|
Enneagram Type 4 Board Archive Re: My interpretationsPosted by Elizabeth on March 31, 2001 at 22:53:11: In Reply to: My interpretations posted by Cory on March 31, 2001 at 19:17:41:
: : Type 1: Obsessive-Compulsive : : Type 2: Histrionic I think there is a lot of confusion between the concepts of social masochism and (for lack of a better term) initimate masochism (which are both completely different from sexual S&M). I think initimate masochism (suffering for the love of family etc.) is closely akin to hysteria with it's dicotomy of love/hate. : : Type 3: Narcissistic : : Type 4: Oral/Avoidant (Affective disorders: unipolar & bipolar are common) I substituted a reference to affective disorders instead of including the depressive personality, which I am not sure actually exists for the very reason you just outlined. I prefer the term 'oral' because I think it explains the personality rather than the common symptomatic co-morbidity of affective disorders. : : Type 5: Schizoid/Schizotypical : : Type 6: Masochistic (Social, not sexual) : : Type 7: Antisocial "Innocent" histrionic! LOL. I think a lot of histrionic twos are mistyped as sevens, especially if they are male. Antisocial personality is not necessarily cruel (sadistic). It is their extremely low empathy levels that make them criminals. : : Type 8: Sadistic : : Type 9: Symbiotic Yes and no. The term symbiotic is key to the developmental concept that they are wanting to live in a merged state with the 'other'. Dependent is suggestive of separation and neediness. : : I realize this isn't a DSM outline but, once again, the DSM is a polical document created to outline legal definitions and is not a theory to explain personality in general. : That's an unfair statement. It was somewhat influenced politically (regarding the Sadistic and Masochistic personality disorders) because of the chaos it would cause in courts, especially in cases where a violent (sadistic) man beats his (masochistic) wife. The real reason for DSM happening was that psychiatrists needed a common language in diagnosing patients. They need to decide once and for all, on paper, what the criteria was for personality disorders. It was made for practical and scientific reasons. A common language is absolutely necessary for the practical functioning of the healthcare system and to have a consistant basis for diagnosis. I am just saying that it does not attempt to theoretically explain the interworkings of personality as a whole and shouldn't be treated like it does. : Here is an interesting question: On the enneagram, one must have an adjacent wing. What if a person has been diagnosed with Antisocial and Narcissistic personality disorders? Would they be a 7w3, or must they be 7w8 by default? Certain clusters mix well with the enneagram, e.g., Narcissistic/Histrionic (3w2), Paranoid/Schizotypal (6w5), but many people would have types in DSM that wouldn't have types on the enneagram. That is an interesting question and one I continue to give a great deal of thought. Most of the time, I think apparent co-morbidity is due to impurity in the understanding of the disorder. For example, narcissistic and antisocial personality share many similar key traits such as lack of empathy (the reason 3s and 7s make excellent salespeople). I think they are easy to confuse as a result. In addition, developmental disorders like autism can severely complicate the situation. I know a 5w6 who is a very high-functioning autistic, having gone undiagnosed until his late 30s. The autism often manifests itself in the form of extreme task orientation and rigid adherance to daily rituals appearing a great deal like obsessive-compulsive disorder. A psychologist could have easily missed his autism and given him a co-morbid diagnosis of schizoid personality and obsessive-compulsive disorder. So, as always, there are many mitigating and complicating circumstances.
|
|