Walter: Hi Brian.
Brian: Walter, I missed the Enneachat, but wanted to participate. Do you think Jung might have been an INTJ? What about Ichazo's type?
Walter: Jung was apparently a dominant introverted intuitive or Point Nine - one of our buddies. When Nine's superior function is overdone, then the inferior sensation shoots them in the foot. Bi-polar inferior at Seven (Se-7 or ES-7). Unipolar inferior is Nine's wing at eight (Si-8 or IS-8). John Fudjack believes that Jung was introverted with his first two functions. Ni-9 plus Ti-5. So if Jung took the MBTI - he would likely test as I-N with T more than F, but since MBTI do not allow same attitude (but Jungians do allow it, and so do I) - Jung’s thinking would be called extraverted Te-1 and we would call him an INTJ as you said. Or just a 9w1. But remember he sits in the 9-4-5 Hornevian traid. So as an NT he has 9w1, 1a4, 4w5, 5a9. I call the 1a4 and the 5a9 Psuedo Types - since they are real enough, just not accounted for by standard MBTI definitions.
[ John: Jung's first two functions were IN and IT. When the first and second function are BOTH introverted or BOTH extraverted, this is technically called a 'pure' type in the literature. For Jung, the IT and IN alternated as dominant at different times in his life - so he may have tested on the MBTI as either an iNtj or inTp, depending. As it turns out, in fact, point 5 may be characterized by the pure type that we have recently referred to, using a new nomenclature, as the INT. ]
Walter: Many people call Ichazo an Enneagram Type Eight. Perhaps. He has strong superior introverted intuition at Point Nine. That would suggest a 8w9 or a 9w8.
Brian: My speculation on the signifigance of Mathematics is that our left brain is always seeking meaning. Witness current space exploration and the Hubble telescope or genetic engeering. Time magazine says science gets closer to God (newsweek, maybe.) My premise is that the technology is driven by the numinous and drives the numinous. That is, we are in search of answers and that answers fuel searches.
Walter: Yes. But neuroscientists are now telling us that the left-brain right-brain thing may be overdone. And that it is the levels that are important - intellectual, emotional, and instinctive brain; interesting! Very enneagramic. Calvin actually uses my favorite hexagons - to of all things - model possible information patterns in the 6 mm thin layer of grey matter in the cerebral cortex. He thinks nature uses standard bathroom tiles there too (but smaller).
Brian: Arabic numerals were a break through. zero and one. nothing and whole. Nine types and a circle. Imperfect within the perfect. Three aspects of intellect: cognition, emotion, conation.
Walter: Thanks for using the word conation. Intentionality. Aquinas via the Arabic philosophers via Aristotle. That;s point three moving function on my Enneagram of Consciousness. Isn't it odd that philosophy went down the drain - when pseudo science was imitated by the humanities.
Brian: Plus, zero, minus. Three centers, too much, unaware, too little. Three centers. three ways. Hmmmm. nine aspects. Geometry. Perfect circles. Three points. Triangles. Three centers, three ways. nine points. triangle, three points. 9 minus 3=6. 1/3=33333.... 1 minus 1/3=2/3 or .66666.... 1/3 plus 2/3 equals .33333.. plus .66666.. or .999999. Hmmmm. 1/1=1. 1/2=.5; 1/4=.25; 1/5=.2; 1/6=1.6666..;1/7=1428571425871...;1/8=.125; 1/9=.111111. Hmmm. zero to ten. 142857 plus 3,6,9, add a circle for ten. Imperfect within a perfect.
Walter: Nice musings!
Brian: Anyway, you catch my drift. Could not one have some iNtuitive-connect- the dots reasoning consonant with contemporary science and spirituality that satisfied one's left brain need for explanations and coincidentally provided a rather good construct for understanding complex behavior and motivation. This hypothetical process is still elegantly simple. Like Einstein's equation. It holds up because it seems to work. ( What about Quantum theory? Oh well. Nothing is perfect.)
Walter: Godel's theorem applies here. No system can critique itself from inside its own premises. That is why I stepped about the standard enneagram theory to get a new set of bearings. Of course this is the meaning of a transcendental function. That is why Russell had to thrown his philosophy attempts in the garbage can.
Brain C: My predjudice is that Gurdjief and Ochazo did not stumble upon some lost ark from Sufi mystics; rather they contributed insights to a long history of self discovery. Our mathematics may reflect left brain needs as much as object reality. If atoms are mostly space, how come I can sit on a chair? Perception or reality. John walked on water until his faith weakened. I digress. The Enneagram is not a secret tablet of the ancients uncovered by the Arica Raiders of the Lost Ark. Jung has a different approach, Say, quantum physics. The search for a unified theory is compelling. Maybe they are both just good aproximations. One focuses on motive. The other on behavior. (Enneagram and MBTI.) Just musings of a nine. Some types have passions, some just idle thoughts.
Walter: You are so right! The enneagram is not a secret tablet. Fractal theory and the Circle-9 dynamical system theory make enneagram theory simple. With the definitions of superior functions of consciousness at each point is simple. But we need to keep in mind that many many enneagram teachers have worked long and hard to observe that in fact human behavior does follow these enneagram patterns of strange attraction. I recommend that a person choose a good enneagram teacher for the traditional enneagram personality type approach. The Geldart Enneagram of Consciousness is for new insight near the top Level of Liberation, and for the new field of Information patterns. I give Jungian synchronicity a context and a place to be expressed with various prime number fractions for fractal patterns and holistic holograms. Brain, You seem to have both passion and thoughtfullness. Incidentally, as a Nine, your eight unipolar wing of Si-8 is your source of instinctual passion.
Karl: ...but there is another thing that interests me. Your theory seems to conflict with reported statistics. There is a serious conflict, in particular with the INTJ. ... basically, there are three times as many 5/INTJ-s as 4/INTJ-s. Furthermore, INFP-s and INFJ-s both score high at 4, but INTP-s (about zero) and INTJ only a few at point 4.
John: Yes, the INTJ distributes in a way that is anomalous, given our theory. This is perhaps the biggest problem for our theory at this point, the ONLY problem that I'm concerned about, actually.
So why don't INTJs statistically show up in enneazone Four?
I don't know. There could be reasons. Maybe most INTJs (because of the biases in Western culture) might very well be inTjs (instead of iNtjs). This would pull them toward Five.
Karl: So if many 4w5-s should be INTJ-s then some should be INTP-s (with the same preference order as a INTJ) but this is non-existant. And this leads to difficulties when it comes to placing the INTJ at point 4 as prototypical.
But I guess you have an explanation for all this 5-INTJ-s and lack of off scale 4-INTP-s (with INTJ preference order). Cause if it goes that off-scale way with INFP-s [where INFPs, which are prototypical of Nine, wind up in Four], should't it happen to some more INTP-s [who are prototypical of Five] too ?
John: That's an excellent point. I don't have an explanation for why iNfps (assuming they exist) might gravitate toward Four, but iNtps (assuming that they also exist) wouldn't.
Karl: To me all this makes placing IN at four problematic. Could the IN thing be shared between 4 and 5, meaning that the ones at the 4 side tend to be INFJ and those at the 5 side be INTJ (in preference order with some prefering P)??
John: At first glance that would seem okay, but when one looks closer, the EMPHASIS in Five is on thinking, not intuition, as it is in Four. Nevertheless, you are right in pointing out that the INs seem to spread out across Four and Five. There seems to be a pattern here, but I can't put my finger on it.
Karl: This is what I found on a page, describing what language each type speaks. It says the INTJ speaks T-N-F-S. While INFJ speak F N T S.
John: No, that's not quite right. The preference order of the INFJ, is N-F-T-S.
[later, in a separate discussion:] John: ... Andrew, what do you think about this discussion? Karl's point about the fact that iNtps should gravitate toward Four the way iNfps do, is a really good observation, and it concerns me.
Andrew [a Five]: Well, my hunch is that point Five isn't just a conglomeration of INTJs and INFJs, but rather characterized by exactly the EXTREME type which you have characterized Jung as in your writing - an individual whose dominant function is introverted thinking and secondary function is introverted intuition. Could all of the 'introverted' enneagram points be similarly characterized, by these so-called 'pure' types?
John: That's a very interesting prospect. I'll have to check out the numbers.
Karl: ... I am sorry for bringing this matter of the INTJ up, cause I did notice what you said [about the preference order of the INFJ] on your big PDF file afterwards, so it's no big deal anyway...
John: ... Please, don't be sorry!!! Your argument caused us to look further, and see a third 'principle' by which MBTI distributes across the enneagram! We'll write it up, and show it to you, to see if you approve.