The enneagram is a diagram which embodies a personality theory. The diagram is a 9-pointed figure, and the origins are wrapped in vague and mysterious beginnings - discussion of Eastern European mystics, the Sufis, number theories, etc., is common.
The basic idea is that there are 9 types of people, who are related to each other by the position on the diagram. The two types beside your type, your "wings", are similar and you can tend towards one of them. There are also two other types which you relate to when under stress, or in security, which are across the figure from you. In other words, your main type + the two wings + plus the two "stress/security" points describe you - or 5/9th of the diagram potentially describes you, and the types that "describe you" cover all aspects of the personality space. As you can see the enneagram is not a sharp tool.
The 9 types can be chunked into 3 groups of three - and your wings and stress/security points ensure that your personality spans then entire space of personality as you are related to each of these groups, e.g. the enneagram does not actually seem to discriminate you into a type that is distinct and informative. These three goups describe how information/emotions are processed by your type - head/fear, heart/grief, body/anger. A generous reading is that the enneagram captures your stance towards objective, social, and objective reality - but reading books/webpages about the enneagram does not have this insight leaping out. In terms of labeling and understanding people, the enneagram seems too complex for what it does - 9 types? But you can be close to the wing? Or under stress and thus across the diagram, or perhaps you are secure and thus across in a different direction? Oh yeah - in some of the literature they point out that stress doesn't mean what we normally mean by stress, so maybe you are at your stress point when you are not stressed. Huh? Where are the clear and sharp distinctions that one would look for in order to justify the number of labels?
At best it seems that the 3 groups of three - head/fear, heart/grief, body/anger - offers some insight, and a reduced version of the enneagram (e.g. 3 main types of personality) could be useful. But at this point why even attempt to salvage the enneagram? The big 5 is an emprical description of personality that is on solid, if limited, footing. Why not simply find your big 5 properties, and then think about subjective, social, and objective reality as the environment that you are embedded in and which you must learn to live in in order to thrive? For that matter, if the 9 types actually were clear distinct types they should correspond to clusters of big 5 properties - if we looked at the 5-d space with points for each person who took the test we should see clusters of the points: to be precise, we should see 9 distinct clusters, one for each type. To my knowlege this has not been observed, pretty strong evidence that the "enneagram theory" is false.
You can take an enneagram test for fun - after first hearing of this theory I googled and took 3 different ones, from 3 different web pages which sold enneagram related products, and had three different results - not surprising since the theory does not seem to make sharply distinct categories. Even worse, some of the test show the "points" you have on each personality type and my score was fairly evenly spread over a huge subset (~3/4) of the personally types. Basically I could pick any personality type that sounded nice to me and claim it as "capturing me". To me it seems clear: the enneagram is pseudo-science that offers no insight or constructive means to understand yourself and others. Disturbing, as apparently this model is used by some counsellors and therapists, as a google and amazon search reveals, and since it appears to have no sharp and incisive properties that would justify such use it would be better to say the model is misused by some counsellors and therapists.
Pseudo-science is not inert, and can cause a lot of pain and damage. Any placebo value of the enneagram should exist with any other treatment plan, so I cannot see any value brought to the table. Folk psychology and traditions have the potential have capture interesting truths, but as far as I can tell the enneagram contains no such interesting aspects. In fact, it does not even seem to be a legitamate folk theory - with the "mysterious roots", with vague references to Sufis or other groups, likely being made up in order to give the false sense that the method is an ancient tradition (no evidence is given, and inconsistent stories exist, both of which suggest the "ancient system" claim is false). The story seems to be thus: the enneagram theory was made up in the 20th century, with false historical pedigree, and its claims to sort people into meaningful categories which help you understand yourself and others and grow falls apart under even the weakest examination.
Lowdown
- The enneagram lives up to its name (pronounced "any-a-gram": yes, you too can pick any of the grams/personality types you want to pick to describe yourself), but does not appear to live up to any of its claims.
Showing posts with label objective. Show all posts
Showing posts with label objective. Show all posts
Saturday, July 25, 2009
3 key planes - objective, subjective, social
There are 3 key planes that humans exist on - the objective, the subjective, and the social. Each is a "type of reality", and to have full, rich, and successful lives we must learn how to live in each of these planes.
Objective Reality. External reality appears to exist, seems to be persistent, and seems to be consistent. Few people dispute this - some philosophers, or the immature, may bicker at the edges and claim not to believe this, but their actions suggest otherwise [1]. Learning how to gain information, experiment, judge truth, use logic, and manipulate objective reality is an important set of skills. The scientific method is thus: ask questions of reality, and honestly listen to the answer. This is simple, yet not easy. Asking the right questions, actually paying attention to an answer, realizing when you meant to ask one thing but in fact asked another, and honestly listening (you often do not like the answer) are all not easy. What we typically learn as "the scientific method" in school is more often actually just some tactics used by scientists, and thus does not always make sense or even get used consistently, but the overall stragety is simple and the same - ask questions, honestly listen to the answer. Learning the basic scientific approach is powerful, has created vast material wealth in our society, and will improve your life to the extent you live the scientific method. It is mind boggling what we can do and create when we ask good quesitons, and take the time to listen to the answer. Learning the scientific method and creating the social conditions that allowed for the honest listening is no easy task. We have succeeded in doing so - anyone with the dedication and willingness can learn the scientific method, and learn how to live in alignment with objective reality. Many do not, including many scientists, but you can.
Subjective Reality. You are conscious. Amazing. It would be mind blowing, if it were not mind defining. This is one of the few things you actually truely know. Subjective truth is everything that feels important - emotions, love, meaning, consciousness, the moment. Many limiting beliefs exist, many unskilled ways of experiencing ones subjective reality exist. Learning how to handle your emotions, to build your character, is one of the most powerful and immediate ways of improving your life. Some scientists seem so taken by the power of objective truth that they seem to discount this factor of life [2], but you can "prove" the sheer insanity of doing so by just experiencing right now. Listen. Look. Feel. Amazing. We often forget just how awesome the universe is, right now, if we simple open our minds to the sheer crazy beautiful fact of consciousness and emotions. Learning to meditate and taking an experiential approach to life are good ways to hone your "subjective skills". Much that limits us are self imposed beliefs, not truth, or neglect of what is important on the subjective level - it doesn't matter if you do well on empty efforts, you are still wasting your time and life.
Social Reality. We are social animals, we need others, are limited by our group, and find meaning with others. Power is essentially our ability to conduct ourselves as we wish in a social environment. The misuse of power can seriously limit others, and preventing such misuse remains a key factor in maintaining a good society. It was a long and hard struggle to get to the point were power of the few was restrained to the point where a "commoner" could speak honestly and communicate what they have found about objective reality to others. If we create healthy and strong connections with others we create a vibrant social network that gives meaning, creates wealth, and gives capacity to our lives. Improving your social network brings value to others and to you, and allows you to both create and store value. Reaching out to others, picking and perking them up, open and honest communication - e.g. sharing yourself - are how you start to build these muscles.
As far as I can tell, these 3 aspects of human reality are "all there is". If we learn to handle ourselves in these 3 domains we will have happy and successful lives, if we don't we most likely will not.
Our society has focused mainly on objective reality and the creation of material wealth. The value and beauty the comes out of this focus is astounding. We live longer and better, to such an extent that even our trash is amazing - a powerful measure of just how wealthy we are (go back in time and you could sell much that we throw out for a pretty penny). We have choice and resources. But why do we focus on this aspect? The positive reason is that it makes for a comfortable and long life, one that is largely easy and pleasant, and it allows people to focus on what is important to and for them. The negative reason is that this is easier to do - we can "train" people to be a cog in a big machine, without much effort or consideration, and have reasonably amazing outcomes, we can do the easy (versus simple) and walk through life without engaging it and others. We don't have to think about how we are doing things, since we are guarenteed a "decent" result without effort.
The important implication is this: we both have vast resources - material wealth - and plenty of room for improvement. On an individual level, our society allows us to do almost anything we want to improve ourselves - and even if we are "poor" we are richer than most of the people currently in the world, and most of people who exisited in history. We are materially secure, even if we don't feel this way, it is true. We can take life choice "risks" without risking much - the worse case is that you are materially richer than "99%" of the people who have ever lived. On a collective level we can vastly improve others lives, both in simple (smile at a stranger) and profound (build up meaning in peoples lives) ways. The simple fact is this: we are materially rich, and yet we live in a society that is poor in social and emotional ways due to largely ignoring these factors (and due to the ease of our wealth we are not so hot at objective reality either - we are rich enough to be able to afford to be wrong and hold incorrect ideas without significant, or at least obvious, pain). Our focus on the material has given us security, and the means to engage either of the other two factors with almost no risk. We simply have to confront our fears, wake up, and engage reality. It is not easy, but it is simple, and it is rewarding.
Notes:
[1] If they truely believed otherwise, then offer them a bet: 1 to 1000 odds for money that objective reality does/does not exist. Put up $100 bucks, so they must put up $100, 000, and have the test as this: cut off your hand. If they truely believe there is no objective truth, then it does not matter if they cut their own hand off or not, if they loose the bet or not, etc. In fact, why are they wearing clothes and holding down a job and submitting to gravity and social norms? If one truely believed in no objective reality, would you live a normal and tedious life? One would have to be completely boring, unimaginative, and unintelligence to live a normal life - the only reason most people live normal lives is due to neccessity, they have strong objective constraints. If you are not constrained by objective reality, why are you limiting yourself? There is only one reason - you actually know, or believe, you are in fact so constrained. This footnote is painfully obvious, and should go without saying, but to a large extent our society has elevated criticism as an ideal - children are rewarded for pointing out faults, even if they are not significant, realistic, or important. Yes, sure, maybe objective reality does not exist - or is not as highly constraining as we think - but this is (1) obvious, and (2) not so productive or important. We train children to have a largly empty and impotent frame - stylistic criticism - and get adults who are diminuate, bitter, and immature. Criticism as a system is corrosive, limiting, and sad - and to a large extent is the focus of our educational system.
[2] This amazes me, but it is true. This may simply be a matter of strength - we tend to focus on what we are strong at, and discount other things. The sheer amazing wealth we have generated from focusing on the objective may also convince some, who are somewhat noncritical thinkers, that it is the only important factor - yes, it is amazing, but so are the other factors.
Objective Reality. External reality appears to exist, seems to be persistent, and seems to be consistent. Few people dispute this - some philosophers, or the immature, may bicker at the edges and claim not to believe this, but their actions suggest otherwise [1]. Learning how to gain information, experiment, judge truth, use logic, and manipulate objective reality is an important set of skills. The scientific method is thus: ask questions of reality, and honestly listen to the answer. This is simple, yet not easy. Asking the right questions, actually paying attention to an answer, realizing when you meant to ask one thing but in fact asked another, and honestly listening (you often do not like the answer) are all not easy. What we typically learn as "the scientific method" in school is more often actually just some tactics used by scientists, and thus does not always make sense or even get used consistently, but the overall stragety is simple and the same - ask questions, honestly listen to the answer. Learning the basic scientific approach is powerful, has created vast material wealth in our society, and will improve your life to the extent you live the scientific method. It is mind boggling what we can do and create when we ask good quesitons, and take the time to listen to the answer. Learning the scientific method and creating the social conditions that allowed for the honest listening is no easy task. We have succeeded in doing so - anyone with the dedication and willingness can learn the scientific method, and learn how to live in alignment with objective reality. Many do not, including many scientists, but you can.
Subjective Reality. You are conscious. Amazing. It would be mind blowing, if it were not mind defining. This is one of the few things you actually truely know. Subjective truth is everything that feels important - emotions, love, meaning, consciousness, the moment. Many limiting beliefs exist, many unskilled ways of experiencing ones subjective reality exist. Learning how to handle your emotions, to build your character, is one of the most powerful and immediate ways of improving your life. Some scientists seem so taken by the power of objective truth that they seem to discount this factor of life [2], but you can "prove" the sheer insanity of doing so by just experiencing right now. Listen. Look. Feel. Amazing. We often forget just how awesome the universe is, right now, if we simple open our minds to the sheer crazy beautiful fact of consciousness and emotions. Learning to meditate and taking an experiential approach to life are good ways to hone your "subjective skills". Much that limits us are self imposed beliefs, not truth, or neglect of what is important on the subjective level - it doesn't matter if you do well on empty efforts, you are still wasting your time and life.
Social Reality. We are social animals, we need others, are limited by our group, and find meaning with others. Power is essentially our ability to conduct ourselves as we wish in a social environment. The misuse of power can seriously limit others, and preventing such misuse remains a key factor in maintaining a good society. It was a long and hard struggle to get to the point were power of the few was restrained to the point where a "commoner" could speak honestly and communicate what they have found about objective reality to others. If we create healthy and strong connections with others we create a vibrant social network that gives meaning, creates wealth, and gives capacity to our lives. Improving your social network brings value to others and to you, and allows you to both create and store value. Reaching out to others, picking and perking them up, open and honest communication - e.g. sharing yourself - are how you start to build these muscles.
As far as I can tell, these 3 aspects of human reality are "all there is". If we learn to handle ourselves in these 3 domains we will have happy and successful lives, if we don't we most likely will not.
Our society has focused mainly on objective reality and the creation of material wealth. The value and beauty the comes out of this focus is astounding. We live longer and better, to such an extent that even our trash is amazing - a powerful measure of just how wealthy we are (go back in time and you could sell much that we throw out for a pretty penny). We have choice and resources. But why do we focus on this aspect? The positive reason is that it makes for a comfortable and long life, one that is largely easy and pleasant, and it allows people to focus on what is important to and for them. The negative reason is that this is easier to do - we can "train" people to be a cog in a big machine, without much effort or consideration, and have reasonably amazing outcomes, we can do the easy (versus simple) and walk through life without engaging it and others. We don't have to think about how we are doing things, since we are guarenteed a "decent" result without effort.
The important implication is this: we both have vast resources - material wealth - and plenty of room for improvement. On an individual level, our society allows us to do almost anything we want to improve ourselves - and even if we are "poor" we are richer than most of the people currently in the world, and most of people who exisited in history. We are materially secure, even if we don't feel this way, it is true. We can take life choice "risks" without risking much - the worse case is that you are materially richer than "99%" of the people who have ever lived. On a collective level we can vastly improve others lives, both in simple (smile at a stranger) and profound (build up meaning in peoples lives) ways. The simple fact is this: we are materially rich, and yet we live in a society that is poor in social and emotional ways due to largely ignoring these factors (and due to the ease of our wealth we are not so hot at objective reality either - we are rich enough to be able to afford to be wrong and hold incorrect ideas without significant, or at least obvious, pain). Our focus on the material has given us security, and the means to engage either of the other two factors with almost no risk. We simply have to confront our fears, wake up, and engage reality. It is not easy, but it is simple, and it is rewarding.
Notes:
[1] If they truely believed otherwise, then offer them a bet: 1 to 1000 odds for money that objective reality does/does not exist. Put up $100 bucks, so they must put up $100, 000, and have the test as this: cut off your hand. If they truely believe there is no objective truth, then it does not matter if they cut their own hand off or not, if they loose the bet or not, etc. In fact, why are they wearing clothes and holding down a job and submitting to gravity and social norms? If one truely believed in no objective reality, would you live a normal and tedious life? One would have to be completely boring, unimaginative, and unintelligence to live a normal life - the only reason most people live normal lives is due to neccessity, they have strong objective constraints. If you are not constrained by objective reality, why are you limiting yourself? There is only one reason - you actually know, or believe, you are in fact so constrained. This footnote is painfully obvious, and should go without saying, but to a large extent our society has elevated criticism as an ideal - children are rewarded for pointing out faults, even if they are not significant, realistic, or important. Yes, sure, maybe objective reality does not exist - or is not as highly constraining as we think - but this is (1) obvious, and (2) not so productive or important. We train children to have a largly empty and impotent frame - stylistic criticism - and get adults who are diminuate, bitter, and immature. Criticism as a system is corrosive, limiting, and sad - and to a large extent is the focus of our educational system.
[2] This amazes me, but it is true. This may simply be a matter of strength - we tend to focus on what we are strong at, and discount other things. The sheer amazing wealth we have generated from focusing on the objective may also convince some, who are somewhat noncritical thinkers, that it is the only important factor - yes, it is amazing, but so are the other factors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)