If we see the enneagram and jungian cognitive functions as fixations and, as lenore thomson puts it, "investments";
... where does the "self" lie?
The main purpose of Lenore's vocabulary of attitudes is to enable you to see beyond the limits of your ego. It gives you a conscious perspective on aspects of yourself that are not necessarily part of your self-image.
The alternative self-understanding that it gives you is: "I have made a number of investments, in both mental working and social position, that have put me into the position where I am today. These investments are not me, they're just investments. I could invest in completely different things, and I can see how I'd be starting from scratch. I could continue investing in the same things, and I can see how I'd get very quick results but would miss out on developing other capacities."
It seems to me that people who become really involved in systems of personality online become -more- like their type, and cling onto it for dear life. Perhaps because they find belonging amongst people who appear to be like minded (when really all it is, is a bunch of people who have the same fixations). They say, I have my type and "this is me". But is this the 'self'? or does the notion of personality/ego fix, have to be transcended in some way in order to be in it? is the ego fix too limited and narrow, and fears incorporating what it thinks it 'is not' which in turn, prohibits and represses coming into something more whole?
Reminds me of this;
As the Taoists see it, yin and yang are complementary parts of a whole, so if we choose one and try to block out the other, we upset nature's balance. What results, as Jung (1963) points out, is restricted adaptability and, in many cases, physical or emotional illness. From the Taoist perspective, to be whole and follow the Tao, we must be willing to accept our dual nature and integrate the opposites.
As did Jung, I consider the integration of opposites to be of primary importance for self-actualization. In working with my clients, I inevitably come across areas of one-sidedness or imbalance that need to be addressed. Sometimes, it might be doing that is valued over being.
Is one sided-ness worth working through, even if you think what you are attached to, works? I suppose it's a means of survival to be attached to a way of living, but the greatest gift of stress (internal and external) is that we have no choice but to adapt because our ordinary way of approaching life, does not work. And we finally become aware that there is a way of life beyond what we know.