enneatypes: method & spirit - universal publishers · arrows in the enneagram. part vi: models...

ENNEATYPESMethod & Spirit

Our nine basic compulsions

Tad Dunne, PhD

Enneatypes: Method & Spirit

Copyright © 1999 Tad DunneAll rights reserved.

Universal Publishers/uPUBLISH.comUSA • 1999

ISBN: 1-58112-793-6

http://www.upublish.com/books/dunne.htm

Also by Tad Dunne:

We Cannot Find Words (Dimension)

Lonergan and Spirituality (Loyola)

Spiritual Mentoring (HarperSanFrancisco)

Spiritual Exercises for Today

(HarperSanFrancisco)

Contents

Introduction The Enneatype SystemAn Overview

Part I: SpiritualityA definition compatible with contemporarypsychology, including a language for speakingof God.

Part II: CompulsionA definition. Comparison to “sin.”Shortcomings in current enneatype theory.Basic terms for speaking about compulsion.

Part III: MethodTen points of analysis used for eachenneatype.

Part IV: EnneatypesThe nine types, each analyzed according tothe ten points of analysis.

Part V: TypingUsing the right side of the brain.Comparisons among the enneatypes. Thearrows in the enneagram.

Part VI: ModelsA critique of the models of Gurdjieff, Ichazoand Naranjo. A proposal using the model ofLonergan.

Part VII: Enneatypes for TeenagersAn essay written for teenagers on how to be.

INTRODUCTION: THE ENNEATYPE SYSTEM

A Theory of Compulsions

In the past few years, a new personality theory has caught theattention of psychologists and counselors. The theory laysout nine types of compulsive personalities, with theexpectation that each person must fall into one of the ninetypes.

Compulsions are the neurotic but common ways we respondto ordinary events. They are not psychoses, but nor are theythe cultivated habits of the mature aspects of ourpersonalities. Compulsions are automatic reactions to thestresses of life. They work without our thinking much aboutthem, which is why they get us into trouble. They cause aninner confusion about how we really feel. They can createself-doubt. They can make us act in ways we regret and yetmake us go ahead and act the same way again—sticking ournoses in everyone else's business, or feeling sorry forourselves year after year, or scolding our children and ourparents, or just getting frozen, afraid and unable to step out.

Even when we try to understand our compulsions, we seemto get nowhere. In fact, the people we think of as smarterthan us often seem more compulsive, not less. It's as if thesubconscious roots of our compulsions have infected ourconscious minds with stupidity about ourselves. This is whywe need a theory that explains how compulsions work.Especially a theory that can return to our minds that power tounderstand ourselves that our compulsions usually block.

The enneatype theory is called a “protoanalysis,” meaning aninitial identification of a compulsion. It is a starting point.However, it is not just an approximate guess subject to laterrevision. On the contrary, it is a firm estimate of central

2 Enneatypes: Method & Spirit

character traits that serves as a foundation for furtherunderstanding.

The nine compulsions (ennea means “nine” in Greek) areusually represented on a circle to indicate relationships thateach compulsion has to adjacent compulsions. There are alsoa number of relationships between non-adjacentcompulsions, and these are usually represented by theenneagram—a circle with nine equidistant points on itscircumference and secants within the circle connecting non-adjacent numbers. The theory has been referred to either asthe enneatype system or, more simply, as the enneagram.1

Enneatype supporters make the bold claim that these ninecompulsions represent the sum total of all possiblecompulsions. There are subtypes and degrees of intensitywithin each of the nine, but none of the nine can besubordinated to another, and there are no further basiccompulsions to be added. If this is true, then it follows thatall the apparently dissimilar neurotic behaviors displayed byany individual have a single source. That is, underneath the

Introduction 3

wide variety of obviously compulsive actions shown by anindividual there lies a single, less obvious problem, a rootcause branching out into a variety of actions that otherscannot understand.

The idea of a root cause is immensely helpful topsychoanalysis, both the kind we do to ourselves every dayand the kind we receive from psychotherapists. Instead ofworking on many seemingly unconnected issues at the sametime, we can work on the single issue that underlies them all.By identifying nine possible basic compulsions, the systemgives a limited field of possible basic causes to explore. Italso vastly speeds up therapy. Enneatype practitioners claimthat it usually takes them less than 15 minutes to identifyyour compulsion. You need to verify this in personalexperience, and although verification can take months as yourecognize the many ways the compulsion works in youreveryday life, the system claims to give insight upon insightinto your otherwise befuddling experiences.

This root-cause approach is not new. For centuries, religiousleaders have expected that human troubles have simpleroots—“The love of money is the root of all evil.” It wasduring the 3rd and 4th centuries that Christian monksdeveloped a limited list of “capital” (from the Latin for“head”) sins. By the Middle Ages this list was canonized atseven, with the understanding that these seven are the chiefsins of which we are capable. Not much was made of this listby contemporary psychology, however, until the emergenceof the enneatype system. What is extraordinary, given theirindependent origins, is that seven of the nine enneatypesexactly match the Seven Capital Sins. Thus, if we add Deceitand Self-righteousness to the Seven Capital Sins, we mapdirectly onto the nine enneatypes.


Here is the traditional summary view of the nine enneatypespaired with their corresponding Capital Sins:

Enneatypes Capital Sins

One: The Perfectionist Anger

Two: The Helper Pride

Three: The Star Deceit

Four: The Romantic Envy

Five: The Hoarder Avarice

Six: The Guardian Self-righteousness

Seven: The Planner Gluttony

Eight: The Bully Lust

Nine: The Slug Sloth

The number in front of each enneatype is often used as aname for that type. A Perfectionist might be called a “One”or a Planner a “Seven.” These numbers do not indicate anypriority among the types, however. A One is neither morecommon nor more pathological than a Two. This justhappens to be the numbering passed down from strange andobscure sources. Also, as we shall see, the names for eachcompulsion will vary, depending on which author you read.

If you are not familiar with the nine compulsions or theenneatype system, you should jump immediately to Part IV,where each of the types is described. At least browse thosepages to become familiar with each type. In this introduction,I provide some history and assessment of the system that willmake sense only to those familiar with it. This introductionand the material leading up to Part IV are aimed at peoplewho sense something valuable in the enneatype theory butare concerned that it may be just another soon-to-be-forgotten pop psychology.

Introduction 5

Origins

One reason the theory smacks of pop psychology is that itsorigins are shrouded in numerology, pledges of secrecy, andgnostic teachings. We are at a loss to understand theconditions under which it was developed. We know littleabout the cultural and social perspectives of those who put ittogether and why they felt the need for such a theory. Wehave no idea of the mental states of the individuals whoprovided the evidence of the nine compulsions, and fewclues about what psychological traditions influenced itsearliest practitioners. All we can do is to see how well theideal types fit actual individuals. Still, this kind of testingthrough actual practice has been going on since the early1970s by respectable professionals, and they report someamazement over the depth of analysis it provides.

People often compare the enneatypology to the Myers-BriggsType Indicator, which classifies 16 personality typesaccording to one's preference for ways of taking inexperience and making decisions. The chief differencebetween the theories is that the Myers-Briggs instrumentindicates personal preferences, all of which arepsychologically normal, while the enneatypes indicatepathologies—all psychologically abnormal. We might saythat all the Myers-Briggs types are healthy, while all theenneatypes are sick. This difference in approach resultspartly from the psychological frameworks of those whodeveloped them The Myers-Briggs indicator is rooted inJungian psychology, which carries a positive attitude towardhuman consciousness, while the enneatype system isinfluenced more by Freudian psychology, which tends tosuspect consciousness. So the Myers-Briggs is useful forhelping fellow employees accommodating their particularthinking styles each other. It can help couples and groupsidentify the different ways of learning and of evaluating that


exist among them and to deploy their relative strengthsaccordingly. The enneatypology, in contrast, is useful foridentifying neuroses. The essential work is personal; it is upto me to catch myself in a compulsive routine, to understandhow self-defeating it is, and to take up an appropriatetherapy. But the system also provides professionals with ascheme for identifying compulsions in their clients andhelping them to gain some measure of freedom.

Currently, not many psychologists rely on either the Myers-Briggs or the enneatype system for diagnoses. There need tobe more empirical studies of these theories that correlate withthe standard psychometric tests in psychology. At leastamong self-help groups and pastoral counselors, the Myers-Briggs indicator enjoys a wider and less controversialreputation than the enneatypology. The 16 preferences in theMyers-Briggs are easily understood; anyone can readily findJung's comments on people's preferences betweenextraversion and introversion, between sensate observationand intuition, and between thinking and feeling.2

The enneatypology, in contrast, emerged from a Sufitradition unknown to most Sufis and from George IvanovichGurdjieff, a Greek-Armenian self-styled visionary withdubious credentials. Gurdjieff's “enneagrams” professed toexplain a wide variety of subjects, ranging from physics andastronomy to music, dance, and how to organize yourkitchen. In 1970, Oscar Ichazo, a Bolivian teacher inintellectual linkage with Gurdjieff, presented hisdevelopment of the nine compulsions as representing whatGurdjieff called the “Chief Features” that underlie the biasesin anyone’s personality. It is important to keep in mind thatIchazo's presentation was only one part of a larger system ofself-discipline aimed at overcoming obstacles to full psychicliberation because one of the criticisms of the enneatypetheory is that by itself, it does not provide much direction on

Introduction 7

how to overcome compulsions. Ichazo left the work oftherapy to other segments of his total system.

Although Ichazo's students promised not to publish thismaterial on the enneagram, they could not keep silent about ahidden treasure for long. Eventually second- and third-generation students published a number of books3 and tapes.Many of them describe each of the nine compulsions indogmatic terms—a style that allures some and alienatesothers. The allure among nonprofessionals, it seems to me,results less from the insights into pathology and more fromthe insights into a person's uniqueness. Indeed, the outcomeof many enneatype workshops is not a therapeuticprescription but a certain pride and self-esteem over beingsuch-and-such a type, along with a feeling of belonging tothe enlightened. Also, the enneatype theory is often pairedwith the Myers-Briggs Indicator merely to name anorientation of the psyche without attempting to free a personto act outside of that orientation.

Positive Aspects of the Enneatype System

One of the most impressive yet disturbing claims made byenneatype devotees is that these nine types cover the totalhuman range of compulsions. Not ten, not eight.4 There aresubsets among the nine, but no more than nine basiccompulsions. This claim is based on an unfamiliar model ofpersonality5 and on the “enneagram” logo.6 But what reallydisturbs professionals is that despite the dogmatic claims ofthe theory and an absence of experiment-based research, it isdifficult to find anyone who fails to fit one of the types.Professionals familiar with the enneatypology, after anumber of years working with the tool,7 feel that these nineare just about right. And numerous individuals claim that thesystem helped them to reach an understanding of theirpersonal compulsions that surpasses other systems incomprehensiveness of analysis. It appears that this weird,


unempirical, upsetting, gnostic and mystifying map of thepsyche seems to work.

In 1990, Claudio Naranjo, M.D., published Ennea-typeStructures: Self-Analysis for the Seeker.8 Enneatype studentswere eager to read what he had to say, since he led thedevelopment of the theory among English-speaking publics.He learned the theory from Ichazo in 1970, and beganteaching it the following year. He was attracted to Ichazo'sideas after years of dissatisfaction with what WilliamSheldon and Raymond Cattell had to say about the possiblevarieties of temperaments. Either there were persons who didnot fit their categories or their categories did not form aclosed system.9 Naranjo's book, among the smallest on thesubject, builds the theory on much more solid ground. Thisground, however, is more strongly influenced by Freudianpsychology and existential philosophy than Ichazo'spresentations, which rely on an eclectic collection ofconcepts and neologisms.

Naranjo lends legitimacy to the theory in several ways. Theapproach of the professional pathologist is evident in hiswriting. In his Transformation Through Insight: Enneatypesin Life, Literature and Clinical Practice (1997), he recordsrich descriptions of each type taken from the psychologicalliterature, from classical literature, and from his own clinicalpractice, including numerous fascinating verbatim accountsof moving with a client from confusion to insight totransformation.10 He regards the theory as a diagnostic tool,not a value-free personality profile. Unlike most otherenneatype authors, who tend to pile adjective upon adjectiveand style upon style to cover the many variations possiblewithin each compulsion, Naranjo keeps the set of descriptorslimited. He wants these descriptors to function the way theyfunction in clinical manuals such as the DSM IV,11 namely,as a list of discrete phenomena sufficient to distinguish onetype from another. By describing diseases with as little

Introduction 9

overlap as possible, he enables therapists to spot the coreproblem more quickly and waste less time on manifestationsof the problem shared with other compulsions.

Naranjo also takes pains to develop a distinction between apassion (such as anger, envy, gluttony, etc.) and a cognitiveerror that underlies that passion. These errors amount touncritical assumptions about what life is like—the kind ofoversimplified worldview (and subsequent inappropriateadaptive routines) that Albert Ellis deals with in his rational-emotive therapy.12 For example, a Bully supports hisvengeful passion by the cognitive principle, “Nobody gives asucker an even break. “ Or a Hoarder might rationalize herpassion of avarice and its subsequent watchful stance bythinking, “Always, always, look before you leap.” Naranjobelieves that by pinpointing cognitive errors, we can spot ourpet myths, rob the corresponding passion of its rationale, andthereby weaken its grip on the psyche.

Another contribution Naranjo makes to the theory is that heconsistently explains the psychological dynamics at work ineach compulsion, rather than just stating them. By appealingto our understanding, rather than an empty-minded docility,he invites us to consult the workings of our own psyches toverify his claims. Genuine understanding is no smallachievement. Our minds are easily content to be familiarwith words, and this substitutes for insight into the realitiesthe words represent. Only under the whip of intellectualdesire will we uncover for ourselves some of our psychicgremlins that have never seen the light of consciousness.Likewise our hearts are easily comforted with comfortablefeelings. It takes an inner discipline, responsible to no onebut ourselves, to face up to the emotional discomforts ofacting responsibly. In my experience of teaching the theory, Ifound that many students find it too difficult to allow thedoctrine to peek behind their personas and uncover themischief going on there. They simply gobble up the doctrine


to fatten a ravenous compulsion. So the Star uses theenneagram to advance her own reputation. The Planner usesit to keep his excitement level high.

Enneatyping is particularly difficult for teachers. They aretempted devour the lore with teaching in mind, not learning.The work, however, is for people who possess enough self-knowledge to know that in the School of Self-Knowledgethey are learners. Whether the work is carried on alone orwith the help of a therapist, the aim of the work is not tosettle what our basic compulsion is, as if from that point onwe know what box we're in. The therapeutic outcome is notto identify a conceptual scheme that sometimes describes ourbehavior. No, the desired outcome is a personalunderstanding of our specific experiences of not being ourbest selves. The enneatype conceptual schemes serve only asinitial pointers to what may be causing our troubles.

This is why it is important to hold the enneatype system atarm's length. Although some people seem to fit a single typeperfectly, others seem to fit several types. Are these justpeople whose self-deceit eludes everyone's analysis, all thewhile being victims of only a single compulsion? Or havethey really developed several distinct compulsions?Practically speaking, it makes no difference, as long as usersrely on the enneatype system as nothing more than atypology. It is a cluster of concepts that represent fixationsand behaviors that logically hang together. Their conceptualconsistency is merely a model to help people raise relevantquestions about inner events that possess a slippery logic oftheir own.

Besides his economy of description and reliance on personalunderstanding, Naranjo brings philosophical acumen to thetheory. He represents a minority of psychologists today whoare concerned about the larger existential issues of beinghuman. Going beyond Ichazo, Naranjo bases each

Introduction 11

psychological dynamic on a fundamental spiritual crisis hecalls “ontic obscuration,” which is a moral deafness to ourinner drives to be authentic persons. The term “ontic” derivesfrom the Greek word for being—not the abstract beingstudied by some idealist philosophers, but the everyday,existential question we all ask ourselves, “How should I be?”“Ontic obscuration” means I have muddied the issue of howto be. I fail to pursue the question intelligently, and so I livewith the uncompleted task of not being my best self,whatever that may mean to me.

Other, less existentially based authors settle for categorizingpeople by behavior patterns. Or, if they look to childhoodtraumas to explain present weirdness, they settle forexplanation rather than go on to the more difficult work ofreclaiming the original self. Indeed, popular psychologyusually lacks the words and ideas with which to reflect onthat innermost work of authenticity. But by paying directattention to “ontic obscuration,” individuals can discover thata major driver behind their compulsive responses lies in howseriously they take those quiet impulses to be fully human orelse how consistently they have avoided the inner workinvolved in staying human.

Naranjo proposes that just as certain cognitive errors underlieeach passion, so certain existential failures underlie eachcognitive error. It is difficult enough to dig down to myfundamental cognitive error and understand how it affectsmy affective life. But this is what psychological analysisdoes, and usually does successfully. Deeper still—andsupporting both the cognitive and affective superstructures ofmy psyche—is the wellspring of my person, the source of mybest inspirations and my shrewdest discernments. Cover thatup and I'm in trouble, not just psychologically butintellectually, morally and religiously. This is whatphilosophical analysis does, but usually does poorly.


This “ontic obscuration” underlies each compulsion in itsown manner. Imagine the nine compulsions arranged along aline with the Slug at the center.13 Or see the drawing on thecover of this book.

The Slug thoroughly obscures inner voices about how to behuman. On either side of the Slug, the Bully and thePerfectionist hear the voices dimly but respond through afocus on externals, especially through various forms of angerbecause things are not what they should be. Farther out onthe Perfectionist's side, the Helper, the Star, and theRomantic hear the voices, but they divert their desire tobecome fully human persons into becoming persons whoseimage carries clout in the lives of others. And farther out onthe Bully's side, the Planner, the Guardian, and the Hoarderalso hear the voices, but they divert a fear of not becomingfully human into strategies designed to protect the little bitsof personhood they believe they possess.

Naranjo refers to this approach as his “Nasruddin” theory.The story goes that the Mullah was crawling in an alley neara marketplace, searching for the key to his house. A friendjoined in the search and, after finding nothing, asked theMullah, “Are you sure you lost the key around here?” The

Introduction 13

Mullah responded, “No, I lost it at home.” The friendnaturally asked, “Then why are you looking for the keyhere?” And the Mullah replied, “The light is much betterhere.”14

The point is that we often look for the key to our house outunder the sun, where everything seems clear. But the key isin the house, and the house is dark.

The Existential Question: How Should I Be?

For all the benefits of Naranjo's “ontic obscuration,” he doesnot explain in precise terms what being human involves. Heonly describes what it feels like when one’s sense of beinghuman is obscured. For example: “loss of a sense of I-am-ness” and “something missing inside.”15 At times hepresumes that deep down people really know the experienceof “ontic obscuration.” At other times he claims that theobscuration itself prevents people from realizing that anykind of obscuration has occurred. So, while it is appropriatefor him to recommend that the seeker find a mentor to helprecognize a compulsion, the theory would benefit also from apositive understanding of just what it is that “onticobscuration” obscures.

To uncover this prize, we need to investigate how beinghuman happens to be obscured in the first place. Its originsextend back to our birth. Existentially, we are born blindinsofar as we start out life totally incapable of raising aquestion. So this “obscuration” is already present in us asinfants. Our blindness about how to be is not a matter ofhaving obscured what once was clear; it is rather a matter ofnot having learned how to see. It is not a breakdown inmental development but rather an unfinished development. Ifit were a breakdown, we would have to find the cause behindit. But since it is an unfinished development, we are lookingfor the absence of a cause that ought to be there.


There are many stages in intellectual development, but Ipropose that the critical development here is the movementfrom a world of images, observable behaviors, symbols andexternal sensations to the larger world of meaning andvalues. As children, we were able to pose questions abouthow to be only by using images. Should I be pushy?Compliant? Generous? Teacherly? Observant? Like a lion?A turtle? A bird? A monkey? Like Uncle Albert or AuntRose? Like my teacher or like the kid next door? Earlysuccessful functioning of one of these styles sets up a habit.The successful habit becomes the source of evidence that theworld around us must be of such and such a nature—the onethat matches our chosen strategy. To the Bully, then, theworld is dog-eat-dog. To the Guardian, the world is riddenwith crooks. We build up a behavioral style and support itwith a cognitive commitment to a particular strategy. Themerit of the enneatype system is that it names nine basicstrategies, nine basic ways to “be.” They are:

1. Be correct Perfectionist2. Be related Helper3. Be impressive Star4. Be sensitive Romantic5. Be retentive Hoarder6. Be wary Guardian7. Be pleasing Planner8. Be pugnacious Bully9. Be calm Slug

We become capable of noticing our compulsions as suchonly later, when we learn that proper use of our minds andhearts is more important than proper behavior, and thatintelligent analysis and reasonable judgment put us in touchwith the real world far better than images and symbols can.Only the person who has learned to think about inner acts ofmeaning can make a statement such as, “There I go again,”as he or she catches on to unreal thinking and feeling.16

Introduction 15

This learning represents a major jump in thinking skills. Ithappens when we discover that the world is not just “alreadyout there.”17 The real world is also the invisible world madeup of the acts of meaning that occur in people's minds andhearts—the agreements, the plans, the guiding ideas, thereigning values, the loyalties, the spites, the memories, thelaws, and the language of any people. It is the absence of thisintellectual development, rather than the presence of anycause, that accounts for the persistence of childhoodcompulsions and strategies in later life.

Here's a thought experiment that points to the differencebetween the “already out there” world and the world ofmeaning and values: Consider what a hospital is.Spontaneously we imagine a building full of beds andmedical equipment. But suppose that some malevolent forcesuddenly wiped out the memory of everyone in that building.Doctors would stand around in white coats staring dumbly attheir stethoscopes. Patients would have no recollection thatthey were once healthy. All the tubes, meters, charts,instruments and ID badges would mean nothing. In truth,there would be no hospital there. A hospital—like anyinstitution—is essentially an agreement of people to gathermaterials for designated purposes. It needs the visiblebuilding as its material infrastructure, but the essence of ahospital is a network of agreements and wits—meanings andvalues.

Somewhere along the road from our childhood to ouradulthood, we learned that agreements and wits run theshow. But most people never realize the full implications ofthis learning. It takes an intellectual conversion to bring thisrealization to my philosophy, religion and ethics. Under thelight of this conversion, we can realize that wherever peoplerestrict the real to the visible, audible or tangible—the“already out there”—they bracket out the most significantrealms of reality. Under this conversion we can acknowledge


that former precepts such as Be correct, Be connected, Besuccessful, Be sensitive, and so on, were established in themind of a child who had no alternative but to think withpictures and symbols. But we can also realize that in theworld of meaning and values, any precepts on how to behuman should replace these image-based precepts. If anysuch human-based precepts exist, they should be based onhow my mind and heart work when they work well.

“Ontic obscuration,” therefore, represents an incompletedevelopment that carries an intellectual component. True,people rely on their agreements and wits to tackle thepractical concerns of everyday life. But it is rare to findpeople who understand how their unfinished intellectualconversion created their difficult and confusing situations.Rarer still are people who can tell you more generally hownormal understanding ought to work, how any incompleteentry into the world of agreements and wits distorts thatnormal understanding, and whether there are neglectedelements in the heart that can hasten a more healthydevelopment.

What's Missing

Some enneagram books reduce it to a game to help peoplelaugh at themselves. Laughter is reputedly the best medicine,so this is no small benefit. Other books contributed to thedevelopment of the enneatype system by integrating insightscoming from the analytic tradition, existential psychotherapy,Gestalt therapy, and various forms of cognitive therapy.Some of these also rely on laughter to help people reach anequilibrium between taking themselves too seriously and, onthe other hand, neglecting the work of the soul.

Introduction 17

Spirituality

What the majority of books lack, however, is an integrationof the pathological aspects with the existential question ofhow to be. If human “well being” means following the bestdictates of our minds and hearts, and if we admit that thedictates of practically everyone's mind and heart are oftenself-contradictory, then we enter the territory of invisible,inaudible events that are chronically dysfunctional. Today,we call this territory psychology. Yesterday it was calledspirituality. Both deal with lifting our minds and hearts tohigher functioning. Spirituality, however, has been bumpedfrom the limelight. One reason for this is that it became tooclosely tied to religious and moral dogmatism—somethingthat some “spiritual” groups tend to favor in any age.Another is that contemporary psychology tends to rebut theidea of God and any destiny higher than this life. But thedomain of spirituality did cover an aspect of the humanpsyche that contemporary psychology does not, namely, ourpenchant for acting against our better judgment. It was called“sin.”

There is an absence of a sense of sin in contemporarypsychology. Naranjo acknowledges spiritual traditions butmainly in their symbolic and mythical expressions of a “fall”of consciousness. In his effort to shift from the world ofsymbols to the world of agreements and wits, he equates thisfall with abnormal existential development that has directmanifestations in psychological pathology. Fair enough, butlike almost everyone in the psychological community, he hasbent over backward to avoid anything smacking of religion,lest some of religion's old, infantalizing dogmatism returnwith seven devils. But most people believe in God, and thenotion of spirituality is gaining respect even among theseserious-minded professionals. Existential psychotherapieshave yet to explain why we regularly undermine ourpsychological and moral development. Nor do they explain


why we can knowingly destroy someone else's well-beingwith full knowledge that we're doing something wrong. Adeeper approach to the human spirit is needed, one that takesinto account the possibility that we can be redeemed by aHigher Power, indeed that there is no other way to theredemption we seek. A theology is needed here tocomplement philosophy and psychology—but a new kind oftheology. It ought to be one that takes human experience asits starting point, rather than the dogmatic statements workedout by other peoples, in other times, with other problems.

Fortunately, theology is beginning to take the data ofconsciousness as its starting point, rather than “truths” spunout for needs in centuries past. Theologians today arestudying how the mind recognizes “truth” in the first place.They have worked out the psychological, social andhistorical forces on the writers of the Bible and Koran. Theyhave acknowleged that religious doctrine is humanlydeveloped, and, in order to maintain a critical stance,acknowledged also that all human developments are subjectto bias and error.

So the foundations for this bridge between an empiricaltheology and a full psychology of the human spirit have beenbuilt on both sides, particularly through the influence ofexistentialism on each discipline. Naranjo takes “onticobscuration” seriously, as do other existentialpsychotherapies. Theologies that look to the data ofconsciousness as their starting points take seriously theexistential concerns we experience about how to be. We willlook more closely at this bridge under the heading of“spirituality” in Part I. In particular, we will give a definitionof spirituality that is empirically based and consistent withcontemporary scientific method. We will also define “God”in terms of the data of our consciousness—again, anempirically-based definition. This will set the stage for a

Introduction 19

discussion of psychological compulsion that covers the fullrange of the human spirit.

Method

The majority of the books on the enneatypes also lack anycritique of the theory itself. There are segments of it thathave never been verified in practice. The result is that someexcellent practitioners will appeal to a client's understandingwhere the theory explains itself, but where the theory cannotbe verified, they will become doctrinaire about the theory.Having studied religious dogma for many years, I find itironic that zeal for a humanistic psychology has noteliminated dogmatism. It has only unseated religious leadersand installed psychologists on the chair of judgment.

My purpose in this book is to help practitioners move towarda complete understanding of the system. Completeunderstanding is only an ideal, of course, and no book can doit all. But we can sketch out the framework of ideas withinwhich a complete understanding might be organized. By a“framework of ideas,” I'm thinking of something like DmitryMendeleyev's periodic table in chemistry. The frameworkwas there long before all its cell contents were discovered,and it was precisely this framework that guided the discoveryof gallium, germanium, and scandium. In the enneatypeframework, there are some blank cells as well. For example,authors differ on their descriptions of the subtypes, as well ason the meaning of the enneagram arrows connecting certaincompulsions. No one that I know of has seriouslyinvestigated the “balance” one is supposed to maintainamong the instincts of survival, sex, and socializing. Andthere are many classic psychological categories that may ormay not prove intelligible within this framework—categoriessuch as control, reaction formation, transference, repression,sublimation, shame, and anger. Regarding these and anyother such categories, I encourage you to fill in the blanks


with whatever wisdom you have already gained. As will soonbecome evident, the blank cells I want to focus on regardspirituality and authenticity for each type.

The categories I will discuss are as follows: description vs.explanation, neurotic bias, authenticity, psychic healing, andthree moments of psychic liberation—analysis, revelationand therapy. These are the key concepts that will enable us tounderstand compulsions and how they might be healed.Further on, I will discuss the larger problem of usingpsychological models and what approaches have been foundmost effective by scientists and practitioners today.

Overview

Here is an outline of the parts of this book:

In Part I --Spirituality—I will focus on a definition ofspirituality that gives a context to the enneatype system.

In Part II—Compulsions—there will be a definition ofcompulsion in light of spirituality.

Part III—Method—covers the question of appropriatescientific method in using the enneatype system. There Ipropose the structure that organizes the materials on eachcompulsion found in Part IV—Enneatypes.

Part IV—Enneatypes—gives a complete description andexplanation of each type. For newcomers to the theory, itmay be the better place to start.

Then Part V—Typing-- explores several ways to identifya particular enneatype.

Part VI—Models—reviews the model of personality usedby the developers of the enneatype system, followed by acritique and an alternative.

Finally, Part VII—Enneatypes for Teenagers—is anessay directed at teenagers. It is during these troubled

Introduction 21

years, I believe, that we develop the capacity to realizethat our psyches are underdeveloped and to identifycertain mistaken assumptions we made as children abouthow the world works.18

My ultimate purpose in this essay is to support thedevelopment of the enneatype system. I believe that many ofits current theoretical elements have solid foundation inreality. I also believe in the many enneatype practitionerswhose judgment I trust and whose integrity I admire. Theirrespect for the system and their breadth of experience helpingothers are warrant enough to say, “Don't underestimate theenneatypes.” Finally, I believe that there is much wisdom inancient spirituality, in contemporary philosophy, and incontemporary theology that can fill in the serious gaps of theenneatype system, chiefly gaps in methodology and anappropriate notion of spirituality. Hence, my title,“Enneatypes: Method and Spirit.”

enneatypes: method & spirit - universal publishers · arrows in the enneagram. part vi: models...

Documents