Personality Cafe banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
574 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
“… Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want. (They are the most frequent perpetrators of the Big Lie, a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth.)” p. 324, Personality Types, riso and hudson

I have an idea of what such a lie might look like, but I want more specific examples-- either from culture/public figures or from your own experience. what are examples of lies that 8s have told or in some way propagated? what comes to mind?
thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
It's important to remember that the passage is talking about unhealthy 8s, and speaking from experience, it takes quite some doing to actually get someone to that level.

Consequently, I doubt you'll find many 8s who've personally utilized the "Big Lie" in any major way, at least not as blatantly as it's made to sound (I don't think smaller instances of deceit, or simply making up a story, count here). It refers more to a technique used by a government to control the state, the most obvious example being the regime of Adolf Hitler.

Beyond that, a more blatant recent example I can think of is in 2003, when American troops had moved into the outskirts of Baghdad, and Saddam Hussein kept insisting, "There are no troops in Baghdad". Now whether this was ever accepted by anyone is debatable, but that's the sort of denial we're looking at.

Another, perhaps better analyzed, instance is of Qaddafi in 2011--"There are no demonstrations--at all--in the streets!" See this clip below.


Obviously, this is a desperate position to resort to, which is why it's classified under "unhealthy behaviors". Though I doubt Qaddafi himself was truly unhealthy, it is an example of when and under which conditions such Lie may be used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
“… Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want. (They are the most frequent perpetrators of the Big Lie, a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth.)” p. 324, Personality Types, riso and hudson

I have an idea of what such a lie might look like, but I want more specific examples-- either from culture/public figures or from your own experience. what are examples of lies that 8s have told or in some way propagated? what comes to mind?
thanks.
Keep in mind that type eights are in the triad anchored by type nine, whose holy idea is Holy Love. This was all before I found the enneagram.

My "big lie" was that no one, especially my parents (I grew up in an abusive childhood, and abuse in my family was inter-generational) loves me. I felt like everyone viewed that I had no right to live, and I used that feeling of perceived rejection to justify my ruthlessness. Amoral would be the kindest way to describe me. Kill or be killed. Lying, cheating, stealing? "I did what I had to do" in order to get what I need/want. No one else was going to do it for me, so I had to. Promises though? I never willingly made promises. I made "promises" to other people, told them what they wanted to hear, in order to get them to fuck off.

I told myself this lie, and I believed in this lie. It was the biggest seed behind my entire misery, leading to a chain of reactions that caused me to be so destructive towards everyone around me, because if I don't destroy them first, then they will destroy me. Lying, cheating, and stealing were the means to the end to destroy them. To break my perceived enemies down at their roots, in an "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" kind of way.

It was mentioned in Maitri's Spiritual Dimension book, where eights felt like they were thrown out of heaven, and ever since then, they reacted in anger at such a mistreatment. If there was such a thing as "God", then I refused to make it more powerful by believing in it. I felt like worship of it was unjust. The fewer people who believed in it, the less power "God" has over "us". And therefore, the weaker its control over me. At some point, (in enneagram terms, it means going 8->5->7), I was actually suicidal. If I couldn't find a way to live in happiness, then I was trying to find a way to die in happiness.

One day, I discovered that it was my fault that I thought this. That I was the cause behind my misery. That I was the cause behind everyone else's (in my immediate social vicinity) misery. It was all my fault. (Type eight's specific reaction is blame.) I had qualities that were worthy of being loved, and it was all my fault for not seeing it, not recognizing it. Not seeing that the actions that very definitely triggered my fear of being controlled were done out of motivations from love. Then, I felt like I *had* to die in order to make up for the destruction I had caused.

Then, once I cognitively realized it, it wasn't a "lie" as much as it was a misunderstanding. This is one of the reasons why type eight's virtue is innocence.

I got better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
It's important to remember that the passage is talking about unhealthy 8s, and speaking from experience, it takes quite some doing to actually get someone to that level.

Consequently, I doubt you'll find many 8s who've personally utilized the "Big Lie" in any major way, at least not as blatantly as it's made to sound (I don't think smaller instances of deceit, or simply making up a story, count here).
...
Obviously, this is a desperate position to resort to, which is why it's classified under "unhealthy behaviors". Though I doubt Qaddafi himself was truly unhealthy, it is an example of when and under which conditions such Lie may be used.
I see your good intentions here. But I still can't help but to be deeply offended.

Your analysis fails here because you missed the extent of the importance of what "vice: lust" (Big) and "Holy Idea: Holy Truth" (Lie) means. It also fails to see how "primary defense mechanism: denial" comes into play to maintain that big lie:

Maitri said:
Eights are predisposed to give everything a more sinister one. For this reason, on the Enneagram of Lies, Diagram 12, which describes the veils through which each type sees reality, the phrase prejudice/false denial occupies Point Eight. His biggest denial is of the optimistic, the upbeat, the hopeful side of things, and it is his primary defense mechanism. He is driven by a profound distrust of other and of life itself, convinced that he must fight to wrest anything good out of the world. It is as though he were afraid of being duped by believing anything positive, so better to see everything from its darkest side than risk being disappointed and let down by reality again. Like Sixes, he lives in an animalistic Darwinian world in which only the fittest survive, but unlike Sixes he identifies with the strong.

Many Eights’ deepest denial is of the source of all goodness: the realm of Being. Rather than feeling the unbearably painful sense that he has been cut off from the Divine, he denies that Being exists. God is to him. It is not that God once existed and now is no more but rather that the whole notion is bullshit in the first place. He becomes a pragmatist, pugnaciously engaging with the shell of the world – what is left when Being is excluded from the picture.

His negation of the multidimensionality of existence may be his deepest denial, but the mechanism of denial functions in large and small ways constantly within his personality. It wards off from his consciousness anything that would be painful to him i.e., anything that might compromise his internal ideal of being strong and powerful. So anything that might make him appear wrong, weak, lacking capacity, or needy is simply disavowed. This runs the gamut from denying actual events to negating inner thoughts and emotions.
These ideas form the core type-eight psychological lynchpins, and I feel like your example was very shallow in comparison, and demonstrates more of type three's usage of deceit than type eight's usage of deceit. Type eight's usage of deceit is far more blatantly and overtly destructive, because destruction is the goal. Eights in general are not known for their subtleties, and especially not unhealthy eights.

I cannot emphasize this enough, but it is absolutely not:
It refers more to a technique used by a government to control the state.
This is especially offensive to me, if for no other reason, than because the opening post started off with traits associated with an enneatype, traits that eights are supposed to relate to on some personal level, and you re-directed it to something impersonal and political in nature. What you said will trigger something (probably anger) in anyone with a significance distortion to Holy Truth. In comparison, even "Scientology" is a more accurate answer to the opening post.

The utilization of the "Big Lie" most importantly refers to the lies eights tell to themselves to justify their treacherous, immoral, and ruthless behavior. It is how the trance/delusion/fixation of unhealthy-average type eight "maintains" itself. It obviously reflects outwardly in the form of lying, cheating, stealing, and breaking promises, and more importantly, it's an obvious indicator of an eight's internal health. When they're unhealthy, when they disintegrate to five, they hide entirely (type five's defense mechanism is isolation): nowhere to be seen, nowhere to be found. They don't bother to conceal themselves in such an elaborate manner; they don't have the energy to even think about other people. Eights aren't image types:
Though I doubt Qaddafi himself was truly unhealthy, it is an example of when and under which conditions such Lie may be used.
This looks more like a type-three deception. "Big Lie" goes much deeper for an eight.

Sorry for my harsh and reactive anger. Again, I can't help but to be offended by what was said. Have you read this? It's informative, I deeply relate to it, and I highly recommend it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
Sorry for my harsh and reactive anger. Again, I can't help but to be offended by what was said. Have you read this? It's informative, I deeply relate to it, and I highly recommend it.
Before we start, I have to be honest, the last line there strikes me as being a condescending snark. I understand the theory quite well, thank you, as well as the reality. However--and I mean this equally honestly--I'm simply going to forget I saw it because I want to answer your post fairly and respectfully. Let's move on.

First, I am sorry if I offended you in any way. This, obviously, was not the intent.

However, I have to stick to my guns on this one. The Big Lie (capital letters), is, in fact a propaganda tool often used as a form of governmental control. Marriam-Webster defines it--

Definition of BIG LIE

: a deliberate gross distortion of the truth used especially as a propaganda tactic
You will hear a similar story from Wikipedia (because Wikipedia is always right) as well as every other page that comes up upon a simple google search. I am including these not to condescend, but for the general public to reference without having to run a search.

Big lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Big Lie

Big lie - RationalWiki


The statement by Riso and Hudson in the OP lists several characteristics of unhealthy 8s, including perpetrating the Big Lie (capitals). They are particularly known for their behaviorally-based approach to the enneagram, and having read the entire Type 8, Level 7 description over and over again, I know that their words are intended literally. They were not getting at a deeper philosophical approach to Enneagram type 8 in this particular case--they intended exactly what they wrote: eights do these things.

The OP asked for specific famous examples of that line--"lies 8s have told"--and I named three instances I feel are in line with the Big Lie (capitals)--and obviously, I think the people who delivered them are liable to be 8s, not 3s as suggested.

If you can name some famous examples of 8s demonstrating the "big lie" to themselves, personally, I am eager to hear them. I could not think of any in the 5 minutes or so I spent responding, and I am not eager to share my own experiences at present.

Thank you for hearing me out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cir

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Before we start, I have to be honest, the last line there strikes me as being a condescending snark. I understand the theory quite well, thank you, as well as the reality. However--and I mean this equally honestly--I'm simply going to forget I saw it because I want to answer your post fairly and respectfully. Let's move on.

First, I am sorry if I offended you in any way. This, obviously, was not the intent.
Sorry, I did not mean to be snarky. The intention wasn't to inform you of the theory, but more about how I see and relate to the dynamics of the generalized, lowercase "big lie" and how it propagates outward to the rest of the personality. Although, to me, the only difference between "Big Lie" and "big lie" is the scale of and direction of the application; the mechanics are the same.

However, I have to stick to my guns on this one. The Big Lie (capital letters), is, in fact a propaganda tool often used as a form of governmental control. Marriam-Webster defines it--

You will hear a similar story from Wikipedia (because Wikipedia is always right) as well as every other page that comes up upon a simple google search. I am including these not to condescend, but for the general public to reference without having to run a search.

Big lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Big Lie

Big lie - RationalWiki
Sorry, I should have clarified. Yes, this is a thing. I meant that within the context of the dynamics of an enneatype, it isn't a propaganda tool to control the state. Specifically, my problem is that you said "It refers more to a technique used by a government to control the state" in a way that necessarily excludes the masses of (perhaps unhealthy) eights who are politically powerless, but managed to use an application of the "Big Lie"/"big lie" to propagandize themselves to resort to destruction to achieve their goals.

It can be used like that, but in order for it to work, it starts at home, within that eight. It starts as "big lie" and then it turns to "Big Lie", if such an opportunity presents itself. Eights don't go straight to "Big Lie" without the underlying foundation of "big lie", and especially unhealthy eights, they don't carry themselves in such a way that you could ever doubt their mental state.

And since I agree with you that wikipedia is awesome, from your link I am referring to these non-Hitler usages, in the personal and non-political application:
"The key-word here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts."

Definition of doublethink: "To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed ..."

In 2005 American television satirist Stephen Colbert coined the word truthiness, the quality characterizing a "truth" that a person making an argument or assertion claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or because it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.
The first quotes illustrates the tendencies for type eights to go into absolutist, black/white thinking. Their specific delusion is "duality". The second quote is pretty much how "defense mechanism: denial" works. The third quote pretty much describes the default, even average, type eight disposition to assert their own truth onto the world, and one of the challenges of type eight's growth is restoring their perception to Holy Truth. Simply put, it starts by being able to admit when they're wrong.
[HR][/HR]
The statement by Riso and Hudson in the OP lists several characteristics of unhealthy 8s, including perpetrating the Big Lie (capitals). They are particularly known for their behaviorally-based approach to the enneagram, and having read the entire Type 8, Level 7 description over and over again, I know that their words are intended literally. They were not getting at a deeper philosophical approach to Enneagram type 8 in this particular case--they intended exactly what they wrote: eights do these things.
They can mean things literally, and still not necessarily be meaning "It refers more to a technique used by a government to control the state".
Riso/Hudson said:
And unhealthy Eights are quite capable of criminal behavior. So great is their fear of being controlled by others, almost any restriction placed on them is an invitation to be defied. Any line drawn in the sand is sure to be crossed. There are no rules to which an unhealthy Eight will bow, and if they are still in a position to make rules, there is no limit to the control they will exert over others. Unhealthy Eights are completely ruthless, despotic, and tyrannical: they oppress people, taking away their rights, their freedom, and their dignity.

It is impossible to be intimate with and dangerous to trust unhealthy Eights since they take every sign of friendliness or cooperation as a sign of weakness, and therefore as an invitation to take advantage of others. Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want. (They are the most frequent perpetrators of the Big Lie, a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth.) The honesty, straightforwardness, and compassion of the healthy Eight have become distorted into their opposites.

What is especially dangerous at this stage is their willingness, even eagerness, to use violence with very little provocation. The smallest hint of aggression from others will bring an avalanche of retaliation from unhealthy Eights. While some of the other personality types also resort to violence, they usually do so if there are no alternatives for defending themselves. And when the other personality types use violence, they generally feel guilty and fear retribution from others.

This is not so of unhealthy Eights, who use violence almost reflexively, without thought and without guilt. Eights are capable of feeling guilty for their actions, but they defy guilt feelings as something they believe would weaken them and leave them vulnerable to the predations of others. They cannot afford to be soft or empathetic, so they intentionally make themselves pitiless.
  • Considering the surrounding passages, they have not referred to a governmental entity. This is not to say they are explicitly excluding it, but it just seems like they're referring to something more general.
  • This sentence can be literally true, and yet, can still be referencing relationships on a smaller scale: "Unhealthy Eights are completely ruthless, despotic, and tyrannical: they oppress people, taking away their rights, their freedom, and their dignity."
    • A definition of "despot" is "a ruler or other person who holds absolute power, typically one who exercises it in a cruel or oppressive way." "Tyranny" is basically a synonym.
    • Easy example of "despotic and tyrannical" are kids who grew up in shitty childhood homes, and when they go to school, completely disrupt the discipline and harmony of the entire classroom. They can throw off the teachers's plans, pick fights with other people (kids or adults), take away other kids's and teachers's rights to a safe learning environment, in the process, smearing on the dignity of others, and still not literally need to be ruler of a state.
    • Unhealthy eights are just straight up abusive. If they manage to capture someone with a weaker will than them, people who in some way feel like they can't escape, then to those people, these unhealthy eights still meet all of the adjectives described above. For starters, "(psychological) freedom to escape", "(human) right to be alive", "(human) dignity".
  • In this sentence, "They are the most frequent perpetrators of the Big Lie, a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth", they have literally defined how they are using the term "Big Lie", immediately after the comma, as "a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth".
    • This can be inclusive of its use in politics as a propaganda tool, but taken that sentence structure literally, it's more likely to mean something more general. "illegality or ruse"
    • If they literally meant "more to a technique used by a government to control the state", then instead of the connecting comma, after which a general definition is explicitly given, they would have used a period. Full stop. Period.
In a book dedicated to the introduction to the enneagram, a book whose goal is to be as accessible to as many people as possible, it would be incredibly odd and inappropriate for them to talk about the "Big Lie" specifically, restrictively in a political way that refers to "It refers more to a technique used by the government to control the the state", when the non-political version would apply to more eights in general. Especially since the preceding sentence is "… Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want" and immediately after the word "Big Lie", continued with "a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth".

It can mean a propaganda tool to control a state. But when all of the other words surrounding "Big Lie", in capital letters, refer to something general, it seems logically out of place to quantify "more" of something related to a government, when literally no other words surrounding that phrase explicitly refers to a political entity.
[HR][/HR]
The OP asked for specific famous examples of that line--"lies 8s have told"--and I named three instances I feel are in line with the Big Lie (capitals)--and obviously, I think the people who delivered them are liable to be 8s, not 3s as suggested.
Yes, that is a "Big Lie" used in a political usage. However, the reason I think your video in particular is about three-deception and not eight-deception is because of these quotes:

  • "No one against us".
    • Eights are like, the most likely type to employ the "me vs them" or "us vs them" mindset, as a common manifestation of "specific delusion: duality".
    • Eights are generally direct and to the point; they would've skipped straight to "It's Al Qaeda" instead of all using all of those phrase buffers.
    • "No one against us" is too optimistic for an unhealthy eight, and too unrealistic for a healthy eight.
  • "They love me. All my people with me, they love me all"
    • "Many Eights’ deepest denial is of the source of all goodness." In enneagram terms, Holy Love is the source of all goodness. Type eight's deepest denial is that love exists at all. When they're unhealthy, when they fear being controlled by people, when they find it difficult to trust people, they are more likely to hide and withdraw from life than to even think "They love me". Being able to convince themselves that "they love me" is a sign of actual healthy growth, and being able to consider alliances with other people is symbolized by the movement to two.
    • Even if you give this guy the benefit of the doubt, that he could be healthy in some measure, this sentence would eventually reveal that he's not an eight: "All my people with me, they love me all".
      • First of all, healthier eights are more in touch with objective reality, and that statement is factually false.
      • Second of all, unhealthy eights are inclined towards "Love doesn't exist at all". If you read Almaas's chapter on the Holy Truth, one word will be repeated over and over again, and that word is "exist" (or some form of it). "Denial" for a type eight means "deny its existence".
      • Third of all, if eights had to group a people together, and then make a definitive statement about where those people stand in relation to the eight, if they're unhealthy, they will choose the more sinister, paranoid, pessimistic route.
      • If an eight doesn't feel threatened, the eight bias towards being open. If an eight does feel threatened, the eight bias towards hiding. The backup vice to lust is avarice: having the energy to deal with things. If you think that guy is in a desperate situation, then his behavior is in complete mismatch to the general movement of eight.
      • This is not to say that what I'm saying is 100% for all eights, but if someone misses most of the important markers of eight-ness, statistically speaking, I'm not going to bet on this guy being an eight. If what lead you to this conclusion is its usage of deception, then I'm going to bet on the type whose vice is deception. Type eight's vice is excess, and in unhealthy eights, anger is especially excessive.
[HR][/HR]
If you can name some famous examples of 8s demonstrating the "big lie" to themselves, personally, I am eager to hear them. I could not think of any in the 5 minutes or so I spent responding, and I am not eager to share my own experiences at present.
Sorry, I don't know anyone/thing famous. I just don't pay attention to that stuff. The most I can do is:

  • Re-quote those specific paragraphs from Maitri (the part where on the Enneagram of Lies, for type eight, is "prejudice/false denial")
  • To say that eights use that (non-governmental, non-political) "Big Lie"/"big lie" on themselves as a defensive mechanism, to reject any inherent goodness, to reject that they are lovable, in order to protect themselves, their inner vulnerability from hurt and pain. If the "Big Lie"/"big lie" is consciously maintained, it is for that purpose, because of a mindset that to love someone is to be controlled by them.
  • To quote this, which is somewhere in the introduction section and not specifically in the levels of health. Meaning this applies to eights in general:
    Riso/Hudson said:
    They find it difficult to trust, and so try to convince themselves that they do not need people. They also harden their hearts by telling themselves that others are around because the Eight has something they need. This is particularly sad, because in fact, while Eights may recognize that people need them, they often do not believe that people love them, and they are afraid to admit the degree to which they want and love others.
If you remain unconvinced at the part where it's deeply and unconsciously self-afflicted, that they first did it to themselves (prior to any real healthy development), then I tried my best, and there's really nothing I can do about that.
Thank you for hearing me out.
Thank you for your patience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
Sorry, I did not mean to be snarky. The intention wasn't to inform you of the theory, but more about how I see and relate to the dynamics of the generalized, lowercase "big lie" and how it propagates outward to the rest of the personality.
No worries, mate. Forgotten.

Sorry, I should have clarified....admit when they're wrong.
Right, fair enough.

I have to delete a lot of your words in the desire not to have a sprawling page, but I did read it all.

They can mean things literally, and still not necessarily be meaning "It refers more to a technique used by a government to control the state".
But--the immediate connotation is indeed what I said there. When someone says "the Big Lie", they think of Hitler, Orwellian regimes, sinister propaganda efforts, and the populace never being able to quite know what's true. That is the immediate connotation.

I think I'll leave it to @prsvrnc to say how she interpreted it and intended to ask the question, though.

  • Considering the surrounding passages, they have not referred to a governmental entity....dignity".
Yes, right.

In a book dedicated to the introduction to the enneagram, a book whose goal is to be as accessible to as many people as possible, it would be incredibly odd and inappropriate for them to talk about the "Big Lie" specifically, restrictively in a political way that refers to "It refers more to a technique used by the government to control the the state", when the non-political version would apply to more eights in general. Especially since the preceding sentence is "… Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want" and immediately after the word "Big Lie", continued with "a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth".

It can mean a propaganda tool to control a state. But when all of the other words surrounding "Big Lie", in capital letters, refer to something general, it seems logically out of place to quantify "more" of something related to a government, when literally no other words surrounding that phrase explicitly refers to a political entity.
Now I'm not arguing they did mean it solely to refer to governmental control. I am arguing that this is the general connotation, particularly when "Big Lie" is in capitals--and also that Riso and Hudson also intended their words as a description of what 8s "do" (rather than a depiction of their inner world). Yes, of course there are smaller ways one can tell big lies--no one would argue with that.

But nor is there any evidence that RH intended this specific statement as a description of the big lie 8s tell themselves. There's no reason to think they meant anything other than that 8s feel little reservation in telling outrageous lies, and they used the "Big Lie" wording as a technique to illustrate it.

However, as I stated prior, the term generally connotes propaganda and government, which seemed to be what the OP was asking for examples of (as I interpret it).

(That said, I also can't think of many lesser-known 8s who've actually survived by making outrageous propagandistic statements [on the scale connotated by capital letters]; lies toward oneself being something else entirely).

Yes, that is a "Big Lie" used in a political usage. However, the reason I think your video in particular is about three-deception and not eight-deception is because of these quotes:

  • "No one against us".
  • "They love me. All my people with me, they love me all"

  • Briefly, while I appreciate your argument here--and I really do--I actually do know something about the guy, and he was likely not a 3. Not even sure it was his heart-fix.

    He made the statements on the assumption that he would eventually regain full control of the country, rebellion would be quashed, and these incidents eradicated from the pages of history. He was denying their existence so as not to give them any legitimacy, or any foothold for future dissent. He doesn't appear to have been saying it to make himself "look good" (personally) in any way.

    I don't think Qaddafi was healthy, or unhealthy--quite probably, about average. He was leveraging his position while trying to keep the country under control. I would tend to minimize the actual wording of his statements, as there are many factors here--culture (in Arabic cultures, "the clan" is a social construct that looms large, along with consequent biases toward "us vs them"), political milieu (he politically came of age in an era of "Arab solidarity"), the fact that English isn't his first language, even his instinctual stacking (a social first might emphasize solidarity), etc. Besides which, it is possible to use the quote once more--he was resorting to "any ruse" to get what he wants--namely, the stability of his country.

    Taken as a whole, the incident strikes me as an 8 trying to retain control by using denial. I don't know how much of that denial was in his head to protect him, and how much was used as a tool of governmental control, mind you, but the fact remains, he made outrageous claims--and did so as a tool of governance, too--hence why I feel it's appropriate to categorize it as the "Big Lie".

    Sorry, I don't know anyone/thing famous. I just don't pay attention to that stuff.
    Noooo...

    If you remain unconvinced at the part where it's deeply and unconsciously self-afflicted, that they first did it to themselves (prior to any real healthy development), then I tried my best, and there's really nothing I can do about that.
    I do not remain unconvinced, nor did I ever intend to convey that denial and self-delusion doesn't also happen to the 8 as a defense mechanism. Again, I was talking about it from the perspective that struck me, and that I thought the OP was interested in. It is perhaps, a more...soc-first (maybe tert-Fe) way to approach the problem, but I do not feel it is in any way illegitimate.

    Thank you for your patience.
    Thanks for having a reasonable discussion with me. I hope it helps the OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cir

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
I have to delete a lot of your words in the desire not to have a sprawling page, but I did read it all.
It's ok. It's difficult trying to balance between "getting to the point" and "being thorough", and I know I can go on forever.

But--the immediate connotation is indeed what I said there. When someone says "the Big Lie", they think of Hitler, Orwellian regimes, sinister propaganda efforts, and the populace never being able to quite know what's true. That is the immediate connotation.
But you said Riso/Hudson meant things literally, which was how I read it (denotation). When I first read this book, the ideas you suggested were not what came to my mind. At all. For me to arrive to your conclusion, it would require me to notice the letters are capitalized and then google/research/consult a source external to a book that is meant to be self-containing. It seemed more obvious to me that "Big Lie" in capital letters were redefined to reflect the absolute worst and driving characteristics of eights, and that references to the political usage of it was intentional, yet secondary in meaning. While the mechanism of both are pretty much the same, it's the switch from referring to a group of individuals, to suddenly talking about government propaganda, then back to the group of that individuals, that lead me to reason that the government propaganda tool can't be the intended primary (and therefore, my issue with your word "more") meaning. The original offense I had was that I perceived that an enneatype's abuse of power was being disproportionately politicized.

[HR][/HR]
Now I'm not arguing they did mean it solely to refer to governmental control. I am arguing that this is the general connotation, particularly when "Big Lie" is in capitals--and also that Riso and Hudson also intended their words as a description of what 8s "do" (rather than a depiction of their inner world). Yes, of course there are smaller ways one can tell big lies--no one would argue with that.

But nor is there any evidence that RH intended this specific statement as a description of the big lie 8s tell themselves.
The thing about eights is that what they do is a reflection of their inner world. At both the healthy and unhealthy end of the spectrum. At the unhealthy end, somewhere in the intro, before they break it down into levels, they quoted a part of Jung's work that they think corresponds to eights:
Their psychic well-being counts as little with him as does his own. He has equally little regard for their convictions and way of life, and on this account he is often put down as an immoral and unscrupulous adventurer
And the healthy end:
Another casualty of the Eight's repression of vulnerability is their connection with other people. In healthy Eights we see the big-hearted, jovial disposition which reflects their natural feeling state, but as they succumb to their fears, they begin to believe that they cannot afford to let others get close to them. They find it difficult to trust, and so try to convince themselves that they do not need people. They also harden their hearts by telling themselves that others are around because the Eight has something they need. This is particularly sad, because in fact, while Eights may recognize that people need them, they often do not believe that people love them, and they are afraid to admit the degree to which they want and love others.
"They do not need people" is both "defense mechanism: denial" and "defense mechanism: isolation". They are very clearly illustrating disintegration behavior, in such a way that maintains how an eight treats others is reflective ("as little", "as does", "equally") of how eights treat themselves ("their psychic well-being counts as little with him as does his own").

Furthermore, even in the healthy state, it's about how eights treat others:
When healthy Eights move to Two, they identify with others rather than against them, realizing that others are not unlike themselves and are therefore worthy of the same rights and privileges.
Riso/Hudson intended their descriptions to reach their intended audiences, the people belonging to those respective types (because in the Wisdom of the Enneagram, they said they believed it was more problematic to type others than on ourselves), and to fully commit to that intention, in the chapter for type eights, they would have to accurately portray how eights work in a way that resonates with eights themselves. They would have to keep in mind, that even for above-average eights, that they think in this manner:
At Level 4, Eights are busy building up their enterprises and projects. They are pragmatic, want simple, direct answers or solutions, and move quickly on their decisions.
Type eights's tendency for pragmatic simplicity and directness alone can account for minimal discrepancy between their actions and their internal state.

[HR][/HR]
But nor is there any evidence that RH intended this specific statement as a description of the big lie 8s tell themselves.
Well, I have reason to think this because of my spiritual work prior to discovering the enneagram, and in my personal experience (read: as far as I'm concerned), most of the books confirmed my findings, leaving just enough traces of words to complete more complex thoughts, but can't, because complex thoughts are non-linear.

That being said, they intentionally omit more complicated explanations for the sake of brevity.
Because an introductory book should be relatively simple, it is not possible to present all the complexities of the Enneagram here. Many of the most advanced, theoretical aspects of the Enneagram have either been omitted or touched on only briefly. We have also omitted specific suggestions about how you can use each of the personality descriptions themselves. Even so, interested readers will be able to apply the descriptions to many different situations in their lives.
To ignore the cohesiveness and physical organization of the chapter, the accumulation of the things that was previously stated, to isolate the details from each other, in a way to ignore how those traits interrelate to each other, is literally a definition of "disintegrate". Sure, I may have a "connotation" difficulty, but the interactions of the ideas at the "denotation" level still, at a minimum, leaves implications about the psychological dynamics of an enneatype. I have absolutely no reason to think they wrote with such a restrictive and narrow scope. It goes against one of their warnings:
These examples illustrate why it is unwise to focus on a single trait in isolation and to try to make a diagnosis based on that. It is necessary to see each type as a whole— its overall style and approach to life, and its basic motivations. A lot of elements must be put together before you can type someone accurately.
[HR][/HR]
There's no reason to think they meant anything other than that 8s feel little reservation in telling outrageous lies, and they used the "Big Lie" wording as a technique to illustrate it.
There is no reason to think that "Big Lie" is used primarily and specifically to refer to a propaganda tool. That is incredibly specific usage of jargon, using words that are basic and common to the English language, which allows creative/arbitrary capitalization to emphasize meaning. The business world does this all the time (like "Big Data", "The Cloud", "Win-Win", "Deep Web"), doing it to normal words to emphasize their (somehow extra)ordinary meaning! To ascertain that it restrictively and specifically refers to a government propaganda tool would require people reading an enneagram book to keep in mind jargon usage to a (in my mind, completely) unrelated topic, not to mention that it depends on people being socialized with a specific social and civil mindset. That's too many conditions, and as such, the description loses some more of its universal reach and appeal. Therefore, it's more likely they mean it in a general way, to increase the odds that people understand what they mean, without the baggage of pre-existing knowledge. The history application seems more like a bonus easter egg.

It goes against the type-eight lens (therefore, obstructing how eights would relate to their own chapter) and it goes against the most basic premise of the book. Not to mention, in the wikipedia page you linked, while listing incredibly specific jargonistic usage of the phrase, "Big Lie" isn't even capitalized there!

[HR][/HR]
Briefly, while I appreciate your argument here--and I really do--I actually do know something about the guy, and he was likely not a 3. Not even sure it was his heart-fix.
And I'm saying, the absence of overt anger, especially in a disintegrating state, is the primary way to rule someone out of the type eight consideration.

He made the statements on the assumption that he would eventually regain full control of the country, rebellion would be quashed, and these incidents eradicated from the pages of history. He was denying their existence so as not to give them any legitimacy, or any foothold for future dissent. He doesn't appear to have been saying it to make himself "look good" (personally) in any way.
Ok, I'm not going to pretend I know who this guy is. As far as I'm concerned, he's another foreign ruler the USA conspired to overthrow. To address your enneagram-related points:

  • The bolded part is not enough information to narrow down to type eight. That's like, every ruler/monarch/emperor ever, and I'm willing to bet that spans the entire enneagram rainbow.
  • Yes, type eight's primary defense mechanism is denial. However, the deepest denial is the existence of love. Out of all of the other usage of denials, that specific location, is specifically a marker of type eight.
    • From the video, "People love me" is a way to "make himself look good".
    • Otherwise, unhealthy eights have serious psychological problems even acknowledging the existence of love, much less go on public display with it
    • You don't just stack contradicting lies on top of each other and believe in the results. The predominant lie taking hold of an eight's psyche is that love does not exist. They will not add an additional layer of "they love me" on top of that. That is "the actual truth" that is being repressed from conscious awareness.
    • But tragedy or not, Eights have made the decision to toughen themselves, and so their vulnerability, their softness, their need for affection, and their ability to ask for help must all be repressed. Most of all, Eights must repress their own fear, because it is potentially the greatest threat to their independence and strength. Of course, beneath the surface, Eights are as afraid as everyone else, but they have learned to limit the degree to which their fear registers consciously.
  • Other than that, all of the other types are absolutely capable of abusing their power as well, and everyone uses defense mechanism: denial in one degree or another. Denying someone's existence (as opposed to denying the existence of love) is like, the most common and "normal" way people purposely use that defense mechanism. Denial, for an eight, goes deeper, stemming from something internal, to repress things from their own conscious awareness.
  • Denying someone's legitimacy is to make someone look bad. In comparison, the person who made the claim did so to "make himself look good" with respect to his legitimacy to rule.

I don't think Qaddafi was healthy, or unhealthy--quite probably, about average.
...
Besides which, it is possible to use the quote once more--he was resorting to "any ruse" to get what he wants--namely, the stability of his country.
No, it's not possible to use that quote in the way you did, because you didn't even follow the assumptions surrounding that paragraph. This isn't wishful thinking on my part, it just logically can't. Purple highlights mean that stability can't exist without friendliness or cooperation.
It is impossible to be intimate with and dangerous to trust unhealthy Eights since they take every sign of friendliness or cooperation as a sign of weakness, and therefore as an invitation to take advantage of others. Treacherous and immoral, unhealthy Eights have little compunction about lying, cheating, stealing, or reneging on their promises. They will resort to any illegality or ruse to get what they want. (They are the most frequent perpetrators of the Big Lie, a blatant and outrageous falsehood repeated so endlessly and vehemently that it begins to be accepted as the truth.) The honesty, straightforwardness, and compassion of the healthy Eight have become distorted into their opposites.
And if he was an unhealthy eight, why would you trust what he says about wanting the stability of his country? Why would an unhealthy eight consciously identify with something he deems weak, especially when that goes against literally everything an unhealthy eight stands for in disposition, action, or results?

Type eight's mechanism is powered by "fear: being harmed, controlled, violated" and "basic desire: self-protection", powered by anger that even healthy eights have difficulty hiding. Unhealthy eights use "any ruse" to get what they want: the destruction of others, the anti-thesis of stability/friendliness/cooperation. If you are using the phrase "any ruse" based on the quote I provided, then you are implying unhealth. And eights in unhealth, don't give a single shit about the stability of anything. Based on what you said, and I didn't bother to research this guy, it doesn't logically match the movement of type eight.

If anything, "desire: stability" most resembles "desire: goodness, integrity, balance" or "basic desire: wholeness, peace of mind".

Taken as a whole, the incident strikes me as an 8 trying to retain control by using denial. I don't know how much of that denial was in his head to protect him, and how much was used as a tool of governmental control, mind you, but the fact remains, he made outrageous claims--and did so as a tool of governance, too--hence why I feel it's appropriate to categorize it as the "Big Lie".
I'm not saying anything about his usage of the "Big Lie". There is nothing that prevents non-eights from using the "Big Lie".

Side stepping all of this other talk, the simplest way to identify an eight is from the magnitude (lust) of anger (especially unhealthy). This dude did not display the magnitude of anger to register as an eight. Controlling anger is something that even healthy eights need to spend energy focusing on. Underneath all of this other complex talk, ultimately, anger pins us down and traps us, and misuse of anger is how eights are identified. If it was an eight, it would be obvious and in your face. He did not. With absolutely no other considerations of the complexities of the psychological blah blah blah Riso/Hudson things, in that one video I watched, he didn't display any anger (average), vitality (healthy), or anger additionally fueled by paranoia (unhealthy). His emotional disposition doesn't appear to be a kind where anger is disproportionately causing him the most problems.

I do not remain unconvinced, nor did I ever intend to convey that denial and self-delusion doesn't also happen to the 8 as a defense mechanism. Again, I was talking about it from the perspective that struck me, and that I thought the OP was interested in. It is perhaps, a more...soc-first (maybe tert-Fe) way to approach the problem, but I do not feel it is in any way illegitimate.
Sure. Soc-first eights, however, are still eights. They're still emotionally rooted in anger. In healthy eights, the anger transforms into something else, it doesn't even really go away.

Thanks for having a reasonable discussion with me. I hope it helps the OP.
Yup. It's nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
Again, I read it all. I don't necessarily have any disagreement or particular problem with much of what you say. There's just a couple of points I do want to address.

But you said Riso/Hudson meant things literally, which was how I read it (denotation). When I first read this book, the ideas you suggested were not what came to my mind. At all. For me to arrive to your conclusion, it would require me to notice the letters are capitalized and then google/research/consult a source external to a book that is meant to be self-containing. It seemed more obvious to me that "Big Lie" in capital letters were redefined to reflect the absolute worst and driving characteristics of eights, and that references to the political usage of it was intentional, yet secondary in meaning. While the mechanism of both are pretty much the same, it's the switch from referring to a group of individuals, to suddenly talking about government propaganda, then back to the group of that individuals, that lead me to reason that the government propaganda tool can't be the intended primary (and therefore, my issue with your word "more") meaning. The original offense I had was that I perceived that an enneatype's abuse of power was being disproportionately politicized.
And, I originally read it as a statement of some things unhealthy 8s do, in which they draw in the generally conceived concept of "the Big Lie" as one commonly known example. The OP asked for responses that came to mind, and that's what came to my mind. I don't think there's any one "right" way to take it, as long as it helps the reader build a world view.

There is no reason to think that "Big Lie" is used primarily and specifically to refer to a propaganda tool. That is incredibly specific usage of jargon.
Well, I'll leave it up to the interpretation of the general public--if they feel like it refers to an apparatus of state involving propaganda, then fine. If they feel like it has a broader meaning, then that's fine too. I cannot speak for every human being who reads RH, only for myself.

I don't think associating "Big Lie" with propaganda is an incredibly specific use of jargon, however. It's just not.

Ok, I'm not going to pretend I know who this guy is. As far as I'm concerned, he's another foreign ruler the USA conspired to overthrow. To address your enneagram-related points:

  • The bolded part is not enough information to narrow down to type eight. That's like, every ruler/monarch/emperor ever, and I'm willing to bet that spans the entire enneagram rainbow.
  • Yes, type eight's primary defense mechanism is denial. However, the deepest denial is the existence of love. Out of all of the other usage of denials, that specific location, is specifically a marker of type eight.
    • From the video, "People love me" is a way to "make himself look good".
    • Otherwise, unhealthy eights have serious psychological problems even acknowledging the existence of love, much less go on public display with it
    • You don't just stack contradicting lies on top of each other and believe in the results. The predominant lie taking hold of an eight's psyche is that love does not exist. They will not add an additional layer of "they love me" on top of that. That is "the actual truth" that is being repressed from conscious awareness.
  • Other than that, all of the other types are absolutely capable of abusing their power as well, and everyone uses defense mechanism: denial in one degree or another. Denying someone's existence (as opposed to denying the existence of love) is like, the most common and "normal" way people purposely use that defense mechanism. Denial, for an eight, goes deeper, stemming from something internal, to repress things from their own conscious awareness.
  • Denying someone's legitimacy is to make someone look bad. In comparison, the person who made the claim did so to "make himself look good" with respect to his legitimacy to rule.

No, it's not possible to use that quote in the way you did, because you didn't even follow the assumptions surrounding that paragraph. This isn't wishful thinking on my part, it just logically can't. Purple highlights mean that stability can't exist without friendliness or cooperation. And if he was an unhealthy eight, why would you trust what he says about wanting the stability of his country? Why would an unhealthy eight consciously identify with something he deems weak, especially when that goes against literally everything an unhealthy eight stands for in disposition, action, or results?

Type eight's mechanism is powered by "fear: being harmed, controlled, violated" and "basic desire: self-protection", powered by anger that even healthy eights have difficulty hiding. Unhealthy eights use "any ruse" to get what they want: the destruction of others, the anti-thesis of stability/friendliness/cooperation. If you are using the phrase "any ruse" based on the quote I provided, then you are implying unhealth. And eights in unhealth, don't give a single shit about the stability of anything. Based on what you said, and I didn't bother to research this guy, it doesn't logically match the movement of type eight.

If anything, "desire: stability" most resembles "desire: goodness, integrity, balance" or "basic desire: wholeness, peace of mind".

I'm not saying anything about his usage of the "Big Lie". There is nothing that prevents non-eights from using the "Big Lie".

Side stepping all of this other talk, the simplest way to identify an eight is from the magnitude (lust) of anger (especially unhealthy). This dude did not display the magnitude of anger to register as an eight. Controlling anger is something that even healthy eights need to spend energy focusing on. Underneath all of this other complex talk, ultimately, anger pins us down and traps us, and misuse of anger is how eights are identified. If it was an eight, it would be obvious and in your face. He did not. With absolutely no other considerations of the complexities of the psychological blah blah blah Riso/Hudson things, in that one video I watched, he didn't display any anger (average), vitality (healthy), or anger additionally fueled by paranoia (unhealthy). His emotional disposition doesn't appear to be a kind where anger is disproportionately causing him the most problems.
Again, interesting argument. I don't particularly have the patience to go through blow by blow right now (which after all, could devolve into pages and pages of point and counterpoint, not what the OP probably wants here). But sorry, I have to mention that, from my end (and this could be Te-dom vs Ne-dom), it's coming across that you're almost overthinking the question. It's not as though human personality operates according to logical binary. There are overlaps, contradictions, rhetorical statements, hidden intentions, etc. and after all, this is only one little piece of footage. I think it shows an example of what I originally mentioned, but little else regarding his Enneastatus (lol). We could probably use it to show he's virtually anything, or not.

As a point of interest, I will also note that, in the same chapter of the same book, RH type Qaddafi as an 8w7, so it's consistent in their minds anyway. Do with that what you will.

Sure. Soc-first eights, however, are still eights. They're still emotionally rooted in anger. In healthy eights, the anger transforms into something else, it doesn't even really go away.
It was one possibility, a potential factor that might influence a certain presentation or mindset in some individuals...not intended as proof.

Anyway, I leave it to you. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cir

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Again, I read it all. I don't necessarily have any disagreement or particular problem with much of what you say. There's just a couple of points I do want to address.
Yeah, again, it's ok. I know I can go on forever, and I rather the people I'm talking to decide the points they wish to address.

And, I originally read it as a statement of some things unhealthy 8s do, in which they draw in the generally conceived concept of "the Big Lie" as one commonly known example. The OP asked for responses that came to mind, and that's what came to my mind. I don't think there's any one "right" way to take it, as long as it helps the reader build a world view.
Yeah.

Well, I'll leave it up to the interpretation of the general public--if they feel like it refers to an apparatus of state involving propaganda, then fine. If they feel like it has a broader meaning, then that's fine too. I cannot speak for every human being who reads RH, only for myself.

I don't think associating "Big Lie" with propaganda is an incredibly specific use of jargon, however. It's just not.
I feel like I should explain my thinking process, if it helps. It may or may not be an ENTJ quirk, or it may or may not be due to the educational/professional environment in which I was exposed to. In "unhealthy" business environments, the application of the "Big Lie" means that the executives and marketing people must believe in the stuff they're pushing, because their livelihoods depend on it. My day job involves programming and reading code, where inconsistent usage of capitalization is more likely to draw my attention than arbitrary usage of capitalization. On top of my cultural-ignorance, I'm basically trained to examine things at the "denotation" level, because that's how programs work, and this extends to how I read things in general. On top of that, business people really like buzzwording things (which often accompanies seemingly arbitrary capitalization) to somehow denote that their particular usage is supposed to be extraordinary or special in some way. And if someone in engineering bring up some flaws about the products that are being marketed, there's a strong chance that those things gets conveniently forgotten. That's like my daily exposure to the "Big Lie".

In the case of the political usage, I don't even think that concept is important enough to merit capitalization. The mechanics seem so simple, and it's used to some degree in many organizations, that in my opinion, it's mundane.

Again, interesting argument. I don't particularly have the patience to go through blow by blow right now (which after all, could devolve into pages and pages of point and counterpoint, not what the OP probably wants here). But sorry, I have to mention that, from my end (and this could be Te-dom vs Ne-dom), it's coming across that you're almost overthinking the question.
It may seem that way, but I enjoy the process of "getting to the truth", or at least, being able to construct the lenses in which other people are seeing something.

It's not as though human personality operates according to logical binary. There are overlaps, contradictions, rhetorical statements, hidden intentions, etc. and after all, this is only one little piece of footage. I think it shows an example of what I originally mentioned, but little else regarding his Enneastatus (lol). We could probably use it to show he's virtually anything, or not.
While this is true, unhealthy people don't have the luxury of freedom of movement to become anything other than predictable. This is why Naranjo(?) focuses on the disintegration behavior to determine a type, and I believe that Riso/Hudson mentioned that healthy types resemble each other.

In addition to that, type ones and eights are most known for their relatively extreme employment of binary logic, and one of the strengths/weaknesses of body types is in their "speed of calculation" (one of the things alluded to by calling us the "instincts" triad, further enhanced by body types's obsession with objective/physical reality). Things that aren't as "clear-cut" as "binary" usages tend to slow down our faculties in that area, so it takes some time for us to be more comfortable with analog usages (in binary logic evaluation, these areas are marked by "don't cares"). It's not necessarily that we operate under binary logic as much as it's generally in the backdrop of our mental operations, and when push comes to shove, we'd bias towards that.

As a point of interest, I will also note that, in the same chapter of the same book, RH type Qaddafi as an 8w7, so it's consistent in their minds anyway. Do with that what you will.
I see that. I'm keeping in mind what they're saying here:
The examples of well-known people are educated guesses based on intuition, observation, and reading. They are offered as illustrations of the diversity of the personality types, with no implication about their state of health or neurosis. Remember that each of these people may have been healthy, average, or unhealthy at various times in their lives, and that each may have moved to his or her Direction of Integration or Disintegration. Above all, remember that there is an enormous amount of individual diversity, including intelligence, talent, and experience, among those illustrating any given type. But even taking these various factors into consideration, the famous people are included because by understanding how they exemplify the different personality types, you will be able to see both what is common to them all and what a vast range of psychological territory is covered by each type. Of course, in their private lives, a few of these people may be substantially different from their public persona, and may even be another type. However, these examples were chosen because their public personalities were illustrative of a type, whatever their private selves may be.
Based on the clip you showed me, I absolutely see nothing in that guy that made me think he's an 8w7, based on what Riso/Hudson said a few sentences earlier:
They tend to be the same at work as they are at home, and tend to treat all people in their lives similarly. There is a "cut to the chase," no-nonsense quality about Eights with a Seven-wing, and they do not hesitate to express what they really think or feel.
I don't think I'm that impatient (yes I am), but people repeating something over and over again and then immediately compromising that message in the span of minutes... pushes my patience to the limits. "Cutting to the chase" means immediately skipping the word buffers.

However, this book was also written 15 years prior to the clip you've shown me, and I still didn't bother to research this guy, so I wouldn't know anything about difference between his public/private persona and how it changed over time. This is partly why I discard most of the "these celebrities exemplify this type" stuff, another part is because they don't explain it, and don't celebrities go through many personas? Which one are they talking about?

It was an interesting discussion nonetheless, thank you. I was due for another re-reading the Riso/Hudson books anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
I feel like I should explain my thinking process, if it helps. It may or may not be an ENTJ quirk, or it may or may not be due to the educational/professional environment in which I was exposed to. In "unhealthy" business environments, the application of the "Big Lie" means that the executives and marketing people must believe in the stuff they're pushing, because their livelihoods depend on it. My day job involves programming and reading code, where inconsistent usage of capitalization is more likely to draw my attention than arbitrary usage of capitalization. On top of my cultural-ignorance, I'm basically trained to examine things at the "denotation" level, because that's how programs work, and this extends to how I read things in general. On top of that, business people really like buzzwording things (which often accompanies seemingly arbitrary capitalization) to somehow denote that their particular usage is supposed to be extraordinary or special in some way. And if someone in engineering bring up some flaws about the products that are being marketed, there's a strong chance that those things gets conveniently forgotten. That's like my daily exposure to the "Big Lie".
And thus the plot thickens. That's incredibly fascinating, and completely different from my background, which involves a more holistic view of the World, the News, the People, Activism, History, Creation, and Destiny. Not to mention, International Affairs--both in theory, and applied. Heavy on the applied part. I've been a lot of places and watched a lot of things. So it is not surprising we saw the OP in two very different lights.

I think there's an implied lesson about Holy Truth in all this, but I don't dare articulate it.

It may seem that way, but I enjoy the process of "getting to the truth", or at least, being able to construct the lenses in which other people are seeing something.
It's a different process, that's all. My way of getting at truth revolves less around hashing it out logically like that, and more around just perceiving everything around me, letting it be what it is, and seeing what logically takes form in my mind. It's more passive, or more inward somehow, which is I guess why I associate it with Introverted Thinking.

However, this book was also written 15 years prior to the clip you've shown me, and I still didn't bother to research this guy, so I wouldn't know anything about difference between his public/private persona and how it changed over time. This is partly why I discard most of the "these celebrities exemplify this type" stuff, another part is because they don't explain it, and don't celebrities go through many personas? Which one are they talking about?
Ha ha ha, well I can agree with that! I watch so many useless typing threads about various celebrities and other figures...and I'm always like, Hey, you based that on XYZ public speech/war report/press release/film roles. Because that's totally an indication of who the individual really is.

So many people simply won't crack open a good biography and dare to read about the actual private individual. And to those people I'm like, Your loss.

Though I think we can metaphorically say, this person/phenomenon represents Type X mindset, just the same as we can associate colors and animals and stories with the types. It doesn't have to be literal, but just illustrate a point.

It was an interesting discussion nonetheless, thank you. I was due for another re-reading the Riso/Hudson books anyway.
Yeah! Thank you too. And you gotta keep re-reading stuff--generate more insights every time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cir
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top