a child who will be excused for their ignorance, innocence, and the feelings they might express on a whim or "just because." In more mature Self-Preservation Twos, however, their need for structure can make them more methodical and more organized than other Twos.

    Self-Preservation Twos can be self-indulgent and hedonistic. They are drawn to cultivate a sense of "euphoria" through parties, shopping, drinking or indulging in food and fun-anything to distract themselves from having to contact themselves. They are sensation-seeking, and they look for pleasurable experiences to distract themselves from feelings of self-abandonment and inner deprivation.

    This Two fantasizes a lot (about being loved or admired) and idealizes people, especially in the early stages of relationships. They unconsciously project their power onto others whom they see as all-good as a way of not having to be "good enough" or responsible themselves, which can make it hard for them to own their own power or have equal and truly contactful relationships.

    The Self-Preservation Two can look like a Self-Preservation Six in that they are fearful and ambivalent about relationships, but in the Six the emphasis is on a more generalized fear, while this Two's fear mainly manifests in relationships. This Two can also resemble a Type Four in that they express more emotionality and a longing for love, but they repress their needs and feelings and focus on others more than Fours do.
    Last edited by Dare; 08-02-2019 at 02:13 AM.
    angelfish, Jawz, mistakenforstranger and 5 others thanked this post.

  2. #22

    What does it mean to have boundaries?

  3. #23

    @Nissa Nissa

    Obviously a joke because of the laughing face,
    Thanks for recognizing the "social" cues. I was joking, but that doesn't mean there isn't some truth to it. By the way, you're Social last now?

    but I don't find it typist, or inaccurate, 'lack of boundaries' (or something like that) is as important for Type Two as 'maintaining boundaries' is for gut types (including sp-last gut types, obviously), I think that goes down to core of the type, I think type 2 is a good type to look at to see wtf sp even is
    Ah, interesting, since I did search "Enneagram Type 2 boundaries" before I made the comment, so as not to offend or be inaccurate, and here were some of the results!

    Twos excel at making connections and empathizing with the needs and feelings of others. Focused on relationships, they are good at supporting others, but find it difficult to turn their attention toward themselves and their own needs. Emotionally sensitive, they want to be accepted and liked by others, and will adapt or change to earn this approval. Setting personal boundaries can be challenging, and they sometimes relieve the pressure through emotional outbursts.
    https://www.enneagramworldwide.com/types/the-giver/

    Set clear boundaries with the Two in your life. If they are over-giving, firmly and gently assure them you know what you need and can give it to yourself. This can break the trance of over-giving. You also model grounded self-care.
    https://lesliehershberger.com/type-2-the-giver/

    Twos get into difficulty, however, when they begin to attend to others' needs without adequately dealing with their own. They can get into denial about the extent of their own needs while insisting that their only concern is taking care of others. At such times, Twos may develop "boundary problems." They disregard their own boundaries, doing things for others that take them away from what they need to do for themselves, and they disregard the boundaries of others, doing things for others that they do not necessarily want done. When others feel crowded by the Twos' efforts to help, and try to set boundaries with them, Twos can feel hurt and insecure about the relationship and feel rejected.
    This is Riso-Hudson's content: https://sites.google.com/site/upatel8/personlitytype2

    So, using "boundaries" as criteria for sp-doms can be complicated, which is why I brought it up in 2s, and therefore is it a reliable measurement for determining if one is sp? That's all. I'm glad you understood.

    I also think other instincts can have "boundaries" too, but it really depends on the context. Of course, with sx, they won't want boundaries between themselves and their partner because then how can you get close, but that doesn't mean a sx-dom will be boundary-less with others/everyone they know who they have no connection with, right? Couldn't they be very guarded in general to many others who they feel no sx connection with? I could also see the case where Social and Sexual types might have been hurt in social situations or past relationships and would therefore enact boundaries as a defense mechanism too.

    anyways

    energy seems like a very specific concept to me and I'd need to hear it discussed as regards all the instincts to formulate an opinion (it seems that 'where you get your energy' is the extrovert/introvert question and that can get translated into instincts but that just makes sx and so extroversion and sp introversion), so I want to know what sp does with energy that is different from so or sx, and that means all the instincts are energy-related
    Yes, you see the dilemma. I do think Social being in one's stacking (as either dominant/secondary) might make an Introvert who is comfortable appear Extroverted from time-to-time. Stephen Colbert is a so/sx Introvert, for example. Introverts, in general, need to recharge their energy away from others after a certain period of time too, but if they're Social or Sexual they'll feel that pull to want to engage again in others or their significant other, as I can't imagine that going away (i.e instinctual). I think the Jung quote is telling from this perspective, where if we're thinking in these terms many so and sx Introverts could mistake themselves for sp.

    And I don't think 'guarding one's personal space' is necessarily sp, but maybe being particularly cued into personal space is a sp thing? except it's also bit of a 5, 6ish thing too, think even say so/sx cp 6s might be territorial at times for example and every 5 needs their space
    Exactly. Also, introverts need their alone time/space, regardless if they're sp or not.

    just hoping i'll say something that'll make someone else say something and keep the conversation going, I have no idea what sp is, never have understood, ultimately I think it's just a flawed concept
    LOL

    edit: theory - the 'counter-type' can be the type working against the instinct?

    i.e. could sp 2 be self-destructive, opposite of self-guarding, 'it's ok you can hurt me'? or using self-destructive behavior to gain love and attention (a la Lana del Rey*), i.e. the instinct isn't the goal, but the means?
    Hmm, I actually think Lana del Rey is sx/so at this point, which may be why she's that way. She's always seemed sx-dom to me.

    *or Aurora is a sp 4 and think it describes disintegration to 2 'I went too far when I was begging on my knees
    When I cut my hands, so you could stand and watch me bleed'
    Oh wow, and yes, that makes sense. I don't know if she's sp-4, as I'm not familar with her work, but that sounds like unhealthy 2-ish disintegration. Thanks for your thoughts.
    Last edited by mistakenforstranger; 08-07-2019 at 06:06 PM.
    Dangerose and Lady of Clockwork thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24
    Type 2w1

    Quote Originally Posted by mistakenforstranger View Post
    Thanks for recognizing the "social" cues. I was joking, but that doesn't mean there isn't some truth to it. By the way, you're Social last now?
    Yeah, I'm not sure, I was really sad when I decided it

    I also think other instincts can have "boundaries" too, but it really depends on the context. Of course, with sx, they won't want boundaries between themselves and their partner because then how can you get close, but that doesn't mean a sx-dom will be boundary-less with others/everyone they know who they have no connection with, right? Couldn't they be very guarded in general to many others who they feel no sx connection with? I could also see the case where Social and Sexual types might have been hurt in social situations or past relationships and would therefore enact boundaries as a defense mechanism too.
    good point

    and presumably sx builds boundaries against unwanted sexual connections, so boundaries against unwanted social connections (classic exclusivity)

    Hmm, I actually think Lana del Rey is sx/so at this point, which may be why she's that way. She's always seemed sx-dom to me.
    I don't know what to think about her anymore, I remember thinking sx for a long time but I apparently reverted right to sp 2 :D
    Last edited by Dangerose; 08-09-2019 at 12:02 PM.
    mistakenforstranger thanked this post.

  6. #25

    I have a hard time maintaining an active interest in people, face to face. Especially groups of them, but even individuals ... I am endlessly more interesting.

  7. #26
    Type 4w5

    Most of the folks I'm close from are Sp dom (unsurpisingly). Even though their types and tritypes are vastly different, I see a big difference with me when prioritizing needs. They all seem to naturally cling to material possessions and are definitively more in touch with their own body. Some instinctively like to test out their physical limits and some love to talk about health fads and new recipes. Most regularly keep their finances in check (especially if SJ) and are conservative about money. I know many of them like getting the most out of a buck and are quite savvy when going to the grocery store.

    When unhealthy, they keep hoarding unecessary things like food, collectables even money. I've seen some of them self-medicating with natural stuff or even giving them a quick high with shopping therapy. Some obsess over being robbed and check/mention their door locks frequently.

    Being Sp blind, I do none of that. I don't understand their motive emotionally, only rationally.

  8. #27
    Type 3w4

    Sp/Sx 3w4 with 5 and 8.

    When you look back and realize that throughout your entire life, you've never looked outwards for support. I'm nothing if not incredibly sure of myself and what I need to do to take care of myself. I don't consider other people when I do anything involving my comfort/health/finances etc.

    Not ever truly feeling like you are a part of a community (sp/sx directly), or even need to bother with the idea of groups. I see the world as made up of individual people, doing their own thing. Sure you can co-operate and do things together, but that sense of connection never jived with me.

    The Sx comes out when I've got my own bases covered, and desire other people on a deeper level than just my extroversion can pull. I haven't been unhealthy in a pretty long time, so I don't really relate to material obsession or things like that. Sp is just about making sure that you are on top of your own shit and not looking outward.

    In closing, I know I'm Sp first because of everything said prior. I simply don't look outward to a group, or individual people, I look to me.

  9. #28

    Quote Originally Posted by Coburn View Post
    All the things sp can't help but be concerned about I'm concerned about. Those areas or topics I find necessary or worthwhile for living are all sp-related.

    I also know an sp-last person and it baffles me to this day how she survives. She de-prioritizes literally everything sp I hold sacred.
    I'm sp last and survived.

    I found this thread interesting.
    Coburn thanked this post.

  10. #29
    Type 9

    I always wonder how this plays out in different MBTI types. I , as example, am an Infp and I'm currently torn between sp/sx or sx/sp for myself.
    Why i think i could be sp first: I never really depended on others - groups or individuals - and I always tried my best not to do so. So I've awlways been pretty self sufficient in this sense, oftentimes to the point of refusing any help or support from the outside. ( I notice while writing that this might be rather a SO blindspot thing than SP first in itself but whatever). I 'm also rather tight with money and I tend to highly value and take care of my possesions. I'm concerned about avoiding seriously dangerous or harmful situations in the sense that I prefer not to risk my life or happines for whatever.
    On the other hand, I can sometimes be rather detached from material possesions and things, just from the material world in general and I'm definitely not very in touch with my body. Sometimes simply noticing if I'm hungry or not can be a real struggle, and that is just one example. Also, I can easily forget bodily needs as such if i don't pay concious attention to it, or I just neglect them. I've noticed that I am not that concerned about - or sensitive to - environmental factors, e.g. lightning, heat, humidity or food/ food quality compared to others as well. In general, I sometimes find it hard attending and paying attention to the "basics" in life. That's what makes me think SP doesn't fit me that well. But then, all the latter things I mentioned are pretty typical for Infps imo or just an Intuitive vs Sensor thing and therefore maybe don't have to do with instinct, in this contex at least; being a bit unpractical, being a bit detached from the pysical world or concrete physical reality, being more about ideas/theory/possibility vs being more practical, more about immediate actual reality and real things.
    What do you think?
    Last edited by Merkurin; 08-18-2019 at 07:42 AM.

  11. #30

    Quote Originally Posted by Merkurin View Post
    I always wonder how this plays out in different MBTI types. I , as example, am an Infp and I'm currently torn between sp/sx or sx/sp for myself.
    Why i think i could be sp first: I never really depended on others - groups or individuals - and I always tried my best not to do so. So I've awlways been pretty self sufficient in this sense, oftentimes to the point of refusing any help or support from the outside. ( I notice while writing that this might be rather a SO blindspot thing than SP first in itself but whatever). I 'm also rather tight with money and I tend to highly value and take care of my possesions. I'm concerned about avoiding seriously dangerous or harmful situations in the sense that I prefer not to risk my life or happines for whatever.
    On the other hand, I can sometimes be rather detached from material possesions and things, just from the material world in general and I'm definitely not very in touch with my body. Sometimes simply noticing if I'm hungry or not can be a real struggle, and that is just one example. Also, I can easily forget bodily needs as such if i don't pay concious attention to it, or I just neglect them. I've noticed that I am not that concerned about - or sensitive to - environmental factors, e.g. lightning, heat, humidity or food/ food quality compared to others as well. In general, I sometimes find it hard attending and paying attention to the "basics" in life. That's what makes me think SP doesn't fit me that well. But then, all the latter things I mentioned are pretty typical for Infps imo or just an Intuitive vs Sensor thing and therefore maybe don't have to do with instinct, in this contex at least; being a bit unpractical, being a bit detached from the pysical world or concrete physical reality, being more about ideas/theory/possibility vs being more practical, more about immediate actual reality and real things.
    What do you think?
    SP all the way. I am completely detached from my body and have never given a rat's arse about possessions, I really don't think those things are SP-related in intuitives. Sensors maybe, or some sensors anyway.

    What kind of an INFP handles the day-to-day admin of life well anyway?


     
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] ENFP and Self-Preservation Instinct
    By Magic Qwan in forum ENFP Forum - The Inspirers
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-06-2019, 04:32 PM
  2. Why Develop a Strong Self-Preservation Instinct When You've Had it "All"?
    By Soliares in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-28-2016, 02:27 AM
  3. Tips for improving Self-Preservation Instinct
    By Xyra in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-25-2014, 01:57 PM
  4. Anyone developing their Self-preservation Instinct?
    By Xyra in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-23-2014, 01:31 PM
  5. So/Sx and Sx/So, how do you experience the Self Preservation Instinct?
    By Swordsman of Mana in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-15-2014, 03:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:43 PM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0