| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 02:11:39 AM
I was just thinking; it seems to me that we can consider the idea of introvert extrovert as proven; the introvert from memory has a fired up central cortex by nature and this compels them to avoid further stimulation socially and the reverse is true of the extrovert.
These strike me as neuro biological factors/determinants rather than type indicators in this system or an astrological one. I guess these explain something of the instinctive variants theory.
Hmmm...now i only need to understand why the sexual variant is not regarded as a subset of the social variant....and a few other things... 
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| 19 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| dnimon |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:59:44 AM
Lets assume that Gurdjieff was correct in stating that what he presented (and what ichazo borrowed from him) gave away nothing of the enneagram symbols actual design, other than grounds for a few ideas.
Now lets imagine that the completed symbol might look something like this; in which case many of the inconsistencies of many ideas of this system would dissapear and new avenues of development would present.
In any case the machinations of a persoanlity type system, built on the idea of fixation would likely only be adequately explained and understood in the context of the complete "enneagram symbol".
Unsurprisingly ichazo, naranjo, R&H et al, make no mention of this subject.
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| dnimon |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:27:51 AM
quote:
Originally posted by marie
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
But to suggest that a one will only move into a four or a seven psychology is patently incorrect, self and external observation shows this so clearly.
No one has ever suggested this though. The claim is that there are special relationships to the types one is internally connected to, but they are not by any means considered exclusive.
Hmm i see a lot of posts that say this and many more that imply i.
i have a special relationship with one....and that is not on my line, also with 4 and that is not on my line at all...i have a special relationship with three which is on my line but not especially with nine, at least not more or less so than with any other point.
This is not just my case....several people in this forum find exactly the same thing, although some like yourself have a special relationship with those points...or a point to which they are supposed to be connected.
There is so little to the int/dis idea when it comes under scrutiny....with uniform special relationships along the esymbols principles...and esp with the direction of flow, and what that means..the idea is not worth pursuing....imo ...so i guess we'll have to agree to disagree here
I can be all the types and ""i go to"" all the negative and positive features of all the types...depending on the context
Everyone accepts this as well.
But this is not emphasised...in fact it is scarcely mentioned, whereas the int/dis idea is treated extensively.... and extensively treated as some kind of cosmic law, in inescapable principle...this lopsided kind of discourse is I think, where grave misunderstandings begin and are perpetuated.
it strikes me as pointless and vaguely mastabatorial to imagine we can see all the subtle levels of further divisions beyond this.
Look it's a work in progress and no one claims to see all the subtle levels. And just what is it that you and ron have against masturbation anyway?
That's a good way to treat it I think and a good attitude to work from..."that a system is being created here, refined added to and subtracted from" The ideas already contained are very worthwhile in parts, others need revision and reconsideration."
Whatever relationship this ideology has with the enneagram symbol, if it has one....is less important..
I could live with that..... very comfortably.....but i could only stay weekends otherwise
I have no problem with masturbation at all ((fives take shelter!) in fact i'm ridiculously good at it..practise i guess.))so long as the individual realises that they are in fact masturbating and not having a real relationship with someone else.
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| .ron4 |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:26:49 AM
Masturbation wrong ?
Masturbation is what it is.
Masturbation is not the real thing
but it does pass the time with some
kind of pleasure, don't you 'think'?
Ron
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change". |
| marie |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:12:10 AM
quote:
Originally posted by .ron4
R&H say ; the 5 thinks tooooooooo much.
He can't stop thinking, he loves thinking
he thinks and thinks and thinks and loves
to hear his brain think until he becomes
the thinker. He can sit back and let his
brain think for him and has theories and
more theories so he can be prepared for
everythink.
Ron
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change".
Yes...thanks ron...but no one's getting hurt in the process. And you never explained to me what's wrong with masturbation!
I've been waiting for the pres to speak and needed to pass some time. I am out of books to read at the moment. |
| .ron4 |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:04:35 AM
R&H say ; the 5 thinks tooooooooo much.
He can't stop thinking, he loves thinking
he thinks and thinks and thinks and loves
to hear his brain think until he becomes
the thinker. He can sit back and let his
brain think for him and has theories and
more theories so he can be prepared for
everythink.
Ron
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change". |
| marie |
Posted - 22 Mar 2010 : 12:02:44 AM
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
If for instance the biological cause turns out to be a particular chemical in anchovies consumed during the first trimester then we can answer that...but whether we have found the exact biological answers or not is somewhat irrelevant.........the cause is biological and there is broad overarching agreement in psychology, for a change, about this.
I think you completely missed my point. But at least I tried. |
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:57:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by marie
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
As far as int/ext though it is considered fact that these are biological in origin, a fired up cortex produces and introvert and a low firing cortex produces an extrovert, pretty much in line with degree, though i haven't viewed the data personally.
There may well be biological correlates for introversion and extraversion, but if we want to claim that they are caused by biology, we can still asks what it is that causes the biology. The principle of explanation doesn't magically come to an end when we find the genes. That's a materialist/reductionist account which would have to be defended. It's not just obviously true or anything.
That's true Marie....but we can start from the point of biology given that this seems to be the cause...not type.
If for instance the biological cause turns out to be a particular chemical in anchovies consumed during the first trimester then we can answer that...but whether we have found the exact biological answers or not is somewhat irrelevant.........the cause is biological and there is broad overarching agreement in psychology, for a change, about this.
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| marie |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:57:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
But to suggest that a one will only move into a four or a seven psychology is patently incorrect, self and external observation shows this so clearly.
No one has ever suggested this though. The claim is that there are special relationships to the types one is internally connected to, but they are not by any means considered exclusive.
I can be all the types and ""i go to"" all the negative and positive features of all the types...depending on the context
Everyone accepts this as well.
it strikes me as pointless and vaguely mastabatorial to imagine we can see all the subtle levels of further divisions beyond this.
Look it's a work in progress and no one claims to see all the subtle levels. And just what is it that you and ron have against masturbation anyway?
|
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:49:32 PM
I think i should mention, that i really think this system has potential as it is further developed, provided it is developed along the right lines to be a usefull educational tool.
For this to happen esoteric window dressing needs to be dropped and concepts such as "health levels " and procrustian explanations which try to relate things like int/dis to the symbol need to be dropped. One does psychologically shift between one psychological state and another, and the qualities of this two states can be quite psychologically different in accordance with that type descriptor.
But to suggest that a one will only move into a four or a seven psychology is patently incorrect, self and external observation shows this so clearly.
I can be all the types and ""i go to"" all the negative and positive features of all the types...depending on the context
If we simply consider that ichazo gave one direction of int/dis flow, current convention is the opposite to that and R&H say that you can int did in either direction, this is enough to say we don't know about int/dis or its relationship to the symbol if it does in fact exist as anything meaningful at all
....in any case it does not work for all or even most as it is advertised advertised in relation the the symbols structure.
I think the idea of the fixation process and instinctive variants with ammendments and refinement are worth keeping....
however Since the most knowledgeable practioners of this systems ideology have such difficulty agreeing about even ones basic type..it strikes me as pointless and vaguely mastabatorial to imagine we can see all the subtle levels of further divisions beyond this.
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| marie |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:43:15 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
As far as int/ext though it is considered fact that these are biological in origin, a fired up cortex produces and introvert and a low firing cortex produces an extrovert, pretty much in line with degree, though i haven't viewed the data personally.
There may well be biological correlates for introversion and extraversion, but if we want to claim that they are caused by biology, we can still asks what it is that causes the biology. The principle of explanation doesn't magically come to an end when we find the genes. That's a materialist/reductionist account which would have to be defended. It's not just obviously true or anything. |
| marie |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:39:35 PM
It could very well be that biology and enneatype (which is not precisely the same thing as fixation) and even the sorts of events which we attract into our sphere of experience are all a function of some more fundamental organizing principle, one which cannot be determined by our biology because our biology is a function of it.
The one way reductionist approach that you seem to adopt (?) while allowing for other independent extraneous determining forces all seems kind of messy. |
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 11:17:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by JoL
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
The matter is of some importance i think, biologically produced types or socially produced types are neither enneagrammic or astrological in origin.
How do you know that biology isn't affected by/related to, and in sync with cosmic influences?
I'm not saying that I know anything. I just believe that we humans are not equipped with what we would need to see the truth of how connected everything really is.
That's what I said.
Good answer....I don't know how and to what extent these things are related. Lets say that eating anchovies in the first trimester reaults in a child with an overactive cortex and an introvert being produced....Do we ascribe this to physiological causes or do we have no recourse but to turn to cosmological causes to explain this?
That somewhere along the line cosmological principles are bound to enter is a given, however in this case, they enter via biology not by astrological type of enneagrammic fixation.
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| sunny |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 10:31:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
The matter is of some importance i think, biologically produced types or socially produced types are neither enneagrammic or astrological in origin.
How do you know that biology isn't affected by/related to, and in sync with cosmic influences?
I'm not saying that I know anything. I just believe that we humans are not equipped with what we would need to see the truth of how connected everything really is.
That's what I said.
|
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 9:49:58 PM
I think i do Jol, and the idea is interesting, the bio-psycho-social model (to which we can add type) attempts to find the origin of a given behaviour with some success. In some areas more than one cause or overlapping causes can be attributed.
As far as int/ext though it is considered fact that these are biological in origin, a fired up cortex produces and introvert and a low firing cortex produces an extrovert, pretty much in line with degree, though i haven't viewed the data personally.
If this is the case type categories such as the adventurer may need to be revisited, since the person with a fired up cortex would not seek adventure or thrill seeking, since these would further stimulate an already overstimulated cortex.
The matter is of some importance i think, biologically produced types or socially produced types are neither enneagrammic or astrological in origin.
However if we take the instinctive variant as inborn and biological in nature, the soc category as first,middle or last makes perfect sense
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| sunny |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 3:10:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dnimon
These strike me as neuro biological factors/determinants rather than type indicators in this system or an astrological one. I guess these explain something of the instinctive variants theory.
But "neuro biological factors" are a part of something bigger.
Maybe people are (partly) a manifestation of cosmic energies.
Maybe someone born with certain genetics and during certain energy patterns tend toward introversion or not, and become the introverted (or extroverted) version of the energetic triad they're born into. I don't see clear boundaries around any system.
That's what I said.
|
| .ron4 |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 2:54:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by .ron4
Interesting.
I would've thought the sexual would've
been a subset of the self-press and the
social a subset of the sexual.
So which 'trovert' are you ?
Ron
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change".
Is this too hard of a question for you dimon ?
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change". |
| dnimon |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 03:20:37 AM
thanks Skahkti...yes..the themes carried by the two groups are obvious...i would rather see all those descriptors gathered into the two groups as facets of int/ext...since so many of them are interchangeable and synonymous....the further classifications are quite overlapping and less conclusive for mine
Apparently they put it down to greater and lesser cortex activity and it makes sense to me
"the pen is mightier than the sword" |
| shakti |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 03:04:13 AM
The brain theory is interesting. I don't know enough to refute or agree with it.
What I know is related to MBTI II. The theory with MBTI II, as I understand it, is you could not be pure Introvert or pure Intuitive etc. to function in the world, and that by looking at particular facets you can see where the individual has selected an adaptation that is against their type preference.
Here are the facets used to measure the presence of introversion or extraversion:
INITIATING
Sociable, congenial,
introduce people
EXPRESSIVE
Demonstrative, easier to
know, self-revealing
GREGARIOUS
Want to belong, broad
circle, join groups
ACTIVE
Interactive, want contact,
listen and speak
ENTHUSIASTIC
Lively, energetic,
seek spotlight
RECEIVING
Reserved, low-key,
are introduced
CONTAINED
Controlled, harder to
know, private
INTIMATE
Seek intimacy, one-on-one,
find individuals
REFLECTIVE
Onlooker, prefer space,
read and write
QUIET
Calm, enjoy solitude,
seek background
from https://www.cpp.com/Pdfs/smp267149.pdf |
| .ron4 |
Posted - 21 Mar 2010 : 02:24:38 AM
Interesting.
I would've thought the sexual would've
been a subset of the self-press and the
social a subset of the sexual.
So which 'trovert' are you ?
Ron
"If you wanna make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make a change". |
