I prefer this form rather than the traditional one.
Excellent explanations and interactions of all of the different triads
The Enneagram Triads | David Daniels M.D. website on the Enneagram and Life
I have only quoted the synopsis but I highly recommend clicking the link and reading the entire article; as it insightfuly integrates all of the different enneagram types and compares and contrasts them within the various triad groups.
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Stumbled on this a few weeks ago and really like it. It's always refreshing to see something explained in a new way!
Very interesting. I feel like 7 having a connection to 4 makes sense.
I agree.
I wanted to find more discussions about this though, it's really interesting. It just makes a lot more sense to me...?
Why is 7 linked to 1 and 5....not 4?
I've wondered the same, as personally I feel so out of touch with the heart center that integrating to 4 is far more logical, as that would help to accept negative emotions, which is a great problem for a type 7. The link to 5 makes no sense, as it's other head type (still deals with fear) and it's a rejection type, so it's very strange that a frustration type would be able to change it's object relation. To be honest 5 should be linked with 2 and not 7.
There is more a focus on observation (withdrawing) than on the needs of others? Also, it gives a link to the head-center which seems...healthier? Still, you raise a good point.
Tbh, idk. I'm not sure I know enough about either 2 or 5 to comment, which is why I was looking for a discussion about this topic. Can't seem to find one though. I guess, from my perspective, as a 7, integrating to 4 instead of 5 makes more sense to me.
Except 5 retains and holds onto what they think they need in order to survive to the point of being aggressively possessive (stingy). This is the very problem 2 is dealing with, that they think they cannot have needs outside that of others and that others must always satisfy and fulfill their needs for them; they cannot have needs on their own and possess their own needs. 5s try to diminish and minimize their needs, especially the needs others place on them, but they are also hyper-aware of the needs they do have and to satisfy them to the point that they have issues giving up what they do have and sharing it with others.
Not as strange as it seems, a common misconception is that 5s never experience any degree of emotion while they're just as painfully self aware and flooded with negativity as a 4 is but, rather than embracing those feelings and letting them shape their identity to fight shame, they reject them and rationalize them to regain control. How does this work with type 7? Well, first of all it helps the 7 identify and understand the emotions they deny and escape from and use them as stimulation to focus and plan, to be more deliberate and aware of the negatives. An optimistic predisposion can be easily grounded by a more cynical yet healthy concrete vision of reality (while 4s often err more on the pessimistic idealist side, not providing adequate balance).
A 7 wastes a lot of energy searching in the outside world the same glorious ideal they've built within their own minds while a 5 is stingy with their physical energy, conserving it to avoid losing control or pointless efforts that would only expose their weakness and inability to face a situation they weren't adequately prepared for. So it make sense that a 7's impulsiveness and high physical and mental energy would be tempered by a withdrawn type whose vice is 'avarice'. A 5 waits before leaping while a 7 prefers a trial and error approach to life, leading integration to provide more sensible grounds.
The problem is that type 5 doesn't completely fix the fact that type 7 is out of touch with it's desires, and this doesn't mean stuff like getting some object. Besides, I didn't imply that type 5 are emotionless, but that they're head types therefore they deal with fear, while 7 is disconnected from the heart center, so for this reason it would be more logical that type 7 integrates to 4. Then the problem of changing object relation is that frustration is also a core component of a 7's mindset, so it wouldn't be possible to suddenly resort to mechanisms typical of a rejection type, and it doesn't make sense that a system allows some types to go through this (2, 4, 5 and 7) while 5 types don't change object relations while integrating or disintegrating.
Besides, you're focusing too much on the 'hyperactive' side of 7, which is just a way of avoiding the real problem, which is having trouble dealing with their own pain. I really fail to see how the hoarding mechanic of a 5 could solve the issue of avoiding emotional pain. Please explain why integrating to 4 wouldn't balance to the positive outlook of a 7, and why a 7 would need another link to a competence type, considering that it's already liked to type 1, instead of really needing a connection to a reactive type that belongs to the heart triad.
I'm not sure how to answer this question? What do you mean by "desire", exactly? My bf always talks about wanting and needing to be desired; which I have a hard time understanding because it's just not something I'm concerned about. I don't change who or what I am in order to please others, if they don't want me, then it's their loss.
No, seriously...
I don't think I understand the concept of "desiring" something. What does that feel like, anyway? If I want something, I'll just go out and try my damn hardest to get it. Is this the same thing?
Basically....I don't understand the question, lol.
I like the link in the OP. David Daniel's stuff is sort of a refreshing alternate look at the enneagram types. He's worked with Helen Palmer a lot, so it's a bit different from the more common conceptualizations found on message boards (which is more Riso-Hudson based). With him, it's more about the types' outlooks on life, rather than personality structures and behaviors.
I'm not sure I'm going to follow the current fad of saying that 5 and 2 / 4 and 7 are connected, since we're on that subject. I suppose it's possible, but most mainstream theory accepts that 5 and 7 / 2 and 4 are connected. This is presumably based on years upon years of research as well as tens-of-thousands upon tens-of-thousands of interviews. You'd think someone would have stumbled across something by now.
David Daniels does note in the article that he has observed a 2-5 / 4-7 connection, but what he says is hardly definitive. In my own observations, I've seen several 4s with pronounced 2ishness rather than 7ness, but, like everyone else on the forum, I'm not a researcher and cannot independently corroborate one thing or another. My feeling is that it may be logical to say that 7s have to accept negative emotions, etc. but that doesn't necessarily mean that's how the personality works. (If I ever turn out to be a 7, focusing on developing one thing in life is clearly going to be a harder task for me than accepting pain).
My two cents.
If you look to the right and left of 7, you've already got 6 and 8, reactive types, who are both basically tooled to see the worst in themselves and in humanity (and are both connected to the image triad themselves). Would 7 need to move to 4, or simply try to recognise and accept some of the darker parts of both wings? I'd think that alone would balance the "positive outlook" if fully accepted. If there were a 4 connection, they'd be touching on all 3 reactive types. Would that be necessary, either?
Also, I don't think anyone argues that 7s should develop a hoarding mechanism, per se. Simply to realize there's limitation, and that that's OK because limitation is actually a form of guidance. Rather than frantically wonder what they're supposed to do with themselves and their talents, they can focus. Perhaps that sense of purpose is what eases the pain and anxiety. Maybe they're supposed to be cerebral.
I don't think type 4 is all about pain. It's about drawing identity from one's emotions, including the darker ones that no one else wants to explore, yes, but experiencing the broad range of human emotion intensely. The virtue is equanimity for this reason. Do 7s need to develop that? Serious question; and I'm open to the 4 and 5 connection points being reversed, but like I said, I don't see much to specifically corroborate it. You could spin arguments either way.
I'm not sure I'm going to follow the current fad of saying that 5 and 2 / 4 and 7 are connected, since we're on that subject. I suppose it's possible, but most mainstream theory accepts that 5 and 7 / 2 and 4 are connected. This is presumably based on years upon years of research as well as tens-of-thousands upon tens-of-thousands of interviews. You'd think someone would have stumbled across something by now.
David Daniels does note in the article that he has observed a 2-5 / 4-7 connection, but what he says is hardly definitive. In my own observations, I've seen several 4s with pronounced 2ishness rather than 7ness, but, like everyone else on the forum, I'm not a researcher and cannot independently corroborate one thing or another. My feeling is that it may be logical to say that 7s have to accept negative emotions, etc. but that doesn't necessarily mean that's how the personality works. (If I ever turn out to be a 7, focusing on developing one thing in life is clearly going to be a harder task for me than accepting pain).
My two cents.
I have an idea.
If you look to the right and left of 7, you've already got 6 and 8, reactive types, who are both basically tooled to see the worst in themselves and in humanity (and are both connected to the image triad themselves). Would 7 need to move to 4, or simply try to recognise and accept some of the darker parts of both wings? I'd think that alone would balance the "positive outlook" if fully accepted. If there were a 4 connection, they'd be touching on all 3 reactive types. Would that be necessary, either?
Also, I don't think anyone argues that 7s should develop a hoarding mechanism, per se. Simply to realize there's limitation, and that that's OK because limitation is actually a form of guidance. Rather than frantically wonder what they're supposed to do with themselves and their talents, they can focus. Perhaps that sense of purpose is what eases the pain and anxiety. Maybe they're supposed to be cerebral.
I don't think type 4 is all about pain. It's about drawing identity from one's emotions, including the darker ones that no one else wants to explore, yes, but experiencing the broad range of human emotion intensely. The virtue is equanimity for this reason. Do 7s need to develop that? Serious question; and I'm open to the 4 and 5 connection points being reversed, but like I said, I don't see much to specifically corroborate it. You could spin arguments either way.
By desire I mean ability to pinpoint what it is you really desire in life, what you truly want and is good for you.I'm not sure how to answer this question? What do you mean by "desire", exactly? My bf always talks about wanting and needing to be desired; which I have a hard time understanding because it's just not something I'm concerned about. I don't change who or what I am in order to please others, if they don't want me, then it's their loss.
No, seriously...
I don't think I understand the concept of "desiring" something. What does that feel like, anyway? If I want something, I'll just go out and try my damn hardest to get it. Is this the same thing?
Basically....I don't understand the question, lol.
But take type 8 - wings of two positive outlook types, integrates to 2, the last positive outlook type. Why is that necessary? It's a part of established theory. You can equally argue that wouldn't it be as valid then, for type 8, to just integrate its wings in the same vein as you suggested for 7 in order to overcome its cynicism? Except that's not what theory says. You need to move to 2 to realize the goodness in life. 7 and 9 won't do.
Also, one may argue that the fact that 7 does not move to 4 and would thus finalize the connection to the image triad (9 is already connected) actually creates a theoretical discrepancy. The enneagram is all about internal symmetry, and my beef with the 7-5 and 2-4 is that it breaks the symmetry of the original symbol for reasons I don't understand.
Yeah, but 4 is also a withdrawn type and thus also focused on oneself. Also, to integrate to the image triad is different from being an image type. I still think my interpretation that the heart types are about recognizing is accurate, which also suggests an orientation away from feelings, in the sense of being aware of deeper feelings.
Fair enough, but the point I was hoping to make is, 7 doesn't have to integrate to a reactive type to gain insights into negativity (I'd think 5 is as capable of cynicism and staring into horror as 4; perhaps moreso because 4s tend to romanticise). I think the more important thing to ask is what is the core issue of the type and what really serves it. The triads that point belongs to may or may not count.
Should symmetry override observation, though? If it makes symmetrical sense to say A, but observation says B, what's the better conclusion? I mean, I imagine people didn't assign it to its current form just because they felt like messing up 3 inner triads.
Also, how is the current form asymmetrical? Geometrically, it forms a mirror image of itself. Serious question,in what ways would you say switching the connections improves it?
Last, what do you consider the original symbol? I was under the impression that the symbol goes, possibly, as far back as ancient Greece and was later used by Gurdjieff, but the work since then has radically changed, including the concept of "types" itself. Whether or not Ichazo fiddled around with the symbol when he assigned the types, I cannot say. But given that it's undergone so much metamorphosis, revision, and refinement over the years, I feel like we could argue that about a lot of enneagram-related ideas.
Okay. So I'm thinking you buy the DoI / DoD theory over the "connecting points" theory. Am I right?
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
