A Tentative Correlation: Enneagram and Humanitarian Socionics

It is interesting to understand the correlation between typology theories like Enneagram and Socionics, because then we can make some inferences from one to the other. We can also have some insight into possible redundancies or complementation between the theories.

I do not believe that Enneagram type has much correlation to the level of sociotype, since sociotype has a great deal of variation. In Humanitarian Socionics, any sociotype is capable of being paired with any subtype or any functional accentuation, but it doesn't give an explanation as to why we are drawn to specific functional accentuations or why those functional accentuations are specifically enduring (except for the fact that it relates to a psychological complex, which is obvious).

Enneagram is a deep and dynamic theory of fixations which are more enduring than our SHS subtype or accentuations. An enneagram type is more like a specific archetypal or motivation complex which describes our ability to flexibly flow in and out of certain functional motifs, rather than being a slave or resident of one particular function, while still being a stable structure. It might go further in explaining why we experience certain consistent functional motifs (permanent combinations of subtype/accentuation), regardless of our sociotype. Thus, our subtype/accentuation may be more deeply embedded than SHS theory would suggest. That said, the theories are still very complementary; the enneagram giving more structure and reason for the more enduring aspects of our subtypes and functional accentuations is a welcome development.

Sociotype likely gives certain socio-intellectual-biophysical boundary conditions and a flexible framework for our dynamic personality (e.g. subtype, accentuation, enneagram, etc.) to operate and play out within. This complementation may extend to other typology theories. It may be possible to be significantly more precise than the correlation I present here by looking in detail at Enneagram theory and correlating them to specific aspects of multi-level Socionics, but for now I will just give my general opinions.

It's also important to remember that we have a tritype in Enneagram, so you probably relate to at least one type in each center (can be more than one due to wings). Relating to one of these does not mean it's your main type, just that it is a major typical motif in your life.

First, there is the Enneagram Body/Gut triad: "Anger-based, how do you assert yourself as a separate individual being that is different than others, “anger” is standing up to reality, ego boundaries".

In Socionics, this relates to several things:

- Business Logic (P) and Power Sensing (F), since these functions involve matters related to anger, aggression, and standing up to anything

- Structural Logic (L), since it is a rigid and governs the precise location of boundaries

- Harmonization (Functions T, S, ethics), because these functions have blurred boundaries, take in the states of others and deal with the nuances of individuals and individual cases

Enneagram 8: This is a functional motif of emphasized Power Sensing (F) over and above any form of rationality. Power Sensing gives increased self-confidence, calm confidence in one's power, desire to acquire more power and control, accumulation and bursts of anger, authoritarianism, fighting spirit and sometimes fanaticism and tyrannical control. Power Sensing emphasized above rationality won't accept control or limits, much like an Enneagram 8. Also similar to Enneagram 8, Power Sensing and Business Logic can endure a lot and minimize their vulnerabilities.

Enneagram 1: This a functional motif of emphasized Business Logic (P) or Structural Logic (L), combined with a tense amount of subordinated Power Sensing (F). Logical functions like P and L give the ability to systematize and organize, stubbornness, strong boundaries in the thinking (sometimes up to black and white thinking and rigidity), discipline and insistence on finishing things to the end. The Enneagram 1 also has a tense anger and aggression underneath the surface, but it is subordinated to a much stronger superego (a righteous goal like Business Logic or rules like Structural Logic, which gives a person a strong sense of justice and very strong or rigid boundaries and discipline).

Enneagram 9: Without the strong boundaries of emphasized Power Sensing and/or Logical functions, 9 is a more common functional motif. It is especially pronounced in those with a lot of receptive-adaptive functions like T and S. These are flexible functions which adapt to their circumstances and surroundings, preferring to spend time in comfort and reflection and being sensitive to small changes. They can also be grumpy due to their sensitivity and tendency to get pushed around a lot. They are situational, permeable, and can see the point of view others. It can also come about due to increased ethics, since E and R have more blurred boundaries with the world than P and L, and the ability to empathize with others which is inherent in 9, as well as respect for individuals rather than rules (L), bottom line goals (P) or territory and ownership (F). The combination of S and R which often exists in 9 can make these people used to certain comforts and informal traditions.

Next, we have the Enneagram Heart/Image triad: "Shame, who are you supposed to be to yourself and others, the shame of not measuring up to that image, emotional processing"

In Socionics:

-The images we process in our psyche, especially the goals that we want to measure up to, relate to Linear Assertive functions, Business Logic (P) and Emotion Ethics (E) most of all. We also process images with the other dynamics functions, S and T, but that is more about memory and speculation, so not as related to the Image triad

-Structural Logic can also relate to aesthetics and images and the desire to appear perfect, so perhaps it deserves to be mentioned

Enneagram 2 and 4 are more directly emotional types, whereas 3 subordinates their emotions in favor of achievements. This doesn't necessary mean Enneagram 3's aren't emotional, since they can also be the best performers of all the types. The key to notice though is that Enneagram 3 perform especially well in a specific role that has already been delineated and cut out, towards which they can strive and succeed in. So overall, this triad will govern how we relate to our Linear Assertive functions.

Enneagram 2: 2 is the most naturally emotional type, so it relates to Emotion Ethics (E), but specifically Emotion Ethics with a + sign (+E). In Socionics, these emotions are more caring (subordinating +S), dreamy (subordinated to +T), more natural and desiring for themselves and others to be happy and included (coming from a place of -I), and sometimes intrusive in their care (leading to -F). Left types might be more common here, but they aren't necessary, since Right types can access +E through activity shifts and accentuations. This is the more hospitable, joyful, natural and sometimes intrusive emotions of the Enthusiast, but which an Enthusiast type is not necessarily defined by and which other types can use at a subtypical or functional motif level. It is a more Declarative use of E, leading to relative stability.

Enneagram 4: This is also an emotional type because it is delicate, sensitive and aristocratic and is all about amplfying its inner emotions and turmoil, but it is the much more rebellious, negativistic and imaginative emotion ethics of the EIE (-E). It is more imaginative and amplifying of inner states, frustrations and contradictions (subordinating -T), more sensitive to discomfort and its own needs (subordinated to -S), is inclined to protest and resist others attempts to force or relate to it (coming from a place of +F), and acts to separate itself from others and stand out as unique (leading to +I). It is a more Questive use of E, being reactive and quick to have a problem with anything out of alignment with its inner states, and because of this it can be much more unstable and quite cruel and critical at times (but it transforms the inner world because of it). Importantly, EIE's will not necessarily relate to Enenagram 4 and many other types can, because of subtypical and functional motifs which differ.

Enneagram 3: This is more of a linear assertive relationship to Business Logic (P), where a person doesn't focus on the amplification of +E or -E per se, but rather desires to succeed at some existing role or goal that would grant them love or positive regard instead. This is more like Emotion Ethics subordinated to, or playing a role for, Business Logic. Importantly, Enneagram 3's can still be quite emotional people, since they can still be great performers whose emotions move the audience extremely well, but these emotions will be oriented to a specific role (such as in the dominant subtype which wants success and winning above all, or with a P accentuation that is obsessed with achieving certain goals). However, 3 doesn't have to be so emotional and can just be oriented to hard work (P or maybe L if its slower or more perfectionistic work), whereas 2 and 4 are more strictly emotionally driven.

3, along with 9 and 6, are the most common. Even most EIE (those with -E program function) are at least as likely to be 3 as 4.

Finally, we have the Enneagram Head/Fear triad: "Fear, how do you navigate through a dangerous world, processing using the mind, questions"

In Socionics:

-The intuitive functions, T and I, both strongly relate to danger. T is concerned with danger and wants to avoid it and collect abstract information, whereas I suppresses concerns about danger and curiously explores the world, even enjoying the risk of touching, consuming and adventuring

-Structural Logic of course also helps us process any mentally oriented questions. It is noteworthy that structural logic probably has the strongest presence in all the centers combined, which makes sense since LSI is the probably the most common type in Humanitarian Socionics

-Extroverted functions, especially those like I and E, can help distract us from our fears and make us feel better, which also relates to how this fear triad plays out

Enneagram 5: This is the most classically fear oriented type which obsessively uses its own mind to collect information to understand the world, has a sensitive nervous system and remains detached. Most of all this relates to Temporal Intuition (T), which is inclined to collect lots of information about the world via its speculative mind and sensitive nervous system, and then come to all kinds of strange conclusions about it which may differ from common conception, all while remaining pretty detached and alien from others. Detachment is also served by L, which protects their nervous system via the isolation, discreteness and analytical detachment of structural logic, so Enneagram 5's are also likely to have an L accentuation, but L is subordinated to T here, since this is the head center more concerned with safety and the collection of information rather than having strong boundaries or sticking to rules. Enneagram 5's are going to use T and L to understand some abstract information or topic which often makes them seem quasi-autistic to others.

Enneagram 7: This is the opposite of 5, a type that uses fun, adventures, excitement and distraction to get away from their fear. They can also have a strong intellect, but it is not as inclined to stay with something in depth or with as much detachment, but is faster paced and wants to quickly move on to the next exciting transformation and use their intellect more quickly and wittily. Obviously this relates to Opportunity Intuition (I) most of all, which is an agile, explorative function that wants to touch and experience many aspects of the world and quickly moves away from anything gets too narrowly focused on something or needlessly heavy (since this sets off their T fear of being drowned in the depths, which their I is able to quickly get away from and suppress). Since this type wants movement and distraction, it's not going to want to do something requiring a lot of sedentary L discipline either, and thus its impatient with such details and rules. Instead, it's more likely to subordinate functions like Emotion Ethics (E) or Business Logic (P) to its Opportunity Intuition (I), since they give more opportunities for active momentum and fun. Occasionally this type can slip into Power Sensing (F) conflicts due to its familiarity and lack of respect for rules and boundaries, leading them to feel that they can touch and take what they want and not liking those who restrict them. However, with 7 in charge (subordinating most things to the I function), this won't get as serious as the boundary conflicts in types like 8 and 1.

Enneagram 6: This type also worries and has a lot of fear like 5, but they don't trust their own mind as much, and are more reactive and emotional towards threats to their safety. Instead, they develop an identification with ideologies, causes or principles which protect their safety and make sure they don't stray too far from others (like a 5 is inclined to with its purer T strangeness). Therefore, people with Enneagram 6 will still have a lot of T due to their concern for danger and inclination to speculate, but it will be subordinated to a rational function (P, L, E or R). This will instead give them something more reliable to devote themselves to which will protect them from danger as a proxy for their T that they use but do not completely trust like a 5 does. They might also develop power sensing to protect their T instead of rationality, choosing to fight against the dangers and injustices that they are so nervous about, dualizing their T and defending some kind of order that protects against such dangers. They are like rebellious victims with an acute central (Ni-Se) sense of oppression. Their reactivity is likely to also give them a more connective subtype with a more sensitive nervous system, like Dominant or Harmonizing, or at least an accentuation on such a dynamic connective function like P, E or T (not S because that would drown out the T concern for dangers).

Tritype archetypes can also be touched upon separately. Combining several of these types together may give something more than the sum of its parts, and lead to different functional motifs.