Home  Tests  Types  Diagrams  Books  Forums  Goals  Search
Main | Type 4 | Type 5 | Movie | Care | Chat

Enneagram Type 4 Board Archive

Re: Palmer's Four description is terrible

Re: Palmer's Four description is terrible


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 4 Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Ronnie on October 10, 1999 at 19:23:02:

In Reply to: Re: Palmer's Four description is terrible posted by Derf on October 10, 1999 at 19:06:26:

: Palmer's interpretation is cause enough for concern, but you're *really* lucky if you've never read the obscure Klausbernd Vollmar. He calls type Three "The Magician" and type Four "The Afflicted Person." Forget the "tragic romantic" hubbub - *here* can be found comic book and soap opera cliches of the most outlandish kind. I can't remember his name for type Five, but I think it was relatively positive (i.e., "The Sage"). A bit of value comparison here....?

I find Riso's descriptions to be the most accurate, although some types are portrayed better than the others. That's natural, otherwise the guy would be a god...but it seems he really has put effort to describing all subtypes as well as possible.

I've never read Vollmar, but try Michael Goldberg and his book about types at work (can't remember the name or the title for sure). They are the most stereotypical I've found thus far. Some examples, the five is a movie director organizing parties where no one meets him (and he wears coke-bottle glasses), the eight is a gruff guy with an ever present cigar and so forth. Still, he doesn't seem to make too strong value judgements between types, he finds good and bad things in each.

It's funny, Palmer's eight description made me feel I'd be that, but Goldenberg's made me feel I just can't be an eight...having a variety can help you understand.

Ronnie 2w1



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Type 4 Message Board ] [ FAQ ]
type4board/messages/3310.html