Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
This was taken from Naranjo's book called Character and Neurosis. Reading through this I got the impression that he is describing type 1 fixation in its pure form, so be aware that not all people Type 1 are going to display all of these traits; some will resemble this profile more so and others less so. If you are curious to read through the intro and see chapters about other types, you can download the entire file here.



ANGER AND PERFECTIONISM
ENNEA-TYPE I



1. Core Theory, Nomenclature, and Place in the Enneagram

“We may consider wrath in three ways,” says Saint Thomas in Questiones Disputatae:
“Firstly, a wrath which resides in the heart (Ira Cordis); also, inasmuch as it flows into words
(Ira Locutionis), and thirdly, in that it becomes actions (Ira Actiones).” The survey scarcely
brings to mind the characteristics of the perfectionistic type as we will be portraying it here.
Yes, there is anger in the heart, mostly in the form of resentment, yet not so prominently as
anger may be experienced by the lusty, the envious, or the cowardly. As for verbal behavior, it
is most characteristic of the anger type to be controlled in the expression of anger, in any of its
explicit forms: we are in the presence of a well-behaved, civilized type, not a spontaneous one.
In regard to action, ennea-type I individuals do express anger, yet mostlyunconsciously, not
only to themselves but to others, for they do so in a way that is typically rationalized; in fact,
much of this personality may be understood as a reaction formation against anger; a denial of
destructiveness through a deliberate, well-intentioned attitude.

Oscar Ichazo’s definition of anger as a “standing against reality” has the merit of
addressing a more basic issue than the feeling or expression of emotion. Still, it may be useful
to point out at the outset that the label “anger type” is scarcely evocative of the typical
psychological characteristics of the personality style in question—which is critical and
demanding rather than consciously hateful or rude. Ichazo called the ennea-type “ego-resent,”
which seems a psychologically more exact portrayal of the emotional disposition involved: one
of protest and assertive claims rather than mere irritability. In my own teaching experience, I
started out calling the character’s fixation “intentional goodness”; later I shifted to labeling it
“perfectionism.” This seems appropriate to designate a rejection of what is in terms of what is
felt and believed should be.

Christian writers who shared an awareness of anger as a capital sin, that is to say, as one
of the basic psychological obstacles to true virtue, mostly seem to have failed to realize that it
is precisely under the guise of virtue that unconscious anger finds its most characteristic form
of expression. An exception is St. John of the Cross, who in his Dark Night of the Soul writes
with characterological exactitude as he describes the sin of wrath in spiritual beginners:

“There are other of these spiritual persons, again, who fall into another kind of spiritual
wrath: this happens when they become irritated at the sins of others, and keep watch on those
others with a sort of uneasy zeal. At times the impulse comes to them to reprove them angrily,
and occasionally they go so far as to indulge it and set themselves up as masters of virtue. All
this is contrary to spiritual meekness.” And he adds: “There are others who are vexed with
themselves when they observe their own imperfection, and display an impatience that is not
humility; so impatient are they about this that they would fain be saints in a day. Many of
these persons purport to accomplish a great deal and make grand resolutions; yet, as they are
not humble and have no misgivings about themselves, the moreresolutions they make, the
greater is the fall and the greater their annoyance, since they have not the patience to wait for
that which God will give them when it pleases Him.”

On the whole, this is a well-intentioned and overly virtuous character arisen as a defense
against anger and destructiveness. It would be a mistake, however, to conceive of it as a
violent character—for it is on the contrary, an over-controlled and over-civilized interpersonal
style. Striking in this style is also an oppositional quality, both in regard to others and to
experience in general. While every form of character may be regarded as an interference with
instinct, the anti-instinctive orientation of this “puritanical” style is the most striking. A good
name for the character (and one applicable beyond the explicitly sick region of the mental
health spectrum) is perfectionism—for in spite of the fact that people in some other
characterological styles may appropriately refer to themselves as “perfectionistic,” this is
definitely the orientation in which perfectionism is most prominent. This involves an obsession
with improving things that result in making their lives and those of others worse and a
narrow-minded concept of perfection in terms of a matching of experience or events with a
pre-established code of values, standards, ideas, tastes, rules, and so on.
Perfectionism not only illustrates the fact that the better is the enemy of the best (and the
search for the best is the enemy of the better) but may be said to involve a cognitive bias, an
imbalance between the allegiances to duty and to pleasure; to gravity and to levity; to work
and to play, mature deliberateness and child-like spontaneity.

As a sequel to the word perfectionist—more colloquially—I have caricatured the character
as one of “angry virtue,” a label that has the advantage of including both the emotional (anger)
and the cognitive (perfectionistic) aspects.

Though I personally appreciate Erikson’s re-statement of anality as an issue of autonomy
that arises at the time of learning sphincter control and walking, I think Abraham and Freud
deserve the homage of having for the first time drawn attention to the connection between the
prohibition of soiling oneself and obsessive cleanliness.

The position of the anger type in the enneagram is neither at the schizoid nor at the
hysteroid corners, but in the group of the upper three characters pervaded by “psychological
laziness.” It is my experience that, contrary to the fact that many obsessives declare themselves
extroverts, this very statement reveals their lack of psychological mindedness, for they are,
rather, sensory-motor extroverts with an introverted self-ideal that is part of their refinement
and intellectual values. The position of ennea-type I between ennea-types IX and II in the
enneagram invites a consideration of how perfectionistic character is not only “anti-intraceptive
”2 but also proud. Indeed the word pride is sometimes used specifically to describe the
aristocratic and haughty attitude of the perfectionist rather than the attitude of the type here
designated as “proud,” whose priding is not so much to be respectable and admirable but to be
needed, loved and exalted as very special.

From a survey of many thousands of entries in the literature since 1960, I find that the
obsessive-compulsive personality style is the most frequently written about. I imagine that this
may be due to its being the most clear cut and recognizable, and yet I also think that a
confusion has slipped into the use of the term “anankastic,” by which the obsessive-compulsive
is frequently designated in Europe. Also, in regard to the “anal personality” syndrome of
psychoanalysis I think that sometimes the term has been applied to the obsessive-compulsive
proper and at other times to the more controlled and obsessive-like schizoid individuals. In
my experience it is the schizoid personality which is more frequently found as the background
of ego-dystonic obsessions and compulsions, andnot the obsessive, in which cleanliness and
order are ego-syntonic.

2. Antecedents in Scientific Literature on Character

I learned from Kurt Schneider’s Psychopathic Personalities5 that it was J. Donath who
introduced the concept of anankastic personalities in 1897. Writing in the early twenties
Schneider reports that literature on “obsessive state is almost impossible to encompass,” yet he
doesn’t draw a clear distinction between what until recently was called an obsessive
neurosis6and obsessive personality. Though there is no doubt that he was acquainted with our
“perfectionist” and the picture of this character was in his mind as he wrote part of his
chapter on the “insecure”7 the very fact that he did regard the anankastic along with the
“sensitive” as varieties of the insecure disposition suggests to me that he fell for the same
confusion that became later apparent in the concept of anal personality—a confusion between
our perfectionist and the schizoid, which have some common characteristics and yet contrast
sharply in other respects.

Reading Von Gebsattel on anankastic personality 8 I have the distinct impression that it is a
schizoid form of obsessivenessthat he has in mind, which inclines me to think that up to this
day the confusion survives. Since the ICD-IX,9 which still has not been superseded by DSM-III in
some countries, includes Kurt Schneider’s system of classification in regard to personality, it is
pertinent to point out that there is no place in this classification for our perfectionist except
possibly as a variety of the “insecure.” Although theoretically it is admissible that an excessive
formality may be a reaction to a deeper insecurity, the terminology leads to a further confusion
since it obscures the clear contrast between the

“On the expressive psychology of the anankastic it must be said that, externally they often
strike us by their exaggerated meticulousness, pedantry, correctness, and scrupulousness.”
In the realm of psychological literature it may be said that the type of person we are
discussing was the first of all personality patterns to be observed, when Freud wrote his
famous essay on anal character. Karl Abraham picked up and elaborated the idea in the anal
character which he begins with a concise summary of Freud’s observations:
“Freud has said that certain neurotics present three particularly pronounced character
traits, namely, a love for orderliness which often develops into pedantry, a parsimony which
easily turns to miserliness, and an obstinacy which may become an angry defiance.” Among his
original observations is that persons with a pronounced anal character are usually convinced
that they can do everything better than other people: “they must do everything themselves.”
The next important contribution to the understanding of the ennea-type I syndrome was
that of Reich, who writes of it:

“Even if the neurotic compulsive sense of order is not present, a pedantic sense of order is
typical of the compulsive character.” “In both big and small things, he lives his life according to
a preconceived, irrevocable pattern …”

In addition, Reich points out the presence of circumstantial, ruminative thinking, indecision, doubt
and distrust hidden by an appearance of strong reserve and self-possession. He agrees with Freud’s observation of parsimony, especially the form of frugality and also shares the interpretation of
the character as deriving from anal eroticism. More importantly, however, he underscores what
might be viewed as the other side of self-possession: emotional blockage. “He is just as illdisposed
towards affects as he is acutely inaccessible to them. He is usually even-tempered,
lukewarm in his displays of both love and hate. In some cases this can develop into a
complete affect-block.”

It is not surprising that Freud and others have been more aware of thriftiness than of
anger in “anal character,” for parsimony and austerity are behavioral traits, while anger is
mostly an unconscious motive in the personality under discussion. Yet, true as it may be that
the tendency to economize and to amass wealth can be present in ennea-type I, I believe that
Freud, Abraham and Reich were inadvertently considering together two different syndromes
when they discussed anal character: two syndromes (our anger and avarice ennea-types)
mapped at the antipodes of the enneagram, and which yet share the quality of being superego
driven, rigid and controlled.

While “anal character” is a rather ambiguous concept, we also find in Wilhelm Reich the
description of a personality that corresponds more purely to our perfectionist: his case of
“aristocratic character,” discussed in Character Analysis in support of some general ideas on the
function of character. He describes his patient as having “a reserved countenance,” and being
serious and somewhat arrogant; “his measured, noble stride caught one’s attention … it was
evident he avoided—or concealed—any hate or excitement … his speech was well phrased
and balanced, soft and eloquent …” “As he lay on the couch, there was little if any change in
his composure and refinement”…”Perhaps it was merely an insignificant … that one day
‘aristocratic’ occurred to me for his behaviour,” Reich comments, “I told him he was playing
the role of an English lord” he proceeds, and goes on to discuss in this patient, who has never
masturbated during puberty, being aristocratic served as a defense against sexual excitation: “A
noble man doesn’t do such things.”

The syndrome we have been discussing is today identified in the American DSM III 13 as
compulsive personality disorder. The following cues are offered by this manual for the
diagnosis of this personality:

The syndrome we have been discussing is today identifed in the American DSM III 13 as
compulsive personality disorder. The following cues are offered by this manual for the
diagnosis of this personality:

1. Restrained affectivity (e.g., appears unrelaxed, tense, joyless and grim; emotional
expression is kept under tight control).
2. Conscientious self-image (e.g., sees self as industrious, dependable and efficient; values
self-discipline, prudence and loyalty).
3. Interpersonal respectfulness (e.g., exhibits unusual adherence to social conventions and
properties; prefers polite, formal and correct personal relationships).
4. Cognitive constriction (e.g., constructs world in terms of rules, regulations, hierarchies;
is unimaginative, indecisive and upset by unfamiliar or novel ideas or customs).
5. Behavioral rigidity (e.g., keeps a well-structured, highly regulated and repetitive life
pattern; reports preference for organized, methodical and meticulous work).

Here follows the picture of the behavioral features of compulsive personality in the words
of Theodore Millon:
“The grim and cheerless demeanor of compulsives is often quite striking. This is not to say
that they are invariablyglum or downcast but rather to convey their characteristic air of
austerity and serious-mindedness. Posture and movement reflect their underlying tightness, a
tense control of emotions that are kept well in check… . The social behavior of compulsives
may be characterized as polite and formal. They relate to others in terms of rank or status; that
is, they tend to be authoritarian rather than equalitarian in their outlook.”

This is reflected in their contrasting behavior with ‘superiors’ as opposed to ‘inferiors.’
Compulsive personalities are deferential, ingratiating, and even obsequious with their
superiors, going out of their way to impress them with their efficiency and serious-mindedness.
Many seek the reassurance and approval of their position. These behaviors contrast markedly
with their attitudes toward subordinates. Here the compulsive is quite autocratic and
condemnatory, often appearing pompous and self-righteous. This haughty and deprecatory
manner is usually cloaked behind regulations and legalities. Not untypically, compulsives will
justify their aggressive intentions by recourse to rules or authorities higher than themselves.”

In the final elaboration that Karen Horney left us of her clinical experience, Neurosis and
Human Growth, she groups together three character types under a general label of “the
expansive solutions.” These are approaches to life through mastery, in which the individual
embraces early in life as a solution to conflicts a strategy of “moving against” others (in
contrast to the orientations of those who move seductively “toward” and fearfully “away from”
others). One of these three forms of the “solution of mastery” (or “moving against”) she calls
“perfectionistic” and though she describes it without reference to the earlier “anal” and
“compulsive” types in the literature, she contributes substantially to the psychodynamic
understanding of the syndrome in question. I quote her:

basis looks down onto others. His arrogant contempt for others, though is hidden from himself
as well—behind polished friendliness, because his verystandards prohibit such ‘irregular
feelings.’ His way of beclouding the issue of unfulfilled shoulds are twofold. In contrast to the
narcissistic type, he does make strenuous efforts to measure up to his shoulds by fulfilling
duties and obligations, by polite and orderly manners, by not telling obvious lies, etc. When
speaking of perfectionist people, we often think merely of those who keep meticulous order,
are overly punctilious and punctual, have to find just the right word, or must wear just the
right necktie or hat. But these are only superficial aspects of their need to attain the highest
degree of excellence. What really matters is not those petty details but the flawless excellence
of the whole conduct in life. But since all he can achieve is behavioristic perfection, another
device is necessary. This is to equate in his mind standards and actualities—knowing about
moral values and being a good person… . The self-deception involved is all the more hidden
from him since, in reference to others, he may insist upon their actually living up to his
standards of perfection and despise them for failing to do so. His own self-condemnment is
thus externalized.

“As confirmation of his opinion of himself, he needs respect from others rather than
glowing admiration (which he bends to scorn). Accordingly his claims are based less on a
‘naive’ belief in his greatness than on a ‘deal’ he had secretly made with life. Because he is fair,
just, dutiful, he is entitled to fair treatment by others and by life in general. This conviction of
an infallible justice operating in life gives him a feeling of mastery. His own perfection
therefore is not only a means to superiority but also one to control life. The idea of undeserved
fortune, whether good or bad, is alien to him. His own success, prosperity or good health is
therefore, less something to be enjoyed than a proof of his virtue.”

We may discern the personality under consideration in Jung’s extraverted thinking type:
is a pure type—is to make all his activities dependent on intellectual conclusions, which in
the last resort are always oriented by objective data, whether these be external facts or
generally accepted ideas. This type ofman elevates objective reality, or an objectively oriented
intellectual formula, into the ruling principle not only for himself but for his whole
environment. By this formula good and evil are measured, and beauty and ugliness determined.
Everything that agrees with this formula is right, everything that contradicts it is wrong, and
anything that passes by it indifferently is merely incidental. Because this formula seems to
embody the entire meaning of life, it is made into a universal law which must be put into
effect everywhere all the time, both individual and collectively. Just as the extraverted thinking
type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for their own good, everybody round him must
obey it too, for whoever refuses to obey it is wrong—he is resisting the universal law, and is
therefore unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to
tolerate exceptions; his ideal must under all circumstances be realized, for in his eyes it is the
purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and therefore must also be a universally
valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of mankind. This is not from any great love
for his neighbor, but from the higher standpoint of justice and truth. Anything in his own
nature that appears to invalidate this formula is a mere imperfection, an accidental failure,
something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, clearly
pathological. If tolerance for the sick, the suffering, or the abnormal should chance to be an
ingredient of the formula, special provisions will be made for human societies, hospitals,
prisons, missions, and so on, or at least extensive plans will be drawn up.
Generally the motive of justice and truth is not suffcient to ensure the actual execution of
such projects; for this, real Christian charity is needed, and this has more to do with feelings
than with any intellectual formula. ‘Oughts’ and ‘musts’ bulk large in this program. If the
formula is broad enough, this type may play a very useful role in social life as a reformer or
public prosecutor or purifier of conscience, or as the propagator of important innovations. But
the more rigid the formula, the more he develops into a martinet, a quibbler, and a prig, who
would like to force himself and others into one world. Here we have the two extremes
between which the majority of these types move.”

In the domain of testing applications of Jungian typology the best fit is to be found in the
“ESTJ” (extraverted, withpredominance of sensation over intuition, thinking over feeling,
judgment over perception). David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates say of these scorers that the best
adjective to describe them would be “responsible.”

In the domain of homeopathic medicine the personality picture similar to ennea-type I has
been described in connection with individuals who are specifically helped by the use of
Arsenicum. Thus, in Portraits of Homoeopathic Medicines Catherine R. Coulter writes of
Arsenicum personality as “the perfectionist par excellence.” She describes in detail the
Arsenicum child’s conscientious and thorough nature.

Corollaries of perfection are to be found in the adult proper compulsively reworking
things, never satisfied with results, as in the case of the professor who endlessly rewrites his
lectures, and a concomitant anxiety of feeling unprepared, which makes the Arsenicum
disposition the very antithesis of relaxation. Another corollary is ordinationness, and still
another self-criticism. She also describes a strong competitiveness that goes hand-in-hand with
the ambition to be the best.

Another word Coulter introduces in the description of Arsenicum is fastidiousness
—applied to compulsive orderliness, thus: “… In all spheres he is ultra-’picky,’ and, in his
intolerance of everything slipshod, irritated at any clumsiness—dropping a dish, overturning a
glass, spilling food—his own as well as another’s.” Still another aspect of perfection mentioned
in the case of Arsenicum is meticulousness—” ‘conscientious about tri)es’: Kent.” Says Coulter:
“his work manifests that particular ‘finishing touch’—that final polish—that reveals a
meticulous attention to detail.”

Very characteristic of ennea-type I is the anxiety described in connection with Arsenicum
Album—an anxiety that has to do with the anticipation of troubles and with fussy
meticulousness that contributes in making the patient a driven and driving person. Frequent
object of concern to Arsenicum,according to Coulter, is money. “Whether or not he has any, he
thinks and talks about it a great deal, frequently lamenting his poverty or the high cost of
living. His liking for money is stronger than that of most constitutional types, and he can even
be ‘avaricious’ (Hering)… .”

Also congruent with ennea-type I is the description of Arsenicum as a domineering type:
“He takes the lead in personal relations, determining their scope and tone, and leaving others
no choice but to comply … The domineering Arsenicum cannot abide others being in charge
and insists on making all decisions himself… .”

Further remarks in Coulter’s description of the Arsenicum type are the overintellectualizing
tendency, a concern with “the meaning of every symptom,” and a medical
“one-upmanship” that “makes him distrustful even of those from whom he is seeking help.”
She reports that, while “Many constitutional types dislike any dietary restrictions … Arsenicum
loves being placed on a diet and will religiously follow the most Spartan regime. He not only
delights in nutritional fads, but the necessity of a special diet certifies the seriousness of his
condition… .”

The correspondence of the Arsenicum personality of homeopathy to our ennea-type I is
made even more explicit by Coulter’s mention of a literacy example-Dickens’ Miss Betsey in
David Copperfield “whose snippy, persnickety, and at times fearsome exterior conceals a
highly developed moral delicacy and integrity.”

I see the reflection of ennea-type I not only in Arsenicum, but also in Carcinosin (a
remedy “made from the scirrhous cancer of the breast”), inasmuch, as Coulter points out, it is
related to a “patient where there is a strong history of excessive parental control and pressure
… or an excessive sense of duty (Foubister).”19 Since Carcinosin also fits the treatment of an
over-responsible, “preoccupied” (Templeton) individual, it particularly seems to relate to a subtype
within ennea-type I characterized precisely by an over-responsible perfectionistic anxiety.

3. Trait Structure

In what follows, I have undertaken to show something of the structure of the
perfectionistic character in terms of the underlying traits that may be discerned through a
conceptual analysis of some hundred and seventy descriptors.

Anger

More than a trait among others, “anger” may be regarded a generalized emotional
background and original root of this character structure. The more specific manifestation of the
emotional experience of anger is resentment, and this is most commonly felt in connection
with a sense of injustice in face of the responsibilities and efforts the individual undertakes in
larger measure than others. It is inseparable from the criticism of others (or significant others)
for displaying less zeal, and sometimes it involves the adoption of a martyr role. The most
visible expression of anger occurs when it is perceived as justified, and can in such cases take
the form of vehement “righteous indignation.”

In addition, anger is present in the form of irritation, reproach and hatefulness that remain
largely unexpressed, since perceived destructiveness conflicts with the virtuous self-image
characteristic of the type. Beyond the perception of anger at an emotional level, however, we
may say that the passion of anger permeates the whole of ennea-type I character and is the
dynamic root of drives or attitudes such as we discuss in connection with the remaining
clusters: criticality, demandingness, dominance and assertiveness, perfectionism, over-control,
self-criticism and discipline.

Criticality

If conscious and manifest anger is not always one of the most striking characteristics of
this personality, the more common traits in the type may be understood as derivatives of
anger, expressions of unconscious anger or anger equivalents.

One of these is criticality, which is not only manifest in explicit fault finding, but
sometimes creates a subtle atmosphere that causes others to feel awkward or guilty. Criticality
may be described as intellectual anger more or less unconscious of its motive. I say this
because, even though it is possible that criticism occurs in the context of felt anger, the most
salient quality of this criticality is a sense of constructive intent, a desire to make others or
oneself better. Through intellectual criticism, thus, anger is not only expressed but justified and
rationalized and, through this, denied.

Moral reproaches are another form of perfectionistic disapproval and not just expressions
of anger, but a form of manipulation in the service of unacknowledged demandingness
—whereby “I want” is transformed into “You should.” Accusation thus entails the hope of
affecting somebody’s behaviors in the direction of one’s wishes.

A specific form of criticality in ennea-type I is that bound to ethnocentrism and other
forms of prejudice, in which case there is vilification, invalidation and the wish to “reform”
inquisitorially those who constitute an outgroup to one’s race, nation, class, church, “Crusader,”
and so on. [Displaying the mechanism of “authoritarian aggression” (described by Adorno,
Sanford, et al.,) anger towards the ingroup’s authority is repressed, inhibited, and displaced
onto those below in the hierarchical ladder and especially those in the outgroup—who then
become scapegoats.]

Demandingness

Demandingness also can be understood as an expression of anger: a vindictive overassertiveness
in regard to one’s wishes in response to early frustration. Along with
demandingness proper we may group together characteristics such as those which make these
individuals the most disciplinarian both in the sense of inhibiting spontaneity and the pursuit
of pleasure in others as well as exacting hard work and excellent performance. They tend to
sermonize, preach and teach without regard for the appropriateness of such a role, eventhough
this compulsive characteristic of theirs may find its niche in activities such as those of school
teacher and preacher.

Together with this corrective orientation is that of being controlling, and this not only in
relation to people but to environments or personal appearance: an obsessive is likely to prefer
a highly “manicured” garden, for instance, where plants are in clear order and trees pruned
into artificial shape, over one that conveys a “Taoistic” organic complexity.

Dominance

Though already implicit in intellectual criticism, which would be without force if not in a
context of moral or intellectual authority, and implicit also in the controlling-demandingdisciplinarian
characteristic (for how would that be effective without authority), it seems
appropriate to regard dominance as a relatively independent trait, comprising such descriptors
as an autocratic style, a self-confident and dignified assertiveness, an aristocratic self-concept
and a superior, haughty, disdainful and perhaps condescending and patronizing demeanor.
Dominance, too, may be regarded as an implicit expression or a transformation of anger, yet
this orientation towards a position of power entails subordinate strategies as the above and
also a sense of entitlement on the basis of high standards, diligence, cultural and family
background, intelligence, and so on.

Perfectionism

Most characteristically, however, the pursuit of mastery in the anger type implies the
endorsement of the moral system or human hierarchy in which authority is vested. It may be
said that the perfectionist is more obedient to the abstract authority of norms or office than the
concrete authority of persons. Also, as Millon remarks, “people with obsessive personality not
only do adhere to societal rules and customs, but vigorously espouse and defend them.” Such
vehement interest in principles, morals and ideals is not only an expression of submission to
the demands of a strong superego, but, interpersonally, an instrument of manipulation and
dominance, for these enthusiasticallyendorsed norms are imposed on others and, as was
commented above, serve as a cover for personal wishes and demands. Yet ennea-type I
individuals are not only oriented to “Law and Order,” and themselves obedient to norms, they
also subordinate themselves to people in the position of unquestionable authority.

The emphatic endorsement of norms and sanctioned authority usually implies a
conservative orientation or, to adopt David Riesman’s language, the tendency to be “tradition
directed,” (a trait shared with ennea-type IX). It is hard to separate, except conceptually, two
aspects of perfectionism: the cathexis of ideal standards, i.e., the vehement endorsement of
norms and the “perfectionistic intention,” i.e., a striving to be better. Both kinds of “good
intention” support a sense of personal goodness, kindness, and disinterestedness, and distract
the individual from the preconscious perception of self as angry, evil, and selfish. (Among the
descriptors grouped in the cluster are included “good boy/girl,” “goody-goody,” “honest,” “fair,”
“formal,” “moral,” and so on.)

Not only is compulsive virtue a derivative of anger through the operation of reaction
formation, it is also the expression of anger turned inwards, for it amounts to becoming one’s
own harsh critic, policeman, and disciplinarian. Also, we may conceive a group of traits,
ranging from orderliness and cleanliness to a puritanical disposition, as a means to evoke
affection through merit and a response to an early emotional frustration.

Particularly important for the therapeutic process, is the understanding of how
perfectionism serves anger by preventing its acknowledgment. More specifically, it serves (by
supporting felt entitlement), the unconscious expression of anger as dominance, criticality, and
demandingness. The image of the crusader may serve as a paradigm for this situation: one who
is entitled to break skulls in virtue of the excellence of his cause and his noble aspirations.
When the strategy maneuver is visible enough, we find it appropriate to speak not only of
“compulsive” virtue but of “hypocritical” virtue—for even though (as Horney points out) a
certain level of honesty is characteristic of the perfectionist, his obsessive preoccupation with
right and wrong, or good and bad, entails an unconscious dishonesty in its intent.

From the preceding analysis it is clear that the psychodynamic relation between anger and
perfectionism is reciprocal: just as we may surmise that the strategy of striving to do better has
been preceded by anger in the course of early development and continues to be fueled by
unconscious anger, it is easy to understand how anger itself continually arises from selffrustration
and from interpersonal consequences of the irritating activity and rigidity of the
perfectionist.

While I have grouped together under the single label of “perfectionism” those traits
ranging from “love of order,” “law abidingness,” and “an orientation to rules,” to “do-goodism”
and “dutiful nurturance,” such as make people adopt fathering or mothering roles toward
others, I have grouped the three traits of “over-control,” “self-criticism,” and “discipline”
separately below. These traits stand in the same relationship to perfectionism as “criticality,”
“demandingness,” and “dominance” stand in relation to perfectionistic anger directed toward
others. Just as criticality, demandingness, and dominance are hard to separate, over-control,
self-criticism, and discipline—three attitudes toward oneself that constitute, we may say, the
underside of perfectionism—are closely related as facets of a single underlying disposition.
Perfectionism may be singled out, along with anger, as a pervasive dynamic factor in the
character and as its root strategy.

Over-Control

What dominance—a transformation of anger—is to others, self-control is to perfectionism.
Excessive control over one’s behaviors goes hand-in-hand with a characteristic rigidity, a sense
of awkwardness, a lack of spontaneity with the consequent diTculty to function in nonstructured
situations and whenever improvisation is required. To others the over-control may
result in boringness. Excessive control over one’s self extends, beyond outer behaviors to
psychological functioning in general, so that thinking becomes excessively rule bound, i.e.
logical and methodical, with loss of creativity and leaps of intuition. Control over feeling, on
the other hand, leadsnot only to the blocking of emotional expression but even to alienation
from emotional experience.

Self-Criticism

What the criticism of others is to anger, self-criticism is to perfectionism. Though selfdisparagement
may not be apparent to the outside observer and tends to be hidden behind a
disparagement may not be apparent to the outside observer and tends to be hidden behind a
virtuous and self-dignified image, the inability to accept oneself and the process of selfvili-
fication not only are the source of chronic emotional frustration (and unconscious anger)
but an ever present psychodynamic background for the perfectionistic need to try harder in the
pursuit of worthiness.

Discipline

What angry demandingness is to anger, an implicitly hateful and exploitative demanding
from oneself is to perfectionism. Beyond do-goodism proper, i.e., an orientation toward
correction and moral ideas, self-demanding involves a willingness to strive at the expense of
pleasure, which makes ennea-type I individuals hard-working and disciplined as well as overserious.
And just as a vindictive element may be discerned in interpersonal demands, a
masochistic element may be discerned in the postponement of pleasure and natural impulses,
for beyond a mere subordination of pleasure to duty the individual develops, to a greater or
lesser extent, a “puritanical” disposition of being opposed to pleasure and the play of instinct.

4. Defense Mechanisms

There is wide spread agreement as to the close association between the mechanisms of
reaction formation, reparation and undoing with obsessiveness. These three constitute
variations of a single pattern of doing something good to over-compensate for something felt
to be bad, and I will concentrate on reaction formation, for reparation and undoingare more
specifically connected to the symptoms of obsessive-compulsive neurosis, while reaction
formation may be regarded as the more universal of the three and the most intimately
connected with obsessive personality or perfectionistic character.

The notion of reaction formation was proposed by Freud as early as 1905 in his three
essays on A Sexual Theory, where he observed that “opposing psiquic forces” arise in the
service of suppressing uncomfortable sensations through the mobilization of “disgust, modesty,
and morality.” As is well known, his interpretation posits that a drive toward soiling during
the child’s anal sadistic stage of development is defended against through disgust and will
result in an excessive concern with cleanliness. I think a consideration of obsessive personality
suggests that reaction formation is not only a matter of covering up something through the
opposite, but a distracting oneself from the awareness of certain impulses through opposite
activities. Even when it is not exactly the case that morally approved action serves to distract
the person from the awareness of sexuality and angry rebellion, we can say that it is intention
—i.e., a disposition to action that serves the function of remaining unconscious of emotions.

We may say that reaction formation underlies and is also the mental operation through
which the psychological energy of anger is transformed into that of obsessive “drivenness.”
Moreover reaction formation may be regarded as the process indicating the transformation of
gluttony into anger. For the self-indulgence of gluttony constitutes a most avoided attitude of
the perfectionist—whose character is the least self-indulgent of all, the most highly endowed
with a “virtuous austerity.”

It is not only the case of a repression of oral passive needs in view of the active and selfreliant
attitude of anger, but a transformation: for we may consider anger as an alternative way
of getting a selfsame underlying love-need satisfied—not through a hedonistic regression, but
through an anhedonic progression to a premature self-control and increased tolerance of
frustration. Rather than being a mere issue of relinquishing oral expectations, as it might
superficially seem, the case of anger is one in which expectations are assertively endorsed, yet
at the same time rationalized as legitimate demands. According to this analysis, then, reaction
formation both generates anger andconstitutes a defense against its recognition, in addition to
constituting the underlying mechanism for perfectionism, moralism, conscious benevolence,
“well-intended” criticality, anhedonic ethic of hard work, and so on.

5. Etiological and Further Psychodynamic Remarks

I find that generally speaking ennea-type I individuals are pyknics and most commonly
ectopenic mesoendomorphs. There are exceptions, however, mostly among those of the social
subtype who tend to be athletic but slender and wiry. It is possible to think that the
aggressiveness of ennea-type I is supported by somatotonia in their inborn temperament.

Freud, who was the first to observe the character disposition that we are here labeling as
ennea-type I, was also the first to formulate a theory concerning its etiology: the toilet training
theory, according to which an excessive concern with cleanliness and orderliness, as well as the
retentiveness in individuals with an “anal personality” is explained as a result of premature or
exaggerated demands of cleanliness at the toilet training period, and also understood in terms
of the attempt todeny through over-compensation an angry desire to soil and let go of control.
Later psychoanalytic observation also recognized that the “retentive” individual harbors an
(“oral aggressive”) desire to soil and let go of control and defends against the forbidden wish
with an over-compensatory, over-formal goody-goodyness.

Since Freud’s time this theory has been mostly revised by Erikson, who proposes that it is
not only the issue of sphincter-control that we should see as being the focus of parental overcontrol
and rebellion, but that of locomotion, mastered during the same stage. Underlying
both, Erikson claims, is the issue of an autonomy that asserts or over-asserts itself. I think that
we can even go further and say with Fromm that this, like every other personality orientation,
is a way of coping with life in general; that has arisen in response to a broader situation than
sphincter control—a generalized situation of excessive demands and frustration in regard to
recognition. I quote from a group reporting on the origin of their shared character:

“Almost all of us agreed that we all took responsibility early. It wasn’t given to us, but we
took it. From the age of three all the way up, you know people remembered early in
childhood up to the age of nine and then of course continued it through our adolescent and
adult life. Often it was around, being, taking care of the children, I mean being that person
that saw that the kids got fed and clothed and sent where they were supposed to be sent. Kind
of assuming almost in a sense the mother’s role a little bit and a lot of, and then wanting to be
recognized almost all of us felt that no matter how hard we tried what we did and tried
harder and harder to be good and to do those things because we wanted to get some kind of
recognition or acknowledgment from our parents, and we never felt it.”

Even so, we may continue to speak of the toilet training situation as paradigmatic and
symbolic of the personality disposition, for the perfectionist has not only developed under
stringent demands of striving harder for some desired behavior and exerting utmost control
over his own organism, but is one who inwardly rebels angrily in face of both external and
internalized control, and who has learned to alienate from hisawareness and inhibit the
manifestations of this anger through the mechanism of reaction formation.

It is easy to trace back the motivation to strive hard in the perfectionist to an early
experience of affective dissatisfaction so that seeking to be a better person represents a hope of
gaining more approval or closeness from one of the parents. Later in life, however, such
striving also takes on a competitive implication, as if saying to father or mother: “I will be
better than you and rise beyond your capacity to evaluate me: I will show you!”: a vindictive
turn in which there is not only in success a hope but also a claim and a vindictive denigration.

I find ennea-type I somewhat more frequent among women. And among them I find that
the parent for whose love the little girl has striven and who has been perceived as cold is more
often the father. Besides an atmosphere of love scarcity, however, there is also in perfectionistic
striving an element of modeling, a taking on by the subject of the hard-working, perfectionistic
personality of one or another parent. Frequently there is a perfectionistic father or mother in
the family of the perfectionist, and when not, there is commonly an ennea-type VI father of an
over-dutiful disposition (which has much in common with the demanding perfectionist).

The over all situation is one of excessive demands coupled with scant acknowledgment, so
the child has felt the need to push on and on in an atmosphere of sustained frustration.

It is my impression that an over-accommodating mother (ennea-types IX or VI) may
contribute to the unmitigated power of an over-demanding and distant father. It would seem
that in these cases an excessively symbiotic or an excessively timid mother betrays the child
out of a comparatively greater need to accommodate her excessively demanding mate.

The individual’s response to the situation thus far described involves not only an attitude
of “See how good I am, will you now love me”, but also one of claiming a recognition or
affection through an appeal to moral justice, a protest: “See how good I am—you owe me
respect and recognition.” Towards earning this recognition and respect that are felt to be
missing (at first from parents, later in people in general) the child learns tobecome a little
attorney for himself or herself, as well as a moralist who specializes in making others play by
the rules.

As an outcome of this process, the search for love that kindled perfectionistic development
becomes the search for right and respectability—which characterizes this hard and distant
personality style and interferes with the satisfaction of a still latent—though repressed—need
for tenderness.

6. Existential Psychodynamics

Before considering the existential psychodynamics of ennea-type I, it may be well to
reiterate the postulate that is to be articulated through the contemplation of the nine characters
in the book: that passions arise out of a background of ontic obscuration; that the loss of a
sense of I-am-ness sustains a craving-for-being that is manifested in the differentiated form of
the ego’s nine basic emotions.

In the case of ennea-type I, the proximity of the character to that of psychospiritual
laziness (indeed the fact of being a hybrid between it and pride) makes the issue of ontic
obscuration something that lies near the foreground of their psychological style. This is to say
that there is in the life-attitude of ennea-type I a loss of the sense of being which, as is the case
in the three characters at the upper region of the enneagram, manifests as an “unconsciousness
of unconsciousness” that gives them a particular self-satisfaction, opposite to felt deficiency or
to “poverty in spirit” of those at the bottom of the enneagram. Unconscious dissatisfaction,
however, is converted into the hottest of the passions, which, however ignored by active
unconsciousness, underlies the quality of interpersonal relationships.

While ontic obscuration involves a sort of psychological coarsening in the case of type VIII
and type IX psychology as will be seen, in type I it is covered up by an excessive refinement; it
could be said that reactive formation also takes place at the ontic level: perceived ontic
deficiency becomes stimulus for compensation through activities purporting to sustain false
abundance. The main activity that promises abundance to theennea-type I mind is the
enactment of perfection. We might say that precisely in virtue of this obscuration, the search
for being can turn into a search for the substitute being of the good life, in which behavior fits
an extrinsic criterion of value. The wrathful are in special need, however, of understanding
Lao-Tse’s statement:

“Virtue (Te) does not seek to be virtuous;
precisely because of this it is virtue.”

In other words: Virtue, by not being “virtuous,” is virtue.

It would be too narrow, however, to say that the substitute for being in type I is virtue, for
sometimes the quality of life is not so much a moralistic one but one with the quality of
“correction,” a goodness of fit between behavior and a world of principles; or a goodness of
fit between ongoing life and some implicit or explicit code.

On the whole, it may be said that the preconscious perception of being-scarcity and the
imagination of destructiveness and evil in ennea-type I is compensated for with an impulse to
being a “person of character”: one endowed with a certain over-stability, a certain strength to
resist temptations and stand by what is right. Also, loss of being and value supports activity
designed to sustain the impression of somebody worthy which, as we have seen, is sought
through a sort of worship of goodness and worthiness.

In the Nasruddin corpus of jokes, ennea-type I may be recognized in the grammarian
whom Nasruddin, as boatman, carries to “the other shore.” After Nasruddin’s answers some
inquiry from the grammarian with incorrect speech, the grammarian asks “Haven’t you studied
grammar?” At Nasruddin’s answering to the effect that this was not the case, he proffers out of
his righteousness and well informed self-satisfaction, “You have lost half of your life.” Later,
Nasruddin asks the grammarian “Do you know how to swim?” And since our worthy
grammarian responds that this is not the case, Nasruddin remarks, “Then you have lost your
whole life, for we’re sinking.”

The joke poignantly alludes to the dissociation between the “grammarian mentality” and
life. A process of rigidificationand loss of meaning through excessive concern for form and
detail has taken place. Even when the pursuit of goodness rather than that of formal
correction, such as in school matters, there is beyond consciously cultivated kindness a coldness
that entails both lovelessness and insubstantiality, or being-loss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
This was taken from Naranjo's book called Character and Neurosis.
Thank you, I've actually being trying to hunt down this book, as I've seen Naranjo's name mentioned on this board and elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sina and cyamitide

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
When speaking of perfectionist people, we often think merely of those who keep meticulous order,
are overly punctilious and punctual, have to find just the right word, or must wear just the
right necktie or hat. But these are only superficial aspects of their need to attain the highest
degree of excellence. What really matters is not those petty details but the flawless excellence
of the whole conduct in life. But since all he can achieve is behavioristic perfection, another
device is necessary. This is to equate in his mind standards and actualities—knowing about
moral values and being a good person
… . The self-deception involved is all the more hidden
from him since, in reference to others, he may insist upon their actually living up to his
standards of perfection and despise them for failing to do so. His own self-condemnment is
thus externalized.
Um, damn. This needs to be posted in some kind of mistype thread for people who don't think they're ones because they're not "perfectionists." The italicized portion, especially, describes exactly the kind of perfectionism that messes with a one's mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
This book is awesome, I read most of it last month. Highly recommended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,315 Posts
@summer solstice

Teal = Applicable
Maroon = Not Applicable
Orange = Partially Applicable
3. Trait Structure


In what follows, I have undertaken to show something of the structure of the
perfectionistic character in terms of the underlying traits that may be discerned through a
conceptual analysis of some hundred and seventy descriptors.


Anger


More than a trait among others, “anger” may be regarded a generalized emotional
background and original root of this character structure. The more specific manifestation of the
emotional experience of anger is resentment, and this is most commonly felt in connection
with a sense of injustice in face of the responsibilities and efforts the individual undertakes in
larger measure than others. It is inseparable from the criticism of others (or significant others)
for displaying less zeal, and sometimes it involves the adoption of a martyr role. The most
visible expression of anger occurs when it is perceived as justified, and can in such cases take
the form of vehement “righteous indignation.”


In addition, anger is present in the form of irritation, reproach and hatefulness that remain
largely unexpressed, since perceived destructiveness conflicts with the virtuous self-image
characteristic of the type. Beyond the perception of anger at an emotional level, however, we
may say that the passion of anger permeates the whole of ennea-type I character and is the
dynamic root of drives or attitudes such as we discuss in connection with the remaining
clusters: criticality, demandingness, dominance and assertiveness, perfectionism, over-control,
self-criticism and discipline.


Criticality


If conscious and manifest anger is not always one of the most striking characteristics of
this personality, the more common traits in the type may be understood as derivatives of
anger, expressions of unconscious anger or anger equivalents.


One of these is criticality, which is not only manifest in explicit fault finding, but
sometimes creates a subtle atmosphere that causes others to feel awkward or guilty. Criticality
may be described as intellectual anger more or less unconscious of its motive. I say this
because, even though it is possible that criticism occurs in the context of felt anger, the most
salient quality of this criticality is a sense of constructive intent, a desire to make others or
oneself better. Through intellectual criticism, thus, anger is not only expressed but justified and
rationalized and, through this, denied.


Moral reproaches are another form of perfectionistic disapproval and not just expressions
of anger, but a form of manipulation in the service of unacknowledged demandingness
—whereby “I want” is transformed into “You should.” Accusation thus entails the hope of
affecting somebody’s behaviors in the direction of one’s wishes.


A specific form of criticality in ennea-type I is that bound to ethnocentrism and other
forms of prejudice, in which case there is vilification, invalidation and the wish to “reform”
inquisitorially those who constitute an outgroup to one’s race, nation, class, church, “Crusader,”
and so on. [Displaying the mechanism of “authoritarian aggression” (described by Adorno,
Sanford, et al.,) anger towards the ingroup’s authority is repressed, inhibited, and displaced
onto those below in the hierarchical ladder and especially those in the outgroup—who then
become scapegoats.]


Demandingness


Demandingness also can be understood as an expression of anger: a vindictive overassertiveness
in regard to one’s wishes in response to early frustration. Along with
demandingness proper we may group together characteristics such as those which make these
individuals the most disciplinarian both in the sense of inhibiting spontaneity and the pursuit
of pleasure in others as well as exacting hard work and excellent performance. They tend to
sermonize, preach and teach without regard for the appropriateness of such a role, eventhough
this compulsive characteristic of theirs may find its niche in activities such as those of school
teacher and preacher.


Together with this corrective orientation is that of being controlling, and this not only in
relation to people but to environments or personal appearance: an obsessive is likely to prefer
a highly “manicured” garden, for instance, where plants are in clear order and trees pruned
into artificial shape, over one that conveys a “Taoistic” organic complexity.


Dominance


Though already implicit in intellectual criticism, which would be without force if not in a
context of moral or intellectual authority, and implicit also in the controlling-demandingdisciplinarian
characteristic (for how would that be effective without authority), it seems
appropriate to regard dominance as a relatively independent trait, comprising such descriptors
as an autocratic style, a self-confident and dignified assertiveness, an aristocratic self-concept
and a superior, haughty, disdainful and perhaps condescending and patronizing demeanor.
Dominance, too, may be regarded as an implicit expression or a transformation of anger, yet
this orientation towards a position of power entails subordinate strategies as the above and
also a sense of entitlement on the basis of high standards, diligence, cultural and family
background, intelligence, and so on.


Perfectionism


Most characteristically, however, the pursuit of mastery in the anger type implies the
endorsement of the moral system or human hierarchy in which authority is vested. It may be
said that the perfectionist is more obedient to the abstract authority of norms or office than the
concrete authority of persons. Also, as Millon remarks, “people with obsessive personality not
only do adhere to societal rules and customs, but vigorously espouse and defend them.” Such
vehement interest in principles, morals and ideals is not only an expression of submission to
the demands of a strong superego, but, interpersonally, an instrument of manipulation and
dominance, for these enthusiasticallyendorsed norms are imposed on others and, as was
commented above, serve as a cover for personal wishes and demands. Yet ennea-type I
individuals are not only oriented to “Law and Order,” and themselves obedient to norms, they
also subordinate themselves to people in the position of unquestionable authority.


The emphatic endorsement of norms and sanctioned authority usually implies a
conservative orientation or, to adopt David Riesman’s language, the tendency to be “tradition
directed,” (a trait shared with ennea-type IX). It is hard to separate, except conceptually, two
aspects of perfectionism: the cathexis of ideal standards, i.e., the vehement endorsement of
norms and the “perfectionistic intention,” i.e., a striving to be better. Both kinds of “good
intention” support a sense of personal goodness, kindness, and disinterestedness, and distract
the individual from the preconscious perception of self as angry, evil, and selfish. (Among the
descriptors grouped in the cluster are included “good boy/girl,” “goody-goody,” “honest,” “fair,”
“formal,” “moral,” and so on.)


Not only is compulsive virtue a derivative of anger through the operation of reaction
formation, it is also the expression of anger turned inwards, for it amounts to becoming one’s
own harsh critic, policeman, and disciplinarian. Also, we may conceive a group of traits,
ranging from orderliness and cleanliness to a puritanical disposition, as a means to evoke
affection through merit and a response to an early emotional frustration.


Particularly important for the therapeutic process, is the understanding of how
perfectionism serves anger by preventing its acknowledgment. More specifically, it serves (by
supporting felt entitlement), the unconscious expression of anger as dominance, criticality, and
demandingness. The image of the crusader may serve as a paradigm for this situation: one who
is entitled to break skulls in virtue of the excellence of his cause and his noble aspirations.
When the strategy maneuver is visible enough, we find it appropriate to speak not only of
“compulsive” virtue but of “hypocritical” virtue—for even though (as Horney points out) a
certain level of honesty is characteristic of the perfectionist, his obsessive preoccupation with
right and wrong, or good and bad, entails an unconscious dishonesty in its intent.


From the preceding analysis it is clear that the psychodynamic relation between anger and
perfectionism is reciprocal: just as we may surmise that the strategy of striving to do better has
been preceded by anger in the course of early development and continues to be fueled by
unconscious anger, it is easy to understand how anger itself continually arises from selffrustration
and from interpersonal consequences of the irritating activity and rigidity of the
perfectionist.


While I have grouped together under the single label of “perfectionism” those traits
ranging from “love of order,” “law abidingness,” and “an orientation to rules,” to “do-goodism
and “dutiful nurturance,” such as make people adopt fathering or mothering roles toward
others, I have grouped the three traits of “over-control,” “self-criticism,” and “discipline
separately below. These traits stand in the same relationship to perfectionism as “criticality,”
“demandingness,” and “dominance” stand in relation to perfectionistic anger directed toward
others. Just as criticality, demandingness, and dominance are hard to separate, over-control,
self-criticism, and discipline—three attitudes toward oneself that constitute, we may say, the
underside of perfectionism—are closely related as facets of a single underlying disposition.
Perfectionism may be singled out, along with anger, as a pervasive dynamic factor in the
character and as its root strategy.


Over-Control


What dominance—a transformation of anger—is to others, self-control is to perfectionism.
Excessive control over one’s behaviors goes hand-in-hand with a characteristic rigidity, a sense
of awkwardness, a lack of spontaneity with the consequent diTculty to function in nonstructured
situations and whenever improvisation is required. To others the over-control may
result in boringness. Excessive control over one’s self extends, beyond outer behaviors to
psychological functioning in general, so that thinking becomes excessively rule bound, i.e.
logical and methodical, with loss of creativity and leaps of intuition. Control over feeling, on
the other hand, leadsnot only to the blocking of emotional expression but even to alienation
from emotional experience.


Self-Criticism


What the criticism of others is to anger, self-criticism is to perfectionism. Though selfdisparagement
may not be apparent to the outside observer and tends to be hidden behind a
disparagement may not be apparent to the outside observer and tends to be hidden behind a
virtuous and self-dignified image, the inability to accept oneself and the process of selfvili-
fication not only are the source of chronic emotional frustration (and unconscious anger)
but an ever present psychodynamic background for the perfectionistic need to try harder in the
pursuit of worthiness.


Discipline


What angry demandingness is to anger, an implicitly hateful and exploitative demanding
from oneself is to perfectionism. Beyond do-goodism proper, i.e., an orientation toward
correction and moral ideas, self-demanding involves a willingness to strive at the expense of
pleasure, which makes ennea-type I individuals hard-working and disciplined as well as overserious.
And just as a vindictive element may be discerned in interpersonal demands, a
masochistic element may be discerned in the postponement of pleasure and natural impulses,
for beyond a mere subordination of pleasure to duty the individual develops, to a greater or
lesser extent, a “puritanical” disposition of being opposed to pleasure and the play of instinct.
 

·
(ノ´ヮ´)ノ*:・゚✧
Joined
·
5,108 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
I wonder if it's accurate to say that Type 1's are uncreative at all, James Cameron strikes me as a Type 1 and yet he's making movies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I wonder if it's accurate to say that Type 1's are uncreative at all, James Cameron strikes me as a Type 1 and yet he's making movies.
"At all" -- no, of course there will be outliers on both ends. There was a study published by the Enneagram Institute (this one) which showed that 1s received lower scores than some other types on "Innovative" "Creative" and "Adaptable". It's not very clear how they were assessed on these parameters so it can be debated.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2014
Joined
·
11,128 Posts
I wonder if it's accurate to say that Type 1's are uncreative at all, James Cameron strikes me as a Type 1 and yet he's making movies.
"At all" -- no, of course there will be outliers on both ends. There was a study published by the Enneagram Institute (this one) which showed that 1s received lower scores than some other types on "Innovative" "Creative" and "Adaptable". It's not very clear how they were assessed on these parameters so it can be debated.
He also says type 8 are 'unintellectual.' I know very creative 1s, and very intelligent 8s who are interested in intellectual pursuits - so I would say that it's a bit of a stretch. I understand what he means though, if you interpret it more 'intuitively" and think that the traits of each type might be more likely to lead to specific types of pursuits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
@Maybe
What Naranjo meant was not the modern day term of not intellectual, what he really means is that TYpe 8's don't follow logic as they do their gut. Type 8s give their gut reactions preference over intellectual conclusions. This is not to be confused with the modern day term meaning someone who is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Animal

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
He also says type 8 are 'unintellectual.' I know very creative 1s, and very intelligent 8s who are interested in intellectual pursuits - so I would say that it's a bit of a stretch. I understand what he means though, if you interpret it more 'intuitively" and think that the traits of each type might be more likely to lead to specific types of pursuits.
That's the case of dr. Gregory House, an extremely intellectual 8w7 character.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
My friend is a 5-fixed 8 and let me tell you, the man can use his mind like a weapon in a manner that would impress many a 5. ;)
I don't think this is so uncommon.

About your other post, I myself am very inclined towards academic carreer and... ta-da, E1. Also, the three most intellectual persons I've ever met are not even in the mental triad: a narcissist 8w7, a 1w2 and a 4w3 professor of mine.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2014
Joined
·
11,128 Posts
I don't think this is so uncommon.

About your other post, I myself am very inclined towards academic carreer and... ta-da, E1. Also, the three most intellectual persons I've ever met are not even in the mental triad: a narcissist 8w7, a 1w2 and a 4w3 professor of mine.
I'm not 'the most intellectual persons you've ever met' - but I was close to the top of my class almost effortlessly, and if I did not have a music career by the time I was in middle school I might have been valedictorian, but I was a bit distracted with piano lessons, dancing lessons, singing lessons, acting lessons, being in multiple plays in various theater groups, and earning money playing & singing at three bars each week. =p

Not trying to be another 'narcissistic 8w7' but facts are facts. There are a lot of people who are more intellectual than I, and I've met 8s on this forum who are more intellectual/ smarter/ higher IQ/ more accomplished. So I am not saying this for any reason other than to fight the anti-intellectual 8 stereotype. I don't consider myself a genius by any means, but I don't think I'm at the bottom rung of the intellectual ladder either.

That being said, it's my ability to stretch resources and make the most of what I have that has kept me 'at the top' or helped with any success I've had, more than raw intellect. This is probably a stereotype of 8s that is closer to the truth. Regardless of what we start with, we're pragmatists and survivalists and we know how to manage our resources because that is what's important to us; to fight the good fight and master our own destinies. So I might have done better in school than someone with a higher IQ who studied more, because I don't have any guilt about b.s.ing my way through an essay if I must, or doing my homework for one class during a different class. Having good grades was important to me because I wanted to keep my future options open; not because I was "supposed to." It was entirely my choice, and I did exactly as much as I needed to do well, and not an ounce more. I prioritized my music career, and divided my time accordingly, so that I could put MY ALL into music without messing up school. I hardly ever slept, and having a lot of energy is also a reason why 8s might do well.

But a lot of 8s don't prioritize school or consider it important, and since we think of ourselves as the master of our own destinies and don't leave it up to the authorities to choose our path for us, it's likely that a lot of 8s simply choose not to prioritize school, and then even if they are naturally smart, they are considered 'unintellectual.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
I'm not 'the most intellectual persons you've ever met' - but I was close to the top of my class almost effortlessly, and if I did not have a music career by the time I was in middle school I might have been valedictorian, but I was a bit distracted with piano lessons, dancing lessons, singing lessons, acting lessons, being in multiple plays in various theater groups, and earning money playing & singing at three bars each week. =p

Not trying to be another 'narcissistic 8w7' but facts are facts. There are a lot of people who are more intellectual than I, and I've met 8s on this forum who are more intellectual/ smarter/ higher IQ/ more accomplished. So I am not saying this for any reason other than to fight the anti-intellectual 8 stereotype. I don't consider myself a genius by any means, but I don't think I'm at the bottom rung of the intellectual ladder either.

That being said, it's my ability to stretch resources and make the most of what I have that has kept me 'at the top' or helped with any success I've had, more than raw intellect. This is probably a stereotype of 8s that is closer to the truth. Regardless of what we start with, we're pragmatists and survivalists and we know how to manage our resources because that is what's important to us; to fight the good fight and master our own destinies. So I might have done better in school than someone with a higher IQ who studied more, because I don't have any guilt about b.s.ing my way through an essay if I must, or doing my homework for one class during a different class. Having good grades was important to me because I wanted to keep my future options open; not because I was "supposed to." It was entirely my choice, and I did exactly as much as I needed to do well, and not an ounce more. I prioritized my music career, and divided my time accordingly, so that I could put MY ALL into music without messing up school. I hardly ever slept, and having a lot of energy is also a reason why 8s might do well.

But a lot of 8s don't prioritize school or consider it important, and since we think of ourselves as the master of our own destinies and don't leave it up to the authorities to choose our path for us, it's likely that a lot of 8s simply choose not to prioritize school, and then even if they are naturally smart, they are considered 'unintellectual.'
You're to externally referential to be an 8. A lot of 'we' use. Too much justification..lots of buts and 'don't get me wrong here'. Apologetic about actions. Too formal, too [here's my space...I have earned it; look at the proof]. The rawness vibe is missing.
I sense 1 here, and some 6. 3 as well...competitive/drive to succeed.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2014
Joined
·
11,128 Posts
You're to externally referential to be an 8. A lot of 'we' use. Too much justification..lots of buts and 'don't get me wrong here'. Apologetic about actions. Too formal, too [here's my space...I have earned it; look at the proof]. The rawness vibe is missing.
I sense 1 here, and some 6. 3 as well...competitive/drive to succeed.
How flattering :kitteh:

Hmm, it seems I have failed in "earning" the right to parade the label of the glorified enneagram type, 8. Based on your brilliant observations and deep thoughts, I hereby pronounce myself a 163. Thank you for seeing through my character and shedding such a clarifying light on who I am. I can't wait to see more platitudes and presumptions from you.. It is very entertaining and insightful. ;)
 

·
MOTM Jan 2014
Joined
·
11,128 Posts
I also might mention that anyone can have drive to succeed but for different reasons. My drive to succeed was tremendous and that is why I mistyped at 3 at one point. The question is how and why? That is a good place to start for finding someone's enneagram type. If I am to state over simplified platitudes then it would look something like this:

1s: want to succeed because they want it to be done right and they want to pay their own way based on principle - one ought to care for oneself

3s: want to succeed because other people will see them as successful and therefore worthwhile

8s: want to succeed in order to be completely in charge of their own destiny so that no one else has power over the 8

6s: want to succeed for financial security And stability

7s: want to succeed because then there are more options for a good life and they won't be deprived of what they want out of life

The association of "wanting to succeed" with type 3 is misleading. 3 is "the marketing orientation" but not every 3 considers being rich or getting good grades a success. Some 3 somewhere might want to market his image as a hippy or a bohemian and therefore would not want anyone to know he has money. If people buy the image he's selling then he has a feeling of self worth. Being success driven in the business sense is a behavior that can come about through many e types (even 9s) and if anything , money seeking is SP oriented behavior and status is SO instinct behavior. I know a 3 who mistyped at 4 because it was important to him for the world to see him as an artist, even though having money is important to him jus like everyone else - it was his image that he was most concerned with. This is what makes a 3 a 3, not the need to be successful. I mistyped at 3 for that very reason but it has little to do with what 3 is about. Enneagram is about the why, not the what.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top