Questions About Tritype...

Jonathan

Jonathan

Community Member
MBTI
INFJ (IEI)
Enneagram
4w5 so/sx
On my quest to understand the various dynamics of the Enneagram, I've passed through several developments in my understanding: I know what each type looks like (including their wings), and I really have a good idea of their "essences." I understand how they are all correlated, with directions of integration and disintegration. Most recently, I've developed a good understanding about how instinctual variants can make even people of the same type look very different. I'm good with all that.

However, this whole Tritype thing is really bothering me. When I first read about it, I got this really bad feeling like I had just spent many, many hours fine-tuning my knowledge of the Enneagram just to have many of its key concepts blown to oblivion. Furthermore, it seems a little disjointed with the rest of the system right now, and appears to be an attempt at a more 'inclusive' Enneagram system. Who knows, this may change, but it's really upsetting me.

So, here are my questions:
(I do apologize, I don't have the financial resources to buy the book on Tritypes as of now, so I'm using this forum to ease, [or intensify, who knows], my worry over this Tritype thing.)

1. Does Tritype interfere with the directions of disintegration? It seems to me that the Tritype approach is like a replacement of the directions of integration or disintegration; or at least distracting from them.

2. Also, if each person has three 'stacked' types that they use as backup for the more dominant type, would the two non-dominant types be subject to integration or disintegration? (If so, isn't that quite complicated?) For example, if I were to submit myself to this approach, my tritype would be Four-Five-Nine "The Philosopher". If I'm using Five as a backup, are my Five qualities still subject to influence from Types Seven and Eight?

3. Furthermore, in regard to wings: I'm a 4w5. In my Tritype, I would theoretically go to Five as a backup (as I definitely don't exhibit many of the traits of Six or Seven, and I definitely have the least identification with the Gut Center.) Would that interfere in any way with my Five wing?

4. My main problem is that I felt that the simple system worked well already. I thought that every type was able to be connected with the Head, Heart and Gut already because everyone has a wing. For example: As a Four (Heart), I'm connected to the One (Gut) and the Two (Heart). The Five wing (Head) would be connected to the Seven (Head) and the Eight (Gut). This gives me connections to the Heart twice (Four and Two), the Head twice (Five and Seven), and the Gut twice (One and Eight). All that I'm 'missing' is the triad of Three, Six and Nine.

Now, you could say I have a 'shortcut' to all the Centers because of my wing, but look at the 4w3. They are Fours (Heart), connected to Ones and Twos (Gut and Heart). The Three wing (Heart) is connected to the Six (Head) and the Nine (Gut).
The 4w3 is less evenly balanced, but knowing my sister; INFP 4w3 sx/sp/so; it makes sense that her Enneatype would have 3 connections to the Heart Center, but only one to each of the others.

5. Also, I like the Diamond Approach's element of the Soul Child. It really resonates, and has been strongly evident in my life, and makes a lot of sense for others, too. Would that simply vanish with this new emphasis on Tritype?

6. Finally, does Tritype have anything to do with the instinctual variants? For example, my stack is so/sx/sp. Would that mean that when I'm in 'Four mode' I'm placing more value on social instinct, when I'm in "Five mode" I'm placing more value on the sexual instinct (wow, that sounds...interesting...), and when I'm in Nine mode, it's self-preservation?

Clearly, I'm very lost. This is frustrating to me because people I know who want to learn more about the Enneagram are having difficulty with the basic system already, and I've been able to help them out thus far. Tritype adds what looks to me right now to be a cluttered mess atop a shiny, clean Enneagram! If people have any insights or explanations, I'd love to get this mess cleaned up. As of now, I either want to reach understanding of this approach, because I feel like simply dismissing it, which may not be wise in the long run.
 
Tritype is still a very new piece of the Enneagram, and I don't think we've discussed it much on this forum yet.

From what I understand about it, you still have one main "type" out of the 9, but each 9 have different characteristics (and this is further explained through the tritype theory).

For example, I'm a 9w1 sp/so...but I'm still not 100% completely like all 9w1 sp/so folks. I'm also an INFJ...and beyond that, if I examine the tritypes, my next type is 5 (Head), and my third is 4 (Heart). Some people feel the tritypes are your first three highest Enneagram scores while others see it as Gut, Heart, and Head (meaning your highest scores in those three areas.

I found this website to be particularly helpful, and the descriptions beneath the video clips are also very, very good at explaining tritypes: http://www.enneagram.net/tritype.html.

Also explore this description on the main Enneagram website: https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24325&whichpage=1 .

The theory fascinates me, actually, and I wouldn't mind discussing it more.
 
[MENTION=442]arbygil[/MENTION] thank you so much for the links, and the interest in discussing this. I had been to enneagram.net, but not the EI Forums. It clears quite a few things up.

I've also noticed there are many people here who use Tritype, but we've never really discussed it much.

The description from the Enneagram Institute was most helpful to me, but it was actually the videos from enneagram.net that confused me/ turned me off in the first place. To be honest, it may be mostly because I disagree with David and Katherine on a lot of aspects of the Enneagram. Having watched their recent Enneagram description video, I was disappointed in their rather narrow descriptions of all the types, and the fact that they included references to physical features and typed celebrities publicly, two things that I feel have the potential to mislead (I'm OK, though, with 'just for fun' celebrity typing here on the forums or with friends/ family). The video examples of the different people of different types seemed misleading as well.

I'm also not a New Age spiritualist, which seems to have a lot of prevalence in their thinking, so a lot of that turns me off. I much prefer the Riso-Hudson approach, because they are generally quite consistent, seem more open to the complex variations in personality, and offer their knowledge in a humble, helpful, and non self-righteous way that is respectful of various spiritual beliefs. Katherine and David strike me as more 'set in their ways.' But then again, so am I :) Recipe for a perfect disagreement.

Aside from that, the Enneagram Institute description cleared up the following things:
1. Tritype does not alter your instinctual variants. If you're a 4/5/9 social instinct type, you'll exhibit patterns of social Fours, Fives and Nines.
2. According to this point of view, the three types are fluid, manifesting themselves organically, with your dominant type prevailing the most strongly, instead of just switching from one instinct to the next. This point of view makes sense to me, as it affirms what I've noticed in many people who have identified with types from each Center, but they tend to be like 'undercurrents' that come and go, depending on their mood, persona, or circumstances. I have difficulty imagining going 'all the way' into Five or Nine mode, but I can feel those 'undercurrents' in different situations.
3. This explanation keeps the directions of integration and disintegration intact (phew), and suggests that Fours are likely to have trouble tapping into the Gut Centre, which makes total and complete sense to me, especially given my breakdown of connections above.

I still am having trouble with the fact that the secondary and tertiary types could potentially be affected by wings. In my case, that would come down to:

DOMINANT
Four +One, -Two
Five wing +Eight -Seven
SECONDARY
Five +Eight -Seven
TERTIARY
Nine +Three -Six

That's a lot of directions to keep track of, especially during overlap periods!

If I am to use this theory, my philosophy would be that it's simply a map of how you identify with all nine types. It still has some bugs to work out; which is understandable because it's new. I like the viewpoint of the 4/5/9 as 'the philosopher' because I can really relate to that archetype. I think I'll have trouble with it until everyone's on the same page as to what direction it's going, i.e. how the secondary and tertiary types manifest in the overall personality, but I'll give it a shot.

A person on the EI forums talked about how some people have trouble with new theories until Russ Hudson gives it the OK. The above is pretty much my view. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE theory, am open to it, and find it fascinating, but at some point it needs to make sense, and not contradict the fundamentals of the system. I hope that Russ Hudson adds something to the Enneagram Institute website about Tritype, but I think the fact that he's holding out because a) The idea was not his, and he may need to go through the process of gaining permissions, and b) I doubt he would put anything on the website unless he was sure the theory was sound. I feel like he has enough integrity and sense of responsibility to try not to mislead people. For now, I'll consider it to be an interesting theory, and I'd love to discuss views about it, but I'll hesitate to share it with others unless they have a solid understanding of the system, just to prevent confusion.
 
Limit said:
http://www.personalitynation.com/enneagram/2119-dominant-vs-tri-types.html

I have the same issues and MORE with Tritypes. It completely destroys the idea of the Enneagram.
Click to expand...

I couldn't imagine you missing the flaws in any type related theory! Thanks for the input :).

I kind of agree that this new aspect really puts the whole system in jeopardy. That's probably why we don't talk about it much here; it's such an iffy theory that everyone wants to know more about, but there simply aren't many plausible answers available. So, the unspoken rule is to just avoid the subject, which I'm planning on doing. While it's a seemingly insightful idea, I just have too many issues with it right now. I wish I liked it for the sake of those who follow it wholeheartedly and unquestioningly, and put so much thought into the whole thing, but it's just not working for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top