Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
So this thing about the "right thing" for me is always off in Enneagram descriptions and I realized why. When I see this phrasing, "doing the right thing", I always interpret the "right thing" as something determined externally. Like, it's determined by God or by society or whatever, but not by your own judgment and not out of your own will. Am I misinterpreting the phrasing? Because that's how I often see it used by others. And, it never makes sense to me then. I'm ok with saying I do what *I* see as correct but not ok with saying doing the "right thing" if that's externally determined.

How do other 1s here or 1s in general see this?

Then there is another thing that I noticed. I can take on something as some action I have to do or some thought/judgment that I have to act based on, where it's something *I* think and feel is justified *and* I feel the conviction in my own judgment too, and then I really am good with it - or I can take it on without really feeling it that viscerally. Doing the latter is either entirely emotionless (very dry instead) or it can come with slightly feeling not entirely good with it, feeling too... repressed in a sense, or I'm not sure how to word it. So far, it's been too hard to tune in and figure out what it is. It is hard to even notice it.

But one thing is for sure, I don't have or at least don't sense the nice satisfying visceral conviction with it that'd fuel it nicely. I still do agree with the thought about how I'm to do something or think in whatever way about something and I would not change what I think, but it is not as... satisfying. Maybe this is almost like doing the external "right thing" where the "right thing" is internal in this case but is still somehow not entirely "part of me".

Does anyone else experience this distinction?

I hope these issues as I put them made sense. Let me know. I am sorry for being so vague, too. It is hard to introspect on these internal things. In any case, thanks for any replies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
I agree with you to an extent. Yeah, I think it also depends on your wing and maybe MBTI? For me doing right is to basically be able to follow rules and regulations and laws? I think it has more external then internal. doing what is right to you would be FI wouldn't it? and would be according to your values? Maybe I am off about it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: grumpytiger

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I agree with you to an extent. Yeah, I think it also depends on your wing and maybe MBTI? For me doing right is to basically be able to follow rules and regulations and laws? I think it has more external then internal. doing what is right to you would be FI wouldn't it? and would be according to your values? Maybe I am off about it?
Yeah I'm sure MBTI cognition plays into it. Yeah, what I follow is more internal than external.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
So this thing about the "right thing" for me is always off in Enneagram descriptions and I realized why. When I see this phrasing, "doing the right thing", I always interpret the "right thing" as something determined externally. Like, it's determined by God or by society or whatever, but not by your own judgment and not out of your own will. Am I misinterpreting the phrasing? Because that's how I often see it used by others. And, it never makes sense to me then. I'm ok with saying I do what *I* see as correct but not ok with saying doing the "right thing" if that's externally determined.

How do other 1s here or 1s in general see this?
That kind of phrasing is general, it can describe both internal and external frames of reference as to what is right and what is wrong.

Then there is another thing that I noticed. I can take on something as some action I have to do or some thought/judgment that I have to act based on, where it's something *I* think and feel is justified *and* I feel the conviction in my own judgment too, and then I really am good with it - or I can take it on without really feeling it that viscerally. Doing the latter is either entirely emotionless (very dry instead) or it can come with slightly feeling not entirely good with it, feeling too... repressed in a sense, or I'm not sure how to word it. So far, it's been too hard to tune in and figure out what it is. It is hard to even notice it.

But one thing is for sure, I don't have or at least don't sense the nice satisfying visceral conviction with it that'd fuel it nicely. I still do agree with the thought about how I'm to do something or think in whatever way about something and I would not change what I think, but it is not as... satisfying. Maybe this is almost like doing the external "right thing" where the "right thing" is internal in this case but is still somehow not entirely "part of me".

Does anyone else experience this distinction?
I agree, its pretty obvious - doing things in a way you feel is important is more fulfilling than just following some kind of standards. Heres an example from me, I like having good formatting in Word because I like how strong, stable, robust and good looking the end result is when perfectly formatted. Someone else who would rather be doing anything but formatting would be more likely to do as little as possible of it because it wouldnt be fulfilling to them, because they see it as insignificant and unnecessary work.

I agree with you to an extent. Yeah, I think it also depends on your wing and maybe MBTI? For me doing right is to basically be able to follow rules and regulations and laws? I think it has more external then internal. doing what is right to you would be FI wouldn't it? and would be according to your values? Maybe I am off about it?
Having hardened internal values is totally Fi. Your love of external red tape has more to do with the possible social benefits of being good at following orders and rules. On the other hand I dont really understand what youre saying, pretty much everyone follows large scale rules and laws most of the time, that isnt purely an enneagram 1 thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
That kind of phrasing is general, it can describe both internal and external frames of reference as to what is right and what is wrong.
Yeah, ok, might just be a language issue here for me.


I agree, its pretty obvious - doing things in a way you feel is important is more fulfilling than just following some kind of standards. Heres an example from me, I like having good formatting in Word because I like how strong, stable, robust and good looking the end result is when perfectly formatted. Someone else who would rather be doing anything but formatting would be more likely to do as little as possible of it because it wouldnt be fulfilling to them, because they see it as insignificant and unnecessary work.
Right. I'd rather have it all good though, lol. But only some of that is "fueled" nicely like I described.


Having hardened internal values is totally Fi. Your love of external red tape has more to do with the possible social benefits of being good at following orders and rules. On the other hand I dont really understand what youre saying, pretty much everyone follows large scale rules and laws most of the time, that isnt purely an enneagram 1 thing.
Some people don't follow quite some of those rules nah... and some follow them more than most people. Also many people only follow quite some of the rules because they are forced to. Or because they want others to accept them. Not because they want to be doing right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,863 Posts
Then there is another thing that I noticed. I can take on something as some action I have to do or some thought/judgment that I have to act based on, where it's something *I* think and feel is justified *and* I feel the conviction in my own judgment too, and then I really am good with it - or I can take it on without really feeling it that viscerally. Doing the latter is either entirely emotionless (very dry instead) or it can come with slightly feeling not entirely good with it, feeling too... repressed in a sense, or I'm not sure how to word it. So far, it's been too hard to tune in and figure out what it is. It is hard to even notice it.

But one thing is for sure, I don't have or at least don't sense the nice satisfying visceral conviction with it that'd fuel it nicely. I still do agree with the thought about how I'm to do something or think in whatever way about something and I would not change what I think, but it is not as... satisfying. Maybe this is almost like doing the external "right thing" where the "right thing" is internal in this case but is still somehow not entirely "part of me".
I am not a type 1 but type Fours have a strong link to type 1 in the direction of integration. I hope the following is relevant to you.

There was a time in my life when I was mercilessly hard on myself. I regret being like that but it was either that or psychiatric medication for me (my parents would have forced or tricked me into that). I practiced certain spiritual practices with a hard regularity and it hurt me more than it helped me to heal. Back in those days I often wondered what my true purpose is (or was). Nothing worked. I am an INFP and I was cut off from my auxiliary Ne. I tried several pursuits and nothing worked. It is here that you struck a chord with me. In those days I used to think that it is fundamental to find one's purpose in life and not waste life following pursuits that do not, as you have aptly put, feel visceral.

I think this is a dichotomy here. Thinking about this feels visceral. But as soon as you start thinking about it it becomes vacant, empty. This is a frustration that I have faced for years without expressing it. I thank you for helping me share this here. Thinking about this doesn't lead one anywhere. I relate with what Camus said - Psychology is not sitting and thinking about oneself. It is putting oneself in action and observing how one behaves. The solution for me was twofold.

One was finding a pursuit that does not force me to give up on the visceral aspect of work experience - writing. Writing helps me find greater depths in the search for the visceral. I still struggle with the weakened Ne function. But I am working on it.

Second was finding love. Love is that imperfect thing that can conquer any kind of perfectionism. Loving a person can be a tremendously frustrating thing. And then one day you just can't help but laugh at the entire enterprise of how you wish to change another person and how it turn she/he ends up changing you. I am sorry if I sound smug here.

I don't know what your situation is but I'd like to hear more. This search can be really frustrating. And I admire that you are looking deep within yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grumpytiger

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
I am not a type 1 but type Fours have a strong link to type 1 in the direction of integration. I hope the following is relevant to you.
Thanks for the post.


There was a time in my life when I was mercilessly hard on myself. I regret being like that but it was either that or psychiatric medication for me (my parents would have forced or tricked me into that). I practiced certain spiritual practices with a hard regularity and it hurt me more than it helped me to heal. Back in those days I often wondered what my true purpose is (or was). Nothing worked. I am an INFP and I was cut off from my auxiliary Ne. I tried several pursuits and nothing worked. It is here that you struck a chord with me. In those days I used to think that it is fundamental to find one's purpose in life and not waste life following pursuits that do not, as you have aptly put, feel visceral.
I see. I wasn't really talking about purpose in life but speaking of that, I prefer that sort of stuff to be something I personallly see a point to and can even envision it a little bit. There may be extra involvement along with it or there may not be.


I think this is a dichotomy here. Thinking about this feels visceral. But as soon as you start thinking about it it becomes vacant, empty. This is a frustration that I have faced for years without expressing it. I thank you for helping me share this here. Thinking about this doesn't lead one anywhere. I relate with what Camus said - Psychology is not sitting and thinking about oneself. It is putting oneself in action and observing how one behaves. The solution for me was twofold.
Hmm that's interesting. By visceral do you mean emotional then, essentially? You can definitely think away emotions. I at least easily do that... But that's yet another topic. And yeah the original sense in which I used the word "visceral" was kind of almost emotional yeah, but not really directly visibly emotional, somehow. It probably is fueled by that too though in the background. Feeling more involved than when it's dry duties.

I would say I'm able to now word it as, there is some emotional fuel there, yeah. It has to be also objectively verified though...

Glad if my thread helps you :)


One was finding a pursuit that does not force me to give up on the visceral aspect of work experience - writing. Writing helps me find greater depths in the search for the visceral. I still struggle with the weakened Ne function. But I am working on it.
I hope you get where you want to get with it.

And yeah, I don't think you want to get too detached.


Second was finding love. Love is that imperfect thing that can conquer any kind of perfectionism. Loving a person can be a tremendously frustrating thing. And then one day you just can't help but laugh at the entire enterprise of how you wish to change another person and how it turn she/he ends up changing you. I am sorry if I sound smug here.
No worries, I didn't see smugness.

It sounds fine to me if you both change each other :)


I don't know what your situation is but I'd like to hear more. This search can be really frustrating. And I admire that you are looking deep within yourself.
Thanks :)

There is actually something I can add yes... very recent realization. Funny you'd ask just now. :) I could never previously make sense of the word "virtue" even if that sounds strange. That's sort of in the same category as "the right thing" for me. Just goes over my head. I mean, it used to go over my head, well it still does in the way many people want to use this phrasing - they seem to apply it to themselves as some trait of themselves. It just does not seem *real* to me. What I however figured out recently is that I can see the things that are called virtues - and where you do "the right thing" for the virtuous purpose determined by these traits - as conceptualized and done in service of society's good objectively. That to me is just a great way to view it, instead of just wanting to do x "good thing", or, yes, "the right thing" to be "good" and "virtuous" or to possess "virtues", you want to do it for society's good where you see the correct principles for that purpose. Of course I always thought in terms of such correct and objective principles but this realization on how to connect it to these concepts on what's a right/good/virtuous thing, somehow made it more clear to me. So such principles determine what's a virtue and what's the right thing. To me it's this simple. It's all objectively for the good of people in society, the ideal of society's good, instead of being subjectively about myself, and I am satisfied with that. I never cared about making these things about myself and I could not previously define these things objectively, and that's what bothered me, now I can. You could say I got a glimpse of the vision that you might call visceral too :) sort of... definitely uplifting to envision it.

What's overall new to me here are not the objective principles - I've always had them, but connecting to this more subjectively moral side is what's new to me. Well it's objective in the way I manage to connect to it but still... it made everything just that much more ...uhh visceral? More "fueled". So it relates to my original post in that way.

I hope this made some sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,863 Posts
I see. I wasn't really talking about purpose in life but speaking of that, I prefer that sort of stuff to be something I personallly see a point to and can even envision it a little bit. There may be extra involvement along with it or there may not be.
Yeah. I suppose I confused my obsession with a purpose of life with a type One trait. But it looks like type Ones have greater discernment and objectivity when it comes to things like that. It was probably more a defense mechanism against my father than a real search.

Hmm that's interesting. By visceral do you mean emotional then, essentially? You can definitely think away emotions. I at least easily do that... But that's yet another topic. And yeah the original sense in which I used the word "visceral" was kind of almost emotional yeah, but not really directly visibly emotional, somehow. It probably is fueled by that too though in the background. Feeling more involved than when it's dry duties.

I would say I'm able to now word it as, there is some emotional fuel there, yeah. It has to be also objectively verified though...

Glad if my thread helps you :)
I did not mean emotional when I said visceral. It is easy to confuse these two words, I admit. You can even make the case that I do not understand the word visceral that well. ;-) Visceral for me is when one's entire physical system is enervated without the possibility of pin-pointing the cause of it. In retrospect we can say that so and so was the reason for the high or the calm but in the moment it is pervasive and rational dissection of it is impossible. I wanted to find that in a pursuit and I think I am discovering it with writing.

You HAVE helped me in a strange epiphanic way. This feels something like a visceral experience. ha ha ha ha

I hope you get where you want to get with it.

And yeah, I don't think you want to get too detached.
Thanks. And thanks again. For understanding. Not getting detached is a real challenge.

There is actually something I can add yes... very recent realization. Funny you'd ask just now. :) I could never previously make sense of the word "virtue" even if that sounds strange. That's sort of in the same category as "the right thing" for me. Just goes over my head. I mean, it used to go over my head, well it still does in the way many people want to use this phrasing - they seem to apply it to themselves as some trait of themselves. It just does not seem *real* to me. What I however figured out recently is that I can see the things that are called virtues - and where you do "the right thing" for the virtuous purpose determined by these traits - as conceptualized and done in service of society's good objectively. That to me is just a great way to view it, instead of just wanting to do x "good thing", or, yes, "the right thing" to be "good" and "virtuous" or to possess "virtues", you want to do it for society's good where you see the correct principles for that purpose. Of course I always thought in terms of such correct and objective principles but this realization on how to connect it to these concepts on what's a right/good/virtuous thing, somehow made it more clear to me. So such principles determine what's a virtue and what's the right thing. To me it's this simple. It's all objectively for the good of people in society, the ideal of society's good, instead of being subjectively about myself, and I am satisfied with that. I never cared about making these things about myself and I could not previously define these things objectively, and that's what bothered me, now I can. You could say I got a glimpse of the vision that you might call visceral too :) sort of... definitely uplifting to envision it.
I have been disgruntled with what people call virtue for a long time. Somehow the insistence on imitating the heroic never made sense to me. Things got so bad that I turned against all kinds of virtues, became cynical, and saw virtue = hypocrisy. Reading Nietzsche gave me better perspective on virtue. He talks about the birth of virtue in an individual. It makes the person vulnerable because of the totality with which he cares for his virtue. Nietzsche compares this man caring for his virtue like a woman cares for her new born. But that self-righteous anger remains. It is perhaps naive of me to see the world in black and white. Still, eyes long to see someone truly virtuous instead of people merely talking about virtues. :)

What's overall new to me here are not the objective principles - I've always had them, but connecting to this more subjectively moral side is what's new to me. Well it's objective in the way I manage to connect to it but still... it made everything just that much more ...uhh visceral? More "fueled". So it relates to my original post in that way.

I hope this made some sense.
I understand how this would be such a boost to life in an overall way. Like one transforming a rock of metal into a blade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Yeah. I suppose I confused my obsession with a purpose of life with a type One trait. But it looks like type Ones have greater discernment and objectivity when it comes to things like that. It was probably more a defense mechanism against my father than a real search.
I see. Btw it actually is important to have a sense of real purpose :) and I know sometimes people do have to search long to find it.


I did not mean emotional when I said visceral. It is easy to confuse these two words, I admit. You can even make the case that I do not understand the word visceral that well. ;-) Visceral for me is when one's entire physical system is enervated without the possibility of pin-pointing the cause of it. In retrospect we can say that so and so was the reason for the high or the calm but in the moment it is pervasive and rational dissection of it is impossible. I wanted to find that in a pursuit and I think I am discovering it with writing.

You HAVE helped me in a strange epiphanic way. This feels something like a visceral experience. ha ha ha ha
OK I see :)


Thanks. And thanks again. For understanding. Not getting detached is a real challenge.
Np!


I have been disgruntled with what people call virtue for a long time. Somehow the insistence on imitating the heroic never made sense to me. Things got so bad that I turned against all kinds of virtues, became cynical, and saw virtue = hypocrisy. Reading Nietzsche gave me better perspective on virtue. He talks about the birth of virtue in an individual. It makes the person vulnerable because of the totality with which he cares for his virtue. Nietzsche compares this man caring for his virtue like a woman cares for her new born. But that self-righteous anger remains. It is perhaps naive of me to see the world in black and white. Still, eyes long to see someone truly virtuous instead of people merely talking about virtues. :)
I think I get what you mean here.


I understand how this would be such a boost to life in an overall way. Like one transforming a rock of metal into a blade.
Yeah :) I find it's changed something for me internally, too, and now I have to see more clearly on the internal changes I'm having and on what I'm to do with them to keep moving towards constructive purposes. Don't get me wrong, having to do all this is a good thing overall I think :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Does anyone else experience this distinction?
It does sound like a language thing, but I'd say it's possibly an MBTI thing too, but also an enneatype (instinctual) thing.

Perhaps because of me being an So-first INFJ, "doing the right thing" is more of a "doing the right thing in order to get to the right place" thing. It sounds vague probably but I think in terms of states a lot - e.g, "what state is the world in right now, and how can we get it into a better shape?". For me, doing the "right thing" is in a sense subject to the "right place".

I feel strongly about what that "right place" looks like (depending on how much resistance I get, I also become aware of how visceral those convictions can be). I am much harder to persuade regarding what state something should be in, whereas my opinions about the "right thing" may be easily influenced by others. Surely there are those who may listen and follow blindly, but I try to be as open as I can towards other ideas and perspectives about how to achieve goals. I realize I am just one tiny person in this world, blessed with an academic brain but by all means not all-knowing nor all-seeing nor all-understanding. I believe that everybody can benefit from others, and that as a community, we can reach synergy and places that we cannot arrive at by only ourselves.

Therefore, it matters not much to me if the "right thing" is based primarily on my judgment or on those of others. I place trust in the idea that relying on the "right people" will help me know what the "right thing" is that can get us to the "right place".

Nyeah.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
Idgaf what I've posted here before, new idea - doing something in a way that doesn't burden my soul. How what why depends on the frame of everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Idgaf what I've posted here before, new idea - doing something in a way that doesn't burden my soul. How what why depends on the frame of everything.
Flowing within frames? How's it working out so far?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Okay I suppose, I'm getting results and moving forward in life.

Tbh I don't know how to answer this question.
Well it hasn't been long since, results on a grander scheme usually play out later. Most people won't notice it when they're detracting kilogram by kilogram from a burden that may feel like a ton. Answers may come later, no? :)

Forward sounds just right, btw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skeletalz

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Living with a Type 1 spouse, I can assure you that her standard for the "right" thing is mostly internal.
Doing the right thing equals "finding the most objectively efficient personally ethical way to do it".
Doing the right thing equates mere problem-solving most of the times, satisfying personal ethics being some part of the problem to solve.
I mean, she'll take information from internal sources first and foremost. Then she'll take information from known external sources if she deems them reliable. Whether she does or not depends on a mixture of gut feeling and personal memories.
She cross-checks information from multiple sources (internal and external), then she has some sort of algorithm to determine "how to do the right thing" theoretically.
When she's set on how to do something theoretically (always with efficiency in mind), she'll try it hands-on and tweak the solution to make it her own, spotting perfectible bits and personally satisfying alterations.

The complete process is:
1- seeking information from memory and known sources
2- sorting and ranking information based on external and internal standards for reliability and efficiency
3- determining theoretical solution based on the retrieved and ranked information
4- implementing solution and testing it on the spot
5- coming up with an internal assessment of quality/efficiency based on objective data and subjective (personal) historical database
5- tweaking solution on the spot based on her quality assessment.
6- systemizing and advocating solution

At this point, the solution is considered good and it would be complete nonsense to try to solve the same problem in a different way. "This is how it is done".

The obvious pros are:
- she always has efficiency in mind
- she takes some time to investigate the problem before tackling it head-on
- but she moves to action quick enough to be able to assess the quality of her designed solution and improve it / abandon it quickly.
- she'll usually be the first to come up with an efficient solution and will happily share it with others, educate them about it.

And the cons:
- when the solution has been determined and some new information comes up, she has to re-run the process entirely.
- if her solution has been internally validated and she's presented with caveats, contrarian advice or negative feedback,
she'll come up with a whole array of rationalizations and altogether bad faith "objectivity" to discard it right away.
She'll eventually agree with you when the cloud of "bad faith" goes away and she distances her ego from the quality of her solution. But patience is needed, and she will never acknowledge the external contribution, she makes it her own and from then accepts it as self-evident.
Both cons have a lot to do with "rigidity". It's like she designs solutions just as one would do pottery: knead the material how you want to, put it in the oven and then it's over, you can't change it without breaking it.

I tried to word the process in a fairly general way, because I believe it's her way of solving ANY type of problem really, and therefore her way of doing ANY thing "right".
I don't know if that rings a bell to other Ones.

Reading back, I think it looks a lot like I'm describing Si with Te in the "solution-building" phase, and generally S with T and J in the "solution-evaluation" phase.

The "Enneagram-specifics" (non cognitive functions related) parts of the process for a One would be:
- Significant use of the gut feeling when assessing reliability of sources of information
- Attachment of the ego to the quality of the solution: I know this is how it should be done, if you criticize it then you're indicting my character and I have to defend it however I can.
- Latent frustration and anger

Gut feeling, anger, ego-boundaries: typically Body triad (891) issues.
Latent frustration: duh, Frustration triad (147)
Si and Te: Quite sure they are somehow correlated to both the Competency triad (135) and Compliant triad (126). As opposed to, respectively, Positive and Reactive triads, and Withdrawn and Assertive triads.

Therefore I think the process description holds with regards to being a One
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Living with a Type 1 spouse, I can assure you that her standard for the "right" thing is mostly internal.

Reading back, I think it looks a lot like I'm describing Si with Te in the "solution-building" phase, and generally S with T and J in the "solution-evaluation" phase.

The "Enneagram-specifics" (non cognitive functions related) parts of the process for a One would be:
- Significant use of the gut feeling when assessing reliability of sources of information
- Attachment of the ego to the quality of the solution: I know this is how it should be done, if you criticize it then you're indicting my character and I have to defend it however I can.
- Latent frustration and anger

Gut feeling, anger, ego-boundaries: typically Body triad (891) issues.
Latent frustration: duh, Frustration triad (147)
Yeah, it's quite internal, but the internal is also influenced by the external to personal extent. The way you describe her processes makes sense but I can't feel it 100%, being NF temperament. Perhaps she's got a different instinct as well (I'm So/Sx).

Funny you used the phrasing "gut feeling", as that is quite NF but could very well be Si depending on the experience and underlying psychological mechanisms and reasons. I think in enneagram lingo, it's not really gut feeling (because that wears the connotation of intuition) but a visceral feeling. You simply know by the way your body reacts.

I do understand and feel the unpersonal criticism thing. I know people may just be valuing the idea, but for some reason I am identified with it, embody it, so criticizing my idea is like criticizing me. I've learned to deal with it, but the initial visceral reaction does not wear down.

And just like with "gut feeling", I do not really agree with the "anger" lingo. The frustration, yeah, I'm likely a 147, definitely got that. But it is more resentment to me than it is anger. Things being imperfect used to upset me a lot, caused frustration and resentment. Sometimes anger, for sure, but anger is a fleeting emotion and momentary, whereas resentment is an attitude, a lingering mood or stance. The right thing for me is a judgment/value based on a mixture of internal ideas and external influences, and things not being quite right makes me resent those things. Perhaps initially angry as well but the resentment is what stays.

Not that I'm a grumpy old man xD I think I've worked through quite a bit of my Oneness. There's always the pitfall of lingering in my resentment for the things that are not the way they should be. But I think (hope) I've learned a thing or two, to let things be the way they are, and be at peace. It is what it is, and if I can change that for the better, I'll try. Only if I can, cause if not, the right thing can also be to let things be and walk away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Yeah, it's quite internal, but the internal is also influenced by the external to personal extent. The way you describe her processes makes sense but I can't feel it 100%, being NF temperament. Perhaps she's got a different instinct as well (I'm So/Sx).

Funny you used the phrasing "gut feeling", as that is quite NF but could very well be Si depending on the experience and underlying psychological mechanisms and reasons. I think in enneagram lingo, it's not really gut feeling (because that wears the connotation of intuition) but a visceral feeling. You simply know by the way your body reacts.

I do understand and feel the unpersonal criticism thing. I know people may just be valuing the idea, but for some reason I am identified with it, embody it, so criticizing my idea is like criticizing me. I've learned to deal with it, but the initial visceral reaction does not wear down.

And just like with "gut feeling", I do not really agree with the "anger" lingo. The frustration, yeah, I'm likely a 147, definitely got that. But it is more resentment to me than it is anger. Things being imperfect used to upset me a lot, caused frustration and resentment. Sometimes anger, for sure, but anger is a fleeting emotion and momentary, whereas resentment is an attitude, a lingering mood or stance. The right thing for me is a judgment/value based on a mixture of internal ideas and external influences, and things not being quite right makes me resent those things. Perhaps initially angry as well but the resentment is what stays.

Not that I'm a grumpy old man xD I think I've worked through quite a bit of my Oneness. There's always the pitfall of lingering in my resentment for the things that are not the way they should be. But I think (hope) I've learned a thing or two, to let things be the way they are, and be at peace. It is what it is, and if I can change that for the better, I'll try. Only if I can, cause if not, the right thing can also be to let things be and walk away.
You’re right about the instinct, she’s Sp/Sx.

About gut feeling and intuition:
I see them as two really different processes which both allow to take shortcuts in the weighing of options.
I completely agree with your description of “visceral feeling” (I thought “gut” and “visceral” were synonyms but English isn’t my first language so…). It originates in the body and it’s quick and grounded (albeit not always rational).
Whereas “Jungian” intuition seems to originate in the mind (at least that’s how I experience it), isn’t grounded and isn’t as quick, I mean it seems to come out of the blue but it’s usually marinating for quite some time before coming to the consciousness.

I really like your paragraph about resentment, it corresponds to what I’ve observed in 1s I know, obviously especially my spouse. When I say “anger” in 1s, I don’t mean it as full-blown uncontrolled rage, but resentment adding up and bubbling to the surface as cold anger, voice all dry and constricted in the throat, face flushing red, implacable all-or-nothing statements, face looking like the embodiment of righteousness, and most of all willing to go all the way to Armageddon instead of settling for a middle ground.
If she’s sure she’s right, nobody can convince her otherwise on the spot. You have to settle, abort the discussion or go straight rampage, no holds barred. But as I said earlier, if you somehow manage to avoid the escalation, sometimes you’ll find out later that your point of view has been taken into account and even incorporated. The other option is as you’ve stated: the resentment stays… and it will inevitably resurface later.

the right thing can also be to let things be and walk away” – sounds like a phrase I’d need to stick to the fridge :D

Anyway thanks for your thoughtful answer !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
About gut feeling and intuition:
I see them as two really different processes which both allow to take shortcuts in the weighing of options.
I completely agree with your description of “visceral feeling” (I thought “gut” and “visceral” were synonyms but English isn’t my first language so…). It originates in the body and it’s quick and grounded (albeit not always rational).
Whereas “Jungian” intuition seems to originate in the mind (at least that’s how I experience it), isn’t grounded and isn’t as quick, I mean it seems to come out of the blue but it’s usually marinating for quite some time before coming to the consciousness.
Ah well, gut and visceral are synonymous probably, so I should probably speak for myself. Gut to me is more instinctual and more akin to Jungian iNtuition yes. I see gut instinct more as perceptual (which is irrational according to Jung, iirc), whereas visceral is more an embodied judgment. Not sure how else to explain it. Like I said, it's like you know with every cell of your body whether something is wrong or bad or corrupt or whatsoever. Or good, even.

I really like your paragraph about resentment, it corresponds to what I’ve observed in 1s I know, obviously especially my spouse. When I say “anger” in 1s, I don’t mean it as full-blown uncontrolled rage, but resentment adding up and bubbling to the surface as cold anger, voice all dry and constricted in the throat, face flushing red, implacable all-or-nothing statements, face looking like the embodiment of righteousness, and most of all willing to go all the way to Armageddon instead of settling for a middle ground.
If she’s sure she’s right, nobody can convince her otherwise on the spot. You have to settle, abort the discussion or go straight rampage, no holds barred. But as I said earlier, if you somehow manage to avoid the escalation, sometimes you’ll find out later that your point of view has been taken into account and even incorporated. The other option is as you’ve stated: the resentment stays… and it will inevitably resurface later.
The physical aspect sounds scarily familiar, haha. Although I do try to be more open minded and listen to other people's ideas in such a moment, it is hard to listen and control the rage when you feel your body is getting ready for Armageddon.

the right thing can also be to let things be and walk away” – sounds like a phrase I’d need to stick to the fridge :D

Anyway thanks for your thoughtful answer !
Actually, I'm going to find me a post-it and do that myself in a sec. And thank you for sharing. There's not that many Ones wandering around here and it's great to hear about the similarities and differences :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
@JpKoff Thanks for your input. I didn't respond earlier, but I'd like to comment a bit. Your spouse is ISTJ, eh? I do relate to a lot of what you described and defined there.


These are very good points at least for me:

"Doing the right thing equals "finding the most objectively efficient personally ethical way to do it".
Doing the right thing equates mere problem-solving most of the times, satisfying personal ethics being some part of the problem to solve."

I think I would say, I want to feel it's a neat thought that is based on the best way to sort and rank the data about the situation or issue. And the data is objective yes. That is already pretty instinctive but then sometimes I have the extra conviction. Sometimes it gets too strong though and then I feel more unhealthy. Like I pour in too much of this (not directly emotional somehow) energy of the conviction. Along with a vision coming up more than usual and me getting really stuck on it. Feels "heated" more than usual too (heated as 1 sx supposedly is but a stronger manifestation of this), so it gets too much. Mostly for SX, maybe SOC matters too, not sure.


"I mean, she'll take information from internal sources first and foremost. Then she'll take information from known external sources if she deems them reliable. Whether she does or not depends on a mixture of gut feeling and personal memories."

This is good too. The gut feeling comes from how well the information can be sorted, ranked, organised, whatever, stuff like that, I guess, and also from how well it makes sense in reality.


"She cross-checks information from multiple sources (internal and external), then she has some sort of algorithm to determine "how to do the right thing" theoretically."

I would not be able to give you one single algorithm on this one but yeah, it's deduced in specific ways (again pretty gut based by default I guess), depending on the type of problem or situation.


"At this point, the solution is considered good and it would be complete nonsense to try to solve the same problem in a different way. "This is how it is done"."

Funnily enough, don't relate to this in SP issues. I do strongly relate to this for SX issues. Sometimes SOC, I guess.


"The obvious pros are:
- she always has efficiency in mind
- she takes some time to investigate the problem before tackling it head-on
- but she moves to action quick enough to be able to assess the quality of her designed solution and improve it / abandon it quickly.
- she'll usually be the first to come up with an efficient solution and will happily share it with others, educate them about it."


Yeah, yeah, in SX matters and sometimes the SOC. For SP matters, I'm less thorough, I'll just deal with it as much as I have to/want to. I can sometimes suggest my conclusions to others though, if they ask or whatever.


"- when the solution has been determined and some new information comes up, she has to re-run the process entirely."

I don't know if I re-run the ENTIRE process. Very basic, fundamental things would have to come into question for that. It would not make sense to do it otherwise.


"- if her solution has been internally validated and she's presented with caveats, contrarian advice or negative feedback,
she'll come up with a whole array of rationalizations and altogether bad faith "objectivity" to discard it right away.
She'll eventually agree with you when the cloud of "bad faith" goes away and she distances her ego from the quality of her solution. But patience is needed, and she will never acknowledge the external contribution, she makes it her own and from then accepts it as self-evident.
Both cons have a lot to do with "rigidity". It's like she designs solutions just as one would do pottery: knead the material how you want to, put it in the oven and then it's over, you can't change it without breaking it."

Most of that's about right though I would not say that it is simply ego lol. It's simply, I don't take in all the new info all that fast. It is actually good to NOT change things often. It has advantages objectively. Also, I don't simply do "bad faith objectivity". What I mostly do is, not taking in the new info yet so my reasoning will be missing what the new info offers. I basically have confidence that I got the best way to sort out the available data (when I was thorough about it), the best reasoning for it, so I'm not updating that on its own. The data has to be updated first and that takes time.


"I tried to word the process in a fairly general way, because I believe it's her way of solving ANY type of problem really, and therefore her way of doing ANY thing "right".
I don't know if that rings a bell to other Ones."


It does to me but I'm STJ too. Also with SP matters, I am not completely set on the "right way" to do things. I do not spend enough time to fully optimise those solutions. It's more like, I come up with a solution, that's not entirely thorough or fully optimised, I may hit upon something later by chance that helps me optimise it more, but otherwise it just stays as is. And I just do it for myself, I don't interact with others on these things unless others ask directly. I still don't like being suggested a different way without first explicitly requesting the input, though.


"The "Enneagram-specifics" (non cognitive functions related) parts of the process for a One would be:
- Significant use of the gut feeling when assessing reliability of sources of information
- Attachment of the ego to the quality of the solution: I know this is how it should be done, if you criticize it then you're indicting my character and I have to defend it however I can.
- Latent frustration and anger"


OK yeah gut feeling though this isn't necessarily that same conviction I spoke of originally.

I do not perceive it as indiction of my character. I can be irritated but if I see the other solution is better I can adopt it afterwards. I don't see most mistakes as a a big deal though again this applies in most SP matters. Try and show me I made the wrong decision or the wrong direction in a SX matter... Yeah maybe that is almost like indicting my character ha ha. I dunno, I'd have to think more on this.


"Gut feeling, anger, ego-boundaries: typically Body triad (891) issues.
Latent frustration: duh, Frustration triad (147)
Si and Te: Quite sure they are somehow correlated to both the Competency triad (135) and Compliant triad (126). As opposed to, respectively, Positive and Reactive triads, and Withdrawn and Assertive triads."


Thinking seems correlated with Competency alright. Si is closer to Compliant I suppose. I see Te as Assertive too, though... at least in my case, when I extravert I get to feel like that a lot.


"Therefore I think the process description holds with regards to being a One"

Hm yeah also the detail orientation.


I really like your paragraph about resentment, it corresponds to what I’ve observed in 1s I know, obviously especially my spouse. When I say “anger” in 1s, I don’t mean it as full-blown uncontrolled rage, but resentment adding up and bubbling to the surface as cold anger, voice all dry and constricted in the throat, face flushing red, implacable all-or-nothing statements, face looking like the embodiment of righteousness, and most of all willing to go all the way to Armageddon instead of settling for a middle ground.
If she’s sure she’s right, nobody can convince her otherwise on the spot. You have to settle, abort the discussion or go straight rampage, no holds barred. But as I said earlier, if you somehow manage to avoid the escalation, sometimes you’ll find out later that your point of view has been taken into account and even incorporated. The other option is as you’ve stated: the resentment stays… and it will inevitably resurface later.
Oh yeah great description hah ha ha. Thanks. But yeah very spot on. This expression of course has its degrees, when it's full-on like this you say it's actually strong anger but really emotionally controlled at the same time. Then sometimes it's not as dry and constricted and it gets closer to a rage, more emotional and I act out then (not in bad destructive ways - I constantly keep in control still and it's still colder overall than hot). What I don't fully understand is where I am supposed to see resentment though. I guess similar issue to the issue of "right thing" (which I'm now fine with, I understand this one now). The one thing I did relate to in 1 descriptions is hostility and not accepting things and that being the source of the hostility and irritation and then here and there the cold anger you describe and sometimes the controlled rage. If that unaccepting hostility is the resentment, fine. Is it?

A note about you thinking you have to settle, abort or go straight rampage no holds barred. Actually, when I hold someone in high respect enough, I am willing to hear them out no matter how angry I get. Well I'm willing to hear out anyone unless I deem it complete nonsense instantly lol. But overall I think the anger mainly influences the bandwidth of how much info I am taking in and how much I will be processing in a given moment. I am still taking it in and processing it though. Well and degree of impulsiveness increases, of course. It's all very decisive as well. So the information processing may stop faster than in other cases yup. If I already took the action, there is no point in trying to convince me in retrospect now, is there.

So anyway my point was that you do not have to go for the rampage necessarily. Add "give reasoning/provide information" as another option. Maybe with your spouse that's never an actual option, I don't know. The only one case where you can be sure I am 100% NOT taking in any extra info is when the anger becomes explosive and emotional. But that's rare as hell for me. And it usually has a point even if I think in retrospect that it was overemotional. Unless some crazy extra stress caused the explosiveness, then no extra strong point to state with this type of anger. It's btw the emotionality that makes me stop taking in ANY info.

Oh I guess one problem with my suggestion of trying to give your input even when the (I)STJ 1 is angry. If you want to stick with logic, then you do have to be using really strong bottom-line arguments if you want a quick enough change lol. The other way to do it is if you can suggest a really good alternative that is actually appealing. Well that's me anyway. I don't automatically say yes to alternatives, for sure.

And yes!, where you say "you’ll find out later that your point of view has been taken into account and even incorporated". Totally true too. I'm not as stubborn as some people want to believe. I just don't process all the new info details right away. And I don't tend to talk about all of it all the time, or about my thought processes and conclusions. I actually dislike being called stubborn, it's not for some emotional subjective reason that I do not agree easily with things, it's due to these specifics of the information processing (ISTJ? E1?).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
It does sound like a language thing, but I'd say it's possibly an MBTI thing too, but also an enneatype (instinctual) thing.

Perhaps because of me being an So-first INFJ, "doing the right thing" is more of a "doing the right thing in order to get to the right place" thing. It sounds vague probably but I think in terms of states a lot - e.g, "what state is the world in right now, and how can we get it into a better shape?". For me, doing the "right thing" is in a sense subject to the "right place".

I feel strongly about what that "right place" looks like (depending on how much resistance I get, I also become aware of how visceral those convictions can be). I am much harder to persuade regarding what state something should be in, whereas my opinions about the "right thing" may be easily influenced by others. Surely there are those who may listen and follow blindly, but I try to be as open as I can towards other ideas and perspectives about how to achieve goals. I realize I am just one tiny person in this world, blessed with an academic brain but by all means not all-knowing nor all-seeing nor all-understanding. I believe that everybody can benefit from others, and that as a community, we can reach synergy and places that we cannot arrive at by only ourselves.

Therefore, it matters not much to me if the "right thing" is based primarily on my judgment or on those of others. I place trust in the idea that relying on the "right people" will help me know what the "right thing" is that can get us to the "right place".

Nyeah.
Thanks, going to respond to this too now. Ok yeah your interpretation of "right thing" is foreign to me. That is what feels too external. Maybe it's MBTI cognition then. Like I said in the other thread, I am less global about the state of the world, so that's again a difference but the idea of a vision for this is less foreign to me, if you meant it in that way. Still not what is in front of my mind's eyes by default but it's a bit more relatable.


The physical aspect sounds scarily familiar, haha. Although I do try to be more open minded and listen to other people's ideas in such a moment, it is hard to listen and control the rage when you feel your body is getting ready for Armageddon.
Hey that's quite commendable, if you are still easily open-minded in that mode without a narrowed focus ha ha. I find it easier to do the physical and emotional control over anger than try and be open-minded with it. And frankly I doubt it's always that good to be open-minded. Then there'd never be a moment of taking a decision and real action.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top