The problem with Motivation

Posted by Cory on March 07, 2000 at 15:47:52:

In Reply to: Re: As I was saying... posted by pork ^(oo)^ on March 07, 2000 at 01:48:15:

How can you exactly determine motivation, when it is completely abstract and therefore open to subjective interpretation? For example, suppose there is someone who travels the world, is quite optimistic, can take things to an excess sometimes, and is constantly on the go. What is his motivation? "To be happy" (Seven) or "To understand the world" (Five)? And if you say Five, and I say Seven, who is to say is right? Does a person Have to be conscious of their motivation?

As well the Enneagram presupposes that there IS a core motivation in the first place. It negates the possibility that people aren't constantly striving for something, and not reacting to their environment.

Why does motivation have to be "for life"? Couldn't a person live their first half of their life as a Three, then as a Five, with different motivations?

Can knowledge of one's motivation be much help for change? Obviously if this is something that's engrained into us, it would be very difficult to curb.

How sure are you that there are Nine "core motivations"? Why not Ten? Or Eleven? Or maybe there's only Six?

Finally, behavior is Closely related to motivation. It really isn't that random. This means for the most part you can accurately find someone's motivation simply by observing their behavior.

The reason observable behavior should be emphasized more is that it is more closer to an objective science than this subjective guessing of motivation. You can actually panel people by observable traits and see what patterns they would fall into. With motivation, it becomes more open to interpretation and personal bias.

I really would like to expound on this more, but unfortunately Extraverted Thinking is an inferior function of mine. =o) I got many more qualms about the Enneagram, although they're not much about the whole motivation issue.

-Cory

: : Unlike the MBTI which provuides questions to determine individual either/or FUNCTIONS that together constitute a type, the Enneagram merely provides 9 hypothetical types that are not actual functions of the mind but are rather types used to decribe observed behavior.

: Aye, there's the rub. I don't know who told you that the Enneagram has anything whatsoever to do with "observed behavior," but these persons were obviously neophytes. Anyone who's gotten past the introductory amateur stage knows that the Enneagram has nothing whatsoever to do with observed behavior. Or perhaps you're referring to some interpretation of the Enneagram with which I'm unfamiliar. Or perhaps you've just skimmed the books very lightly. Or perhaps you've been reading only the flaky books. Ever hear of Naranjo? The Enneagram model I use is based on the nine passions combined with some triadic theory. Ancient, yes. But behavioral? Not in the least. Why does behaviorism insist upon soiling every discussion I hear about the system? Maybe it's a word game sorta thing - when you think "personality," you think observable traits. And thus, we're taken in. Though the way I see it, a basic passion, driving force, bias - call it whatever you like - represented as an Enneagram point can lead to any damn observable trait you can imagine. So... since one of the foundations of your convoluted argument has been exposed not only TO thin air, but AS thin air itself, I'm afraid that renders the rest of it useless. Now, go read Tom Condon's essay "The Trouble With Typing," and save the wordy, technical talk for the real Enneagram of "personality," not this "horoscope mag" sham imitation based on observed traits, abilities, personal qualities, ad nauseum.

: So long!

: pork

Follow Ups:

• Re: The problem with Motivation pork ^(oo)^ 01:17:53 03/08/00 (1)
  • Thank you Cory 02:12:31 03/08/00 (0)

Post a Followup