Oh, that. Well, that'd have to be how much our personalities mesh together, how much we share the same interests, and, once those are decided to be similar enough, how many experiences we've shared openly. Then again, I've become good friends with people who just seem to like me despite us not having much in common. I guess this gets into emotional connections which just seem to work despite any logic I'm aware of. I'm not sure I'm getting this question right. Are you asking how I decide I'm close with someone?
Yeah, so to speak. What made you attracted to them in the first place?
From your words I'm so going to put 4 and 5; at least concerning your attitude / view towards people. But I don't know which is the main.
sx variant? I guess so. For whatever reason, I haven't had a relationship yet, so I'm not so sure it's sx over sp. And yes, I very much want personal connections. But then again, doesn't everyone? What's the alternative? Having friends for show and social status? Connecting for connection's sake?
Also, I'm learning that just having matching interests isn't quite enough. Some people are just dull; it's like reading a textbook: interesting, but no connection. Then I worry that I'm that dull textbook, and so I try not to impose on others. But then if I'm expressive, I start getting really self-conscious if I don't get my desired reaction and I feel like I'm imposing. Anyway, I guess the point is that it's personality first, followed closely by interests. But if interests are incongruent, we'd never get to talk enough anyway.
Mmm, nope. sx variant isn't about relationship in the romantic sense but, more like knowing someone in the 'intimate' sense. You want to..not only know, but connect with them. Not that any other type doesn't need personal connections; we all do, to some extent. Only sx variant do so more frequent, more preference, and more expertise.
The way I see it, sx is all about the act of connecting personally. so, on the other hand, identifies oneself more with the 'group'. while sp variants relates others with oneself. YEAH, we all use three of them. :|
from the bolded part, you also seemed to have a so tendencies. sx/so variant?
ETA: Wait wait wait, I just realized something. If my type is supposed to be defined by my basic motivations and desires, doesn't that mean I will be satisfied or motivated to fulfill those? So am I lying to myself regarding competence or separation anxiety?
Sometimes I wonder how I can be so dense. Type 5 clearly makes no sense if that's the case, because I had problems when I was completely competent in the area I was working. And how are these personality traits supposed to arise from these basic motivators anyway? Now I remember why I had some serious problems with the Enneagram. Still, the discussion about me so far has been enlightening.
Maybe I'm actually 9w1-5w4-4w3? I could see a case for me not realizing that what I really need is more connection.
Not..exactly...defined per se. I would say it'd be the opposite. Our basic motivations is defining our types. But that's semantics. I also cannot say 'defined', because no, not all our problems always have the -same- motivation or desires as our Enneatype. With all the complexities of human, I don't think it's unnatural that every person has parts of the 9 Enneatypes inside, trifix aside (me myself am touching trifix with a 20-feet pole). Only that big part of our decision making is relied on one type, the way a painter may have a signature color theme, or a writer, signature styles.
(On another, possibly unrelated hand, I'm beginning to think of Enneagrams as what Jungian (and Freudian, iinm, but I'm leaning more towards Jungian) psychology is calling a 'complex', a set of thoughts that governed, controlled, and effected our thought pattern by itself)
On bolded part; what kind of problems are you talking about here? Most of the problems in type 5, as far as I'd seen, tends to be "This isn't enough." (There's bits of a personal bias here.) They always want to -know-, even when they might know compared to most people, they know better. It's all about self-development for the sake of self-development.
About personality traits and how it's developed...I'm personally saying that this is part of how our motivations are relating, conflicting, and compromising itself with the outside world. Defense mechanism, I'd say? That's why Enneagram tends to be VERY fluid, and for me, even more personal compared to MBTI. Yet it's best to keep it as that. This is something I'd been realizing only in myself, so I can't give much a credence over this; sometimes problems disguised themselves as another problem. What we thought was a problem, might actually another problem, only disguised. That's a part of why I always asked "why? WHY? is there something underneath?" when analyzing my own actions, but I totally digress...
*hugs* I'm glad you've been better now 
