Posted by Cory on January 30, 2001 at 12:36:27:
In Reply to: Are you guys for real? posted by Sceptic on January 29, 2001 at 20:06:09:
As Tom said, the enneagram (like psychology) isn't a true science. Science relies on objective evaluation of empirical data. You can do this when measuring the ages of rocks, but not necessarily with unconscious motivations and inner feelings. You can measure certain parts of psychology empirically, such as surface behaviors however. So in the end, the enneagram is not based on certainty (like hard science) but more so on probability and pragmatism (like theoretical science such as quantum physics, et al.) If you are not willing to accept the limitations of the enneagram, then it's not for you.
It's really impossible to say if the enneagram is "true" or "untrue". However, this should not be of the utmost concern. Instead it is this: Does the enneagram WORK? Can I explain myself with it? Will it help me with my relationships and career? It may work for many people, but not all. It's not a Perfect system. It doesn't claim to be.
The enneagram is really quite simple really. It is based on the premise that while people are individuals and differents, many people have the same underlying motivations/insecurities/fears/etc. and that certain personality patterns emerge from this. Most of us naturally engage in personality typing. In our common language we have the "strong and silent" type, the "player", the "nerd", etc. We are not attracted to people who are "not our type". Plus, it's easy to see how certain groups of people have a lot in common. In our world we have yuppies, traditionalists, "wild childs", new agers, and others. These people have a common bond, a common motivation. The Yuppies tend to be motivated by success and money, the traditionalists want security and lack of change, the wild childs want independence and change, and so on. It's not likely that the wild child downing a bottle of Tequila while on the back of her boyfriend's Harley is in search of security and structure. Now, we can pretty much divide humanity up into an infinite amount of types. We can have two types or we can have two-thousand. What we need is a balance of complexity and truthfulness but also simplicity and pragmatism. We could divide people into two types, like "Outgoing" and "Shy" but we could only take this so far. People are outgoing for different reasons -- some like people, some want to influence the environment, some want attention, etc. And our personality extends far beyond how we are socially. On the other hand, we can have a personality system of two thousand types...but who is going to write the descriptions of each type? How will we remember each one? How can we tell a #284 from a #1358? The Enneagram divides people into nine main types and that provides a good medium. However, some of us favor more complexity, which results in wings, instinctual variants, and so on.
Despite all of this, I am not an enneagram worshipper. In fact, I've been this board's most vocal skeptic about it's validity! I have questioned whether or not wings must be adjacent, if the integration/disintegration lines have any value, and how much of the enneagram is just pure speculation. I've even offered skeptical arguments against these. But, what I am fairly certain of, and this is from my personal experience, is that the enneagram is a pragmatic tool which works for most people. You can divide people into the 9 types and beyond and they can apply it to their lives and it helps them.
This, I feel, is the true test of the enneagram.
-Cory